This post is on Iris Zhou’s topic with regards to advertisements/commercials centered on very young children wearing little and skimpy clothes (underwear and swimwear).

I want to bring light to this topic because I find it really intriguing and interesting thing that people in some cultures actually find these kind of commercials are “correct” and there is nothing “ethically wrong” with young children dressed in skimpy wear.

Is it appropriate for a 10-year old model to be “reclining seductively in stilettos and evening gowns and more makeup and jewelry than anyone under the age of 30 should be wearing” and showcased on one of the most-read magazines in the world, Vogue?

Luis Paredes, the publisher of the Lingerie Journal said that while Americans may be shocked, the line of clothing wouldn’t cause a ripple in Europe, reported NY.

This huge discrepancy in different views on children in lingerie clearly shows that the “Cultural” and “Social” aspects from CDSTEP are crucial to a company’s marketing decisions as some forms of advertisements may be completely acceptable certain areas and completely un-acceptable in other areas. It may seem like a simple marketing campaign to attract parents to purchase beautiful clothing for their young children but further studies should be carried out to determine the real impact on our society. Pictures like these encourage Pedophiles to carry out illegal activities and shift the unknowing consumer towards a society that might be potentially dangerous and harmful to young children.

Our world as we know it is very inter-connected, especially with Social Media and websites like Youtube where millions of people around the world can upload and view videos with a few clicks of the mouse. Companies that are engaging in marketing have to now not only consider the Culture of the Continent, Country and City but also have to take into account Cultures in different regions around the world to prevent incidents like these from happening.

I wanted to talk about marketing campaigns that have been banned because I find it interesting and intriguing as to why large multi-national companies spend thousands if not millions on advertising only to find out that they are not allowed to air it. It’s interesting because TV commercial regulators such as the FCC (United States) have specific guidelines on their websites for companies to follow. Even with guidelines posted, many companies still fail to adhere to the minimum requirements and end up having their commercials banned from public tv.

One of the more interesting observations I found was with the Swedish Company IKEA. IKEA has a long history of banned commercial advertisements. The banned advertisements are known to be notoriously funny and exciting but it is unfortunate that they were not allowed to be aired.

So, why do companies decide to push the limits of those regulations and try for bold commercials outside the box? It is easy to note that viewership for banned commercials are, in most cases, much higher than commercials that are not banned. So it’s safe to say that these commercials are a lot more appealing and noticeable to the public, which is their intended purpose. However, going forward, companies have to be aware and take into account the guidelines and at the same time ensure that their commercials are appealing and safe for the general public.

One of the more popular banned commercial from IKEA circulating on the internet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ony_iJRcCmY