Marketing to Children?

[Lessifer]

@Lessifer ...and I usually agree with what you have to say. In this context, when I say children, I mean not legally an adult or under 18. I suppose, strictly speaking, "marketing to" implies intent, but in this case, I think the smart money would be on, yes they intended this ad to reach those who are underage. Anyway, intent or semantics isn't what is important here, it's the fact that this type of advertising plays right into the hands of those who wish to shut down vaping.

It's okay, we don't always have to agree

Why would you say they intended this ad to reach those who are underage? You say you saw this on their website, right? As in you had to specifically go to their site to see it? Intention is absolutely important here. If they're not ACTUALLY marketing to children, then someone is making an argument to sway people against vaping, based on nothing but feelings. I'm not say you're doing this, but you've obviously been influenced by people doing this before(like with smoking).

 

[Ed_C]

I didn't see this ad on the juice manufactures site. I saw it on the front page of a B&M site, which is located maybe, 2-3 blocks from a large high school. I assumed the ad originated from the juice manufacturer, but I can't be certain. I am kind of perplexed by this ad, because I have no idea what they are trying to do here. What possible good could come from an ad that portrays someone who, at least appears, to be 13 or 14, vaping? It certainly would not appeal to most people who are of legal age to vape. So who could their market be? If not intentional marketing to minors, it's certainly abject stupidity in the light of where we are, in the fight to keep vaping from disappearing.

 

[Lessifer]

I didn't see this ad on the juice manufactures site. I saw it on the front page of a B&M site, which is located maybe, 2-3 blocks from a large high school. I assumed the ad originated from the juice manufacturer, but I can't be certain. I am kind of perplexed by this ad, because I have no idea what they are trying to do here. What possible good could come from an ad that portrays someone who, at least appears, to be 13 or 14, vaping? It certainly would not appeal to most people who are of legal age to vape. So who could their market be? If not intentional marketing to minors, it's certainly abject stupidity in the light of where we are, in the fight to keep vaping from disappearing.

I took a closer look at what I could see of her face, and I believe she's definitely over 18, likely in her early 20's, but it's hard to tell.

Again though, you had to go to the website of this B&M to see this, it wasn't a paid advertisement on some outside site where you would get a lot of random traffic, right? I'm assuming the store wants to showcase that they carry this line, and the intention was to use an attractive girl to get that message across. Was this picture displayed in the window of the shop visible to the street? Is the shop known to sell to minors?

I'm not saying anything about this picture was a great idea, but "marketing to children" is a pretty serious accusation to me, and I'm just not seeing it here. JMHO.

 

[bobwho77]

She looks young, I don't know if she looks under 18, that's pretty hard to judge these days and we don't really see much of her.

I don't feel this is marketing to children, as that's a pretty nebulous phrase. What do we mean by children? If you mean teens, maybe, I guess, as she looks like she might be a teenager, but 18 year olds can buy vape gear in most states. If you mean actual children, like below 13, what exactly about this makes it marketing to children? Are there popular kids show characters? Was this advertised on a site known to be visited by children?

There is a difference between "might be appealing to" and "marketing to." We would do well to remember that.

That's not to say someone won't see this and call it marketing to children, we've been programmed to think that way.

The fact that we're discussing the issue here simply makes your point

 

[Ed_C]

I imagine she is over 18, but she could easily pass for a middle school child. Whatever their intent is, the main issue is that, this just looks bad, and appearances shape public opinion We just don't need this. It doesn't help our cause.

 

[Lessifer]

The fact that we're discussing the issue here simply makes your point

IMO this is one of the subjects, and there are a few, where most vapers are all too willing to tow the anti-tobacco(and anti-vaping) party line, with little to no evidence of any harm or mal-intent.

I'm not saying that anyone here is anti-vaping. We've been told for decades that the evil tobacco companies tried every underhanded method to lure young people into smoking. Guess what? Decades after "marketing to children" was banned, all smoking characters were gone(Joe and the Cowboy), flavors are non-existent, teens are still smoking.

Is this marketing to children, or does it just make you FEEL that way?

 

[pennysmalls]

The producers of this image are supplying bullets for the gun that's trained on this industry.

 

[Lessifer]

The producers of this image are supplying bullets for the gun that's trained on this industry.

It's funny to me that we still think they need our "bullets" when they manufacture weapons of mass destruction.

 

[pennysmalls]

It's funny to me that we still think they need our "bullets" when they manufacture weapons of mass destruction.

No, they don't need our bullets but I'm sure they don't mind one bit that we offer them up anyway. Makes us look like idiots.

 

[Ed_C]

IMO this is one of the subjects, and there are a few, where most vapers are all too willing to tow the anti-tobacco(and anti-vaping) party line, with little to no evidence of any harm or mal-intent.

I'm not saying that anyone here is anti-vaping. We've been told for decades that the evil tobacco companies tried every underhanded method to lure young people into smoking. Guess what? Decades after "marketing to children" was banned, all smoking characters were gone(Joe and the Cowboy), flavors are non-existent, teens are still smoking.

Is this marketing to children, or does it just make you FEEL that way?

And that's the point here Lessifer, it really doesn't matter if they are intentionally marketing to minors or just producing ads that look like marketing to minors. It makes us look like the bad guys in the public's eyes and gives them ammunition. Can't you see that? Perception is reality.

 

[pennysmalls]

Just to be clear I don't know if I believe this particular image constitutes a clear example of marketing to children but the meaning behind the content of this image escapes me. I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to be getting from it.

 

[Lessifer]

And that's the point here Lessifer, it really doesn't matter if they are intentionally marketing to minors or just producing ads that look like marketing to minors. It makes us look like the bad guys in the public's eyes and gives them ammunition. Can't you see that? Perception is reality.

