To Regulate or Not to Regulate Junk Foods Advertising Aimed at Children?

MBA 5X09-S Legal Environment of Business Law
September 26, 2012

To Regulate or Not to Regulate Junk Foods Advertising Aimed at Children?

United States faces the risk that the percentage of obesity among children will increase. The percentage of children and adolescents who suffer from this epidemic is 17% (CDC). One generation ago, the rate was three times less than now. The number of obese children is continuously growing, which may cause a danger to children and the future of the country. The risk of obesity does not only mean the risk of diseases and health problems, but also the risks associated with psychological and social impact. There is no doubt that one of the biggest causes of obesity is the unhealthy dietary choices that many children make nowadays (IOM). The larger the increase in the percentage of obese children and thereby the increase in the risks surrounding them, the greater the need to confront this problem. Companies, institutions, parents, and individuals should play a role in fighting obesity, but the role of government is most important. The government can enact laws regulating the process of junk food advertisement aimed at children that contribute to the problem significantly. Although some jurists and businessmen oppose such regulation by government, there is some evidence that regulating junk foods advertisement aimed at children yield positive results.

Opponents of regulating junk food advertisements aimed at children claim that government has no right to take this action because of its expected negative impacts. For example, profit decrease of junk food companies and advertising agencies, which may cause danger to their employees. However, in order to be able to assess this action legally, it is necessary to assess the nature of the right involved and accordingly what standards of review the Supreme Court will use to evaluate the reasonable basis justifying the action. For business and economic regulation, the rational relationship test applies (Mann & Roberts 2012). In this case, the rational relationship is that government wants to contribute in fighting childhood obesity as a part of its responsibility. It is a very rational relationship, especially in view of the problems and dangers caused by obesity for children and the American nation as a whole. Studies show that approximately 21% of health care costs in the United States are associated with obesity (Medical Daily 2012). Moreover, government has valid arguments to defend their position when it comes to advertising to children. For example, until the age of 10, children believe what they see or hear and do not understand that advertisers may distort the truth in order to enhance the positive aspects of a product. Also, advertising junk food products to children who lack knowledge is unfair; it robs them of the chance for healthy growing and building a strong immune system. Finally, by promoting junk foods which are usually highly packaged and processed, the environment is harmed in the long term. Furthermore, to assess this action morally, it is necessary to assess the three components of moral act which are moral object, moral end and circumstances (Hardon 80). First, the moral object of the government’s act is regulating junk foods advertisements. It might be difficult to prove that this object is morally good independently of the end and circumstances, but certainly it is not morally bad. Second, the moral end is the underlying intention which motivates the government to take this action. The intention from government is to contribute in fighting childhood obesity. Third, when looking to the circumstances, the percentage of childhood obesity is increasing. Hence, all of the three components of government’s act support their moral position. Clearly, the government’s position to regulate is not legally questionable. By taking this action, government is contributing in fighting childhood obesity as a part of its responsibility.

Opponents also maintain that there is no relationship between food advertising and children’s health. They also say that government action will not reduce obesity. However, research conducted by Food Standard Agency shows that unhealthy food ads have an impact in children’s food choices, buying habits, and consumption. Some advertisers try to portray more healthy food to children, but many children are overcome with junk food advertisement. Children are exposed to as many as forty thousand TV ads yearly (Starsburger 01). Also, health professionals have confirmed that food promoting impacts children’s food preferences, and that 88% of parents in 2008 Newspoll survey believed that junk food advertising weakened their efforts to convince children to make healthy choices (Moore 09). All of the above facts show the weaknesses of the opponents’ argument.

The final argument advanced by opponents of regulating junk food ads aimed at children is that even if the regulations succeeded in reducing children’s preferences for junk food, this is only one part for solving the problem with regards to the child’s diet. The second half of the solution is to encourage children to maintain a balanced diet and to build healthy eating habits (Jonnypugh 12). This argument is completely correct, but it does not conflict with government position. On the contrary, it would support and strengthen regulating junk foods ads. For Example, during last summer, Disney announced that it will ban all junk food ads on its channels and media outlets. This decision followed several steps such as developing landmark nutrition guidelines and “Mickey Check” tool that calls out nutritious food and menu items sold. All of that will encourage food and advertising companies to meet those standards to be able to target kids who watch Disney channels as Robert A. Iger, Disney’s chairman, said. If this the case with a single company that took the initiative to ban junk food ads, what will be the impact if government regulates junk food advertisement? Obviously, it will make a significant impact.

It should be evident that the arguments against regulating advertising junk foods on children programming are not valid. On the contrary, this will have a great influence on the business of advertising companies and food companies. Although it might cause some losses to those companies in the short term, the benefits will outweigh the downside (Barnes 12). The economic regulation requires some rational relationship to permit governmental action. The relationship between regulating junk food advertisements aimed at children and reducing obesity is very clear. Therefore, there is significant proof that government should take the action in such situation.

Works Cited
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Childhood Overweight and Obesity”. Web.
September 21, 2012.
Institute of Medicine. “Institute of Medicine Report”. 2006. Web. September 21, 2012
Hardon 's, Fr. John. “Modern Catholic Dictionary”. Doubleday, 1980. Print.
Mann, Richard A. and Roberts, Barry S. “Smith & Roberson’s Business Law,
Fifteenth Edition”. (2012). Print.
Medical Daily. “Obesity Accounts for 21% of the U.S Health Care Costs: Study”. Web.
September 21, 2012.
Hardon 's, Fr. John. “Modern Catholic Dictionary”. Doubleday, 1980. Print.
Starsburger, Victor. “Children and TV Advertising: Nowhere to run, Nowhere to hide”. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 22, 185. (June 2001). Print.
Moore, Felicity. “Campaign to stop junk food ads targeting children gains pace”. Couriermail.
(May 28, 2009). Web. September 25, 2012.
Jonnypugh. “Banning Junk Food Ads On Disney Media Outlets: A “Game-Changer”, or a
Mickey Mouse Measure?”. Practical Ethics (June 7, 2012). Web. September 25, 2012.
Barnes, Brooks. “Promoting Nutrition, Disney to Restrict Junk-Food Ads”. The New York Times
(June 5, 2012). Web. September 15, 2012.

Cited: September 21, 2012. Institute of Medicine. “Institute of Medicine Report”. 2006. Web. September 21, 2012 Hardon 's, Fr September 21, 2012. Hardon 's, Fr. John. “Modern Catholic Dictionary”. Doubleday, 1980. Print. (May 28, 2009). Web. September 25, 2012. Barnes, Brooks. “Promoting Nutrition, Disney to Restrict Junk-Food Ads”. The New York Times (June 5, 2012)