英语论文网

that the government has in protecting children from the amount of commercials? Prong three: Does the CTA work efficiently in Children’s protection? Prong four: Is the CTA more extensive and broader than necessary?
However, under the Court’s four-prong test, we can find that the CTA does not work as effectively as expected. According to the Prong-one, such regulation “must not mislead the consumer or promote unlawful acts”; but, some advertising companies use popular TV characters to promote their products, it is now a very common strategy used in advertisements; which might mislead children to think that the products the stars are using or eating must have a good quality or taste.
Additionally, the problem with finding that the CTA should have significantly reduced children’s exposure to commercials; nevertheless, children are already exposed to a large amount of commercials through other mediums of communication such as internet, magazines as well as radio (Ramsey, William A, 2006, p.378).
Moreover, reducing the quantity of commercials cannot really reduce the effect of the content of commercials on children. It is the content of commercials that causes damage to children and not the duration of or number of advertisements (Handsley et al, 2009, p.1); for example, the duration of McDonald's advertisement is not long, but most of children are impressed by this advertisement and willing to buy the junk food. The reason is because the cartoon characters in McDonald’s advertisement are attractive to them, although the duration time is short. Therefore, the regulation should focus on the effect of the content rather than the duration time of the advertisements.

Furthermore, FCC (Federal Communications Commission) enforced the CTA to provide exceptions that “public service” and “educational announcements” do not be counted in the total amount of commercial time. (Ramsey, William. A, 2006, p.380) Nonetheless, this provision does not actually conform to the CTA’s purpose, but undermine the goal of reducing children’s exposure to advertising. If there are many “public service” and “educational announcements” shows on TV, children would be ‘persuaded’ to watch more TV; as the increased amount of television (even if which are educational programs) aimed at children might correspondingly increase the amount of the advertising aimed at children; in other words, children might have bigger chances to be exposed to commercials (Children and Television, 2008).

c. Other ways to protect children
1. The importance of the role that parents play in advertisement education and in helping their children to develop cognitive skills should be emphasised; the family is still the most important social group and source of information for children (North, E. J., & Kotze, T., 2001, p.93). Moreover, parents need to look at their own consumption, and help their children to build a healthy scepticism by talking with them about advertisements or marketing tricks, because children learn things through their parents. Parents should be role models (Bigda & Carolyn, 2005, p.91).
2. The Court held in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation that the government may protect the “well-being of its youth” through the “regulation of otherwise protected expression,” by restricting indecent speech on the radio that children are likely to hear. (FC