Jakob Nielsen’s research suggests that children do not distinguish between advertising and content on the web. Apparently the kids were aware of privacy issues. “Don’t give your name to strangers” is burned into the neurons, but parents aren’t teaching their kids what advertising is and how it differs (if it does) from other content.
Media literacy, or whatever you want to label it, is important. See the related AlertBox Column, the complete report ($125 to download), and coverage of the report in Newsweek.
I wonder if the children were frightened of Jakob?
I don’t know about the children but Jakob frightens me.
On a more serious note, I have two young, school-age children and I honestly don’t know if they would be able to distinguish between an ad and the content they are viewing.
Take TV, for instance. They seem to know what a show is, since they’ve never asked what time that Cap’n Crunch thing is on, but does that mean they understand why the show they are watching is interrupted with these other cartoons for cool toys? And if there was an infomercial aimed at children, would they understand that it was just an ad?
I think that many shows blur the line as it is. He-Man and GI Joe cartoons from my childhood served mainly to market the toys of the same names. And even more mainstream movies have charcters and plotlines that serve primarily to boost the merchandising kick of the movie. George Lucas is a master of this. Both the Ewoks and Jar Jar were primarily designed to attract the interest of younger Star Wars fans and sell more licensed merchandise. I think he was consideraby more successful with the Ewoks.
I wasn’t aware that there actually was a difference between “content” and “advertising” any longer. Or, indeed, that there ever was.
Most would argue that, say, The National is content. But isn’t it simply advertising for a particular viewpoint (“The CBC will reflect the strength of our countrys past, the promise of our future, and the remarkable regional and cultural diversity of our people.”), a way of looking at the work that the CBC has developed little different in form that, say, the way Archer Daniels Midland has its own way of looking at the world (“ADM applies the latest technology to agriculture so that we can add the most value to crops such as oilseeds, grains and cocoa.”)
I’m sure Jakob Nielsen would view his report as “content” too, but isn’t it simply an extended advertisement for his own world view?
Why do we insist on saying that one type of vision is pure (content) and another is impure (advertising)?
My goal for my own son is not for him to be able to make distinctions based on form, but rather to be able to critically examine anything anyone is telling him, regardless of who’s doing the talking or how.
We just tell our 3 year old daughter that TV is a big fat lie and that it is only as useful as you need it to be. So far the greatest utility is the 8:01 pm Saturday Night dance to the Hockey Night in Canada theme. She is getting a bit sucked in by ads. One day she informed us that we needed the Buick 4×4 Tiger Woods was selling. [At least she dreams bigger than Barbie but – as Peter might suggest – is there really a difference between Tiger and Barbie?] We disabused her of the need of the Buick through a family point and laugh at the TV. One TV education trump card I may play one day in the TV education is the 21 inch Black and White in the upstairs closet. As for the internet, I think she’ll be dating before I hand out the ISP password. There are too many good books around – I recommend “Brave Potatoes” at the moment.
Good points Peter. I supose it has more to do with disclosure (disclosure the concept, not Disclusore the hard hitting current affairs show on CBC). When a TV show ends and an ad begins, or when an ad is confined to the 460 by 80 pixel banner ad zone, there is an implicit disclosure: we paid to be here.
I remember when i was kid, sit down on the floor and watching tv… waiting for the commercials ads of my favourite toys… oh yes… i waited for all the day to see just 30 secs of those he-mans actions dolls… then i couldn’t wait to buy one…