Why are teens to addicted to their phones? Mass Media Target Advertising on the Youth
Mass advertising is targeted to the most popular consumer for trendy products: teenagers. Pop up ads and other quick advertisements engulf YouTube, game apps, and other widely trafficked apps and cites that are used by the youth. Advertisers often target specific age groups but often this targeting leads to intrusiveness and is disfavored by their potential consumers. According to the articles, “Online Advertising Aggressively Targets Children and Teens”, by Jeff Chester and Kathryn Montgomery and, “Ban Targeted Advertising”, by David Dayen, ads do more than interrupt games, songs, and movies, ads can individually collect personal data that is used to conduct neuropsychological media research. Additionally, the articles, “Teens May Not Respond to Online Advertising”, by Mark Dolliver and, “Empirical analysis of values on interactive advertisement aimed at a teenage audience”, by Belinda De Frutos Torres, Maria Sanches Valley, and Tamara Vasquez Barrio, reflect their unconcern by the pervasive intrusion of ads upon the youth for equivalently, they are confident that the youth will ignore them completely. The youth, as they mention, view ads as an incessant distraction and are accustomed to them. Compared in the other articles, factors derived from the intensive immersion of digital advertising have resulted in varying observational effects. Mass media target advertising upon the youth presents the infringement of privacy, participation of teen-ad engagement, and advertising pragmatisms which involves target marketing.
Controversially, advertising companies have been widely accused of infringing upon people’s privacy, especially the youths. Using interactive ads, researchers can collect viable data, which is transmitted to a database, analyzed, and then distributed to a third party. According to the article, “Online Advertising Aggressively Targets Children and Teens”, by Jeff Chester and Kathryn Montgomery, “Marketers can compile a detailed profile of each customer, including demographic data, purchasing behavior, responses to advertising messages, and even the extent and nature of social networks”, (Chester and Montgomery, 2). Additionally, they include, “Marketers use the information to create messages tailored to the psychographic and behavioral patterns of the individual”, (Chester and Montgomery, 2). As gathered, interacting with ads can unintentionally expose personal information. Compared to the article, “Teens May Not Respond to Online Advertising”, by Mark Dolliver, digital advertising is not viewed as invasive to privacy but rather viewed as a medium to communicate with the youth while they are using certain online platforms. Dolliver focuses on teen interactivity with ads and ad disassociation while Chester and Montgomery are focused on the neuropsychological debilitating effects ad invasiveness imposes on the youth as well as their advertising tactics. Antithetically, in the article, “Ban Targeted Advertising”, by David Dayen, “Digital ad spending surpassed television ad spending globally for the first time; targeted data is prized”, (Dayen, 2018). Dayen, possessing similar views to Chester and Mongomery, focalizes the negative aspect of digital marketing by exposing its intrusiveness on society. Dolliver, however, maintains differentiating views from Dayen in respects that digital marketing has little correlation with privacy exploitation. Ads are able to collect information when a user engages with them, which is why users should be cautious when using online platforms. The main intent of ads is to prioritize marketing efforts of a specific product to a designated group of people who they anticipate will most likely be inclined to buy their product. It is typically larger corporations, such as restaurants in the fast-food industry, that will simultaneously market their product and collect user information by enabling interaction. Ultimately, advertiser rely on interaction and audience-based engagement to determine the effectiveness of their advertisements.
On the contrary, teen-ad engagement in advertisements is lacking and the reason is because advertisers have greatly misinterpreted their audience. It is prominently acknowledged that mass media advertising is quite ineffective because of this flaw and is why many advertisers are re-evaluating their approach to their audience. Many teens, who “use social networks to socialize, not to read ads”, often ignore the presence of ads completely because they have become accustomed to their presence (Dolliver, 1). Teenagers generally conceive ads as a source of distraction and inconvenience, furthermore, decreasing their receptiveness to them. Perhaps teens dislike ads because of the associated connotations ads have with interruption. For example, on the app Spotify, if you do not purchase the Premium Package, you will be susceptible to ads in between songs and the entire music experience will be unpleasant. Similar occurrences are present on YouTube, websites, and other TV-based platforms. The presence of ads is almost inevitable and unavoidable, unless you are willing to pay a price, with cash or personal information. Correspondingly, Online Advertising Aggressively Targets Children and Teens”, by Chester and Montgomery, advertisements are “designed to encourage young consumers to engage playfully with products over long periods of time”, (Chester and Montgomery, 3). Which leads to the new re-evaluated approach advertisers took. Similarly, a Young Adult and Marketing Brand Engagement platform called Fuse, sustains an array of partners, such as influencer Bill Carter. Carter conjectures that, “Teens are indifferent to advertisers on social networks who don’t participate in the actual purpose of the social network, which is to actively communicate with each other and have fun in their communities and organized groups”, (Dolliver, 2). In antithetical to the previous article, Chester and Montgomery are not solely reliant on the interactive correlation between teens and ads, but rather, the severity of such participation on a prolific scale. Like Chester and Montgomery, Dayen fears that the acquired data through digital engagement will expose personal information on an international spectrum. All three articles reflect similar stances regarding the significant teen-ad engagement and what external results will be entailed, as well as possessing contrasting perspectives about the exploitation of information resulting from ad-engagement.
