Nick Stringer new Head of Regulatory Affairs at the IAB, discusses the review and why it is needed.

Earlier this month the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Ed Balls, announced a consultation to assess the impact of commercialisation upon Britain's children and young people. The consultation is part of the Government’s wider Children’s Plan – a blueprint for our children’s future - launched in December last year.

Why? The Government is concerned that consumerism may be skewing our children's values and aspirations. So they are conducting an independent assessment with a view to understanding how families can strike the right balance in keeping their children safe, but also allowing them the freedom to learn and develop. The review is to be led by David Buckingham, Professor of Education at the Institute of Education, London University, and founder of the Centre for the Study of Children, Youth and Media. His review will look at how children's engagement with the commercial world has changed, as well as what impact such changes are having.

The issue of the ‘commercialisation of childhood’ - especially the increasing level of marketing to younger children - has therefore risen to the top of the political agenda. The issue affects all walks of life and is not just an issue for the advertising world or even new media. Therefore public affairs professionals across all commercial, marketing and technology sectors need to sit up and act before decisions are made for us.

In the advertising sector, proposals in specific areas are in place. For example, advertising of High Fat Salt and Sugar Foods (HFSS) to children is now regulated across all media, such as television and the Internet. But there is a strong lobby to introduce measures in other areas, for example clothes, soft drinks, toys and video games. Where is a sensible line to be drawn? Perhaps Professor Buckingham’s assessment will provide us with clearer parameters in this area

In the online world, we have approached child protection issues within a self-regulatory framework to help protect children as technology develops and behaviours change with it. For example, standards in online advertising and marketing are set by the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code and are enforced by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) which investigates complaints about advertising content. The code has specific guidelines on marketing to children, for example that online adverts should not contain anything that is likely to result in physical, mental or moral harm or to exploit their credulity, loyalty, vulnerability or lack of experience. It also incorporates the rules for HFSS.

The CAP Code is an excellent example of self-regulation in a fast-growing and ever-changing sector where the UK already leads the world in delivering innovative, engaging and entertaining online content. However, this is not a flawless approach by any means. As with any self-regulatory code, it needs to be kept under review to ensure it maintains pace with new developments and changes. This is particularly important in the online world with new ways to access the Internet, such as via mobile phone, or changing and innovative ways to advertise, such as via social networking sites like Facebook or Bebo.

In her recent review of the impact of the Internet and video games upon children, leading child psychologist Dr Tanya Byron upheld the self-regulatory approach in this area, supporting the working together of key stakeholders, such as industry, government, children’s charities and regulators, to address online child protection issues. However, she emphasised the importance of ‘future proofing’ in areas such as online advertising. A grey area – which Byron rightly identified – is the promotional material on actual websites and the fine line between advertising funded content and editorial. For example, Haribo, the sweets manufacturer, specifically targets children on their website with fun and games. This is despite calls to amend their site. Others, such as Kellogg’s, have taken the decision not to directly market to children on their websites. This is at the top of the IAB’s agenda and we’ll be working with key stakeholders to address this.

Byron’s report is welcome and her proposal of a new UK Council for Child Internet Safety to strengthen the existing self-regulatory arrangements is the best way forward to address the ‘commercialisation of childhood’ issue in the online space. The challenges are considerable. Removing alco pops from the supermarket shelves is one thing, but how do we protect children on social networking sites, the use of mobile phone advertising or as yet unheard of new technologies?

Across all sectors we need to empower parents, improve their knowledge and understanding of the risks and give them responsibility so that they can make the right decisions and find the right balance about what their kids are exposed to. In the online world, this - coupled with effective regulatory measures - can help give parents and children the confidence to continue accessing and enjoying free content on the Internet.

The commercialisation of childhood is, without a doubt, a controversial issue. It is sometimes viewed as taboo within the marketing world. However, the bottom line is that we all have to aim for greater control. Action is required whilst we still have some say on the eventual outcome.

Click here to read an article that Peadar Drislane of Azure wrote on marketing to children