I get it, I really do. It's just one of those areas where I personally feel that accepting the bs is always going to hurt us. There is this idea, that somehow these products are being marketed to children, and no one can define what that means. Some think it's the flavors, some think it's the names, some think it's the packaging, in this case it appears to be the model used. The ANTZ will hate picture of a plain white bottle labeled Formula 2 just as much. We'll never make them happy. So, I personally, choose to stop feeding that beast.

Just to be clear I don't know if I believe this particular image constitutes a clear example of marketing to children but the meaning behind the content of this image escapes me. I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to be getting from it.

This is just my opinion, but to me, this picture says "we carry OHW liquids" and here's a pretty girl to get you to look for a few more seconds.

On a personal note, I've noticed something about myself lately. I'm almost 36 and just recently I've started thinking that some of the models used to make things "sexy" are a bit too young to me. I'm sure they're all over 18, but it's starting to make me a little uncomfortable as to what I'm obviously supposed to be attracted to. Now, I don't think the models have gotten any younger, or that they look younger, I think I'm just getting older.

So, what does that mean? Maybe marketing to young adults looks like marketing to children, to older adults?

 

[Ed_C]

I do know what you mean. We always try and define things as black or white, particularly when it comes to law, when the world is mostly grey. I just personally think that this example is pretty dark grey and in "the interest of pragmatism" is not good for us. I got my teaching license a few years back, so I have a pretty good idea of what middle and high school kids look like. That being said, I can't count the times that I went to see a new doctor and thought, "what is he or she twelve"? I'm a bit (OK, more than a bit) older than you and I can contest to the fact that people do seem younger the older that you get.

 

[Adan]

The female was a blogger.
The image is from a video she made on her youtube channel, it wasn't up long.
Tiffany (@sweetstixvapor) | Twitter

 

[Lessifer]

The female was a blogger.
The image is from a video she made on her youtube channel, it wasn't up long.
Tiffany (@sweetstixvapor) | Twitter

She definitely looks of age.

 

[HauntedMyst]

I don't agree with marketing like this but the other day I picked up the kid I mentor for the Big Brother program and we had breakfast before school. Usually we hang out after school but he had T-ball practice so we hit breakfast. On the way to school, he and I did our usual thing, had a Cloud chucking contest while we walked (I got him off cigs this summer, he took his parents divorce bad and started smoking in the spring). I'm not ashamed to say those little lungs of his can out chuck me any day! One of the older kids, a 4th or 5th grader I think, started making fun of him for vaping. Zack looked at me, I looked at him and gave him the nod. Without a word, he rolled up his XvoStick in his T shirt sleeve like a little pack of smokes and just clocked the older kid right in the nose! The experts say that some kids vape just to make themselves look cool. They are right! Zacks the coolest 3rd grader in the world! Ethan with the bloody nose and teary eyes, not so much.

 

[Ed_C]

I would comment, but my internet slows down to about 14.4kbs in the evening and I can't get anything to load. One of the joys of living in the boonies. -grumbles-

 

[Ed_C]

I agree she looks to be of age. I still think it was a poor choice for a picture on the front of a vaping store website.

 

[ENAUD]

She definitely looks of age.

On the Twitter page, yes. On the add, her face is ever so slightly out of focus, at least on the edges where the lines appear blurry or fuzzy. I personally think the image was doctored to blur the lines as to her age, and still stand by my take that the add copy is purposefully aimed at instigating an age inappropriate emotional response, and as such it was indeed effective by the posts in this very thread. Granted, my opinion is 100 % speculation, and I could be 180 degrees off the mark. I cannot even fathom why such an image would be used to promote a brand of e-juice in our current state, unless the vendor is a complete dolt, or that they intended to stir the pot. Also of note to me were the large bottles of e-liquid with non childproof easy pour spouts. Especially considering the recent implementation of the childproof packaging requirements enacted upon nicotine liquids...

 

[skoony]

I believe the reason the FDA and the ANTZ like advertisements such as
this is because they can perpetuate their false argument about advertising.
I recently purchased some juice from this site. Juishy E-Juice USA Made E-Liquid Vapor Flavors
Some would say the names,flavors and,packaging would attract children.
Even if it does so what? News flash: Selling tobacco products to minors
is against the law. So the little chillin' want this stuff? To bad kiddo.
your gonna have to wait till your 18.(21 in some states)

In my pre-teens I knew what alcohol and tobacco were. I knew they were
for adults. That didn't stop me from wanting to use them. There were plenty
of opportunities to do so in my neighborhood. My friends and me being the
sneaky little weasels we were availed ourselves at every chance to do so.
It had absolutly nothing to do with packaging,flavors,or names. Another news
flash: hard alcohol and tobacco tastes awful no mater what the flavor to the
uninitiated. One doesn't simply wake up and start chugging down the Jack
and huffing a pack of Red's on the way to middle school.( To all of you
who started that way your the rare exception and I congratulate you.)

I think the issue is the way we perceive what it meant by advertising
to children. Any product either appeals to one or it doesn't. There is
no breakdown according to age. It is against the law to sell to minors.
So why is this sort of suspect (?) advertising used?
Evidently people 18 and over are attracted to it. Flavored vodka is
proof enough that. What vendors want is to sell their product.
Their customers by law are adults. One does not waste money
trying to attract customers that can not buy the product.
I know of no person who as a minor gave a rats behind if their first
cigarette was a Marlboro or their first drink had to be Cake Vodka.
Advertising does not influence decisions. It does not make one
smoke or drink. Advertising offers choices to those that choose to
partake in such things. There are a lot more kids who choose not
to smoke or drink than choose to do so. They have all seen the
the same so called child attracting influences. Why are they not
smoking and drinking?

Regards
Mike