Advertising pragmatisms, which involves target marketing, utilizes psychological tactics of manipulation to procure personal information. Ineffably, such target advertising has rose to prominence because of its affiliated convictions with the exploitation of information and exploitation of patronage. The use of ad surveys and questionnaires are tactics used to attract users to submit information, misleading them to expose themselves. Comparatively, in the article, “Ban Targeted Advertising”, by David Dayen, “the rise of digital media made a more invasive form of marketing too irresistible”, (Dayen, 2018). In the past, advertisers had to seek out potential customers, though now, due to technological advancements, advertisers can readily pre assess each intimate detail about targeted customers beforehand (Dayen, 2018). Advertisers began targeting people based off their geographical region and behavior. Furthermore, advertisers collected data deriving from “their common interests or things they liked in social media or what they wrote in emails to friends. The surveillance economy was born”, (Dayen, 2018). Before the topic of target surveillance is further discussed, it is an imperative to understand the difference between target-interactivity and teen-ad engagement. Interestingly, target-interactivity is separate from teen-ad engagement. Target-interactivity, if targeted towards the youth, relies on the answering of questions ads supply. Contrastingly, teen-ad engagement mainly relies on the acknowledgement one yields towards ads, such as the decision to ignore and dislike them, rather than prospectively engaging with them. Target-engagement, when prodigiously engaged, results in Market Optimization, which is enhanced when people use certain platforms extensively or engage with an ad on a large scale. Similarly, other tactics of manipulation, according to, “Empirical analysis of values on interactive advertisement aimed at a teenage audience”, by Belinda De Frutos Torres, Maria Sanches Valley, and Tamara Vasquez Barrio, delve into the strategies that are commonly practiced in the marketing field. Preceding the strategies, are a lengthy array of tactics. Such tactics, among many others, include Internet advertising, Teenage Consumers, Target Marketing, Interactive Marketing, Socialization, Materialism, Competition (Psychological), and Ethics, (Torres, Valley, Barrio, 1). Such stratagem is used to appeal to the senses of the audience, such as their emotion, morals, ethics, self-perception, and empathy. Their response stipulates whether they will interact with the ad. From such information, will they then become a ‘target’, a statistic and an experiment. The arising concerns about becoming the ‘target’, as mentioned by Dayen, creates the epitome of a dystopian nightmare, in which Dayen fervently demands that target advertising should be banned to prevent further subjugation.
Subsequently, advertising has infringed upon privacy, has shown to be inefficient due to lack of engagement, and has been involved in certain advertising pragmatisms that lead to the exploitation information. In all four articles, it can be interpreted that advertisers assertively attempt to attract their audience by conducting conducive research that enables them to collect data analyzing feedback. Such feedback results in target advertising, which derives from manipulating the target consumers using interactive ads and exposes qualitative data. Teen-ad engagement, on the other hand, is distilled because of the lack of interest and dissociation teens displayed when confronted by ads. Finally, target advertising, has harbored rising concerns for the violation of individual privacy and unprecedented research. Media advertising upon the youth infringes upon privacy, demonstrates inefficiencies among teen-ad engagement, and involves advertising pragmatisms which lead to target marketing. Perhaps mass advertising could be more efficient if advertisers genuinely understood their audience and would utilize more secure methods to ensure the safety of their interactive ads.
Work Cited
Chester, Jeff and Montgomery, Kathryn. “Online Advertising Aggressively Targets Children and Teens.” file:///C:/Users/seren/Downloads/Option%202%20Article%201%20(1).pdf Accessed October 14, 2020
Dolliver, Mark. “Teens May Not Respond to Online Advertising.” file:///C:/Users/seren/Downloads/Option%202%20Article%202%20(1).pdf Accessed October 14, 2020
Dayen, David. “Ban Targeted Advertising.” Gale, 2018, https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Viewpoints&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&hitCount=1&searchType=BasicSearchForm¤tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CHTIEWE899739626&docType=Viewpoint+essay&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZXAY-MOD1&prodId=OVIC&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CHTIEWE899739626&searchId=R3&userGroupName=lincclin_mcc&inPS=true Accessed October 14, 2020
De Frutos Torres, Belinda, Sanches Valley, Maria and Vasquez Barrio, Tamara. “Empirical analysis of values on interactive advertisement aimed at a teenage audience.” Comunicación y Sociedad, 2012, http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=0fa9afa0-d55a-4941-a655-f7f8fd576c6c%40sdc-v-sessmgr02 Accessed October 14, 2020
