Children Learn to Say, ‘Buy, Buy’

Two-thirds of parents say their children define their self-worth by their possessions--one of several startling results of a national survey on kids, consumerism and marketing.

More than half of the parents of kids ages 2 to 17 admitted they’ve bought their child something they disapprove of, find junky or harmful because their kid wanted the item in order to fit in. And, the poll found, one in three parents are actually working longer hours to pay for “things their child feels they need.”

Overall, a majority of parents said they think “cradle to grave” marketing threatens to turn their children into materialistic hyper-shoppers who would rather go to the mall over running around outdoors.

“I think parents are yearning for kids to just be able to be kids,” observed Betsy Taylor, executive director of the Maryland-based Center for a New American Dream and the mother of two, “and I think advertisers think of kids as customers. And therein lies the struggle.”

Other results of the poll, released last week by the Center for a New American Dream, a nonprofit national organization advocating responsible consumption, paint a picture of parents feeling overwhelmed by what is estimated at $2 billion spent annually on marketing and advertising aimed at their kids.

The poll of 400 parents, conducted July 20 and 21 by EDK Associates of New York with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 5 percentage points, found that four out of five parents believe marketing efforts pressure youths to buy items that are bad for them or too pricey, and two out of three parents want television programmers to be forced to limit youth-targeted ads.

The obvious question: What are parents themselves doing?

“I think what we found from this poll was that parents blame advertisers, but they also blame parents,” Taylor said.

“I think it’s very fair to say that parents can do more,” she added, “and also fair to say that it’s very hard, when your child is bombarded not just on TV and the Internet, but in movies and in schools.”

At the age of 5, Taylor Sun of Woodland Hills has not seen the new Disney movie “Inspector Gadget,” nor did he see the latest “Star Wars” epic. But that doesn’t mean he lacks extensive knowledge of spin-off merchandise and brand names that won’t soon be found in his household.

“He knows all the [“Gadget”] pieces that are being sold at McDonald’s with a Happy Meal, and we’ve never taken him to eat there,” says Steve Sun, the boy’s father. “We try to minimize his exposure to commercial TV and movies, but we aren’t all that successful.”

Sun objects to the barrage of commercial appeals aimed at children, but his larger concern extends beyond content. He thinks the act of watching television--the passivity of it--is just as harmful.

At home, his son mostly watches “Arthur” over breakfast, and “The Simpsons” at dinner--”probably not the best choice for a 5-year-old,” he laughs.

So then why does he view his attempts to curtail his son’s media exposure as only half-successful? “I can’t control what his mother and grandparents do. . . . It’s not that we disagree, it’s just that TV is a convenient baby-sitter.”

That leads to another facet of the consumerism issue: How much TV is too much?

Last week, the American Academy of Pediatricians announced new recommendations, published in its August peer-reviewed journal, that urge parents to reduce children’s exposure to TV and other electronic media.

Most dramatically, the group, representing 55,000 pediatricians, recommended that children age 2 and younger avoid TV. The group’s report did not base that finding on TV content or research--it said there is little on that age group--but said infants and toddlers need interaction and other stimuli for proper brain growth and development.

The AAP also suggested that parents keep their children’s bedrooms free of electronic media and avoid using media as a baby-sitter. The group urged pediatricians to ask questions of patients and parents about their degree of media exposure.

In Yorba Linda, Cheryl Hasegawa feels fortunate that her 4-year-old son, Alec, does not nag about the dizzying parade of movie-character merchandise.

She said she and her husband, Kevin, “restrict television to PBS only, and generally we just watch a video a day rather than any television.”

Their friends and family are aware of her desire to simplify, she said. They want to “spend less, to make more homemade gifts and spend more time together in an activity or an outing rather than purchasing an item as gifts.”

She understands it gets tougher when kids get older. She sees that in conversations with her “simplicity circle,” a group of people meeting monthly and chatting online who share the belief that less really can be more.

“It’s complicated--why we think we feel better [going to] buy something. I have found myself at the shopping center and realize I’m just bored, or feeling depressed, and you have to catch yourself.”

Even her sister, she says, who works and has three kids, “gets home tired and it’s easier to turn the TV on for a while.”

Taylor, of the Center for a New American Dream, knows how easily that can become a routine, and has worked to establish family dinners and bedtime rituals that focus on reading and talking.

But the consumerism message seeps in from outside, she says. Her son, 9, does not watch commercial TV at home and she does not buy him packaged cold cut lunches. But he wants those lunches now; all his classmates eat the processed cheese and meat at recess.

“Advertising is just the background noise of the culture,” she says. So, her group advises, “talk to your kids about the message they are getting.”

Nancy Wride can be reached at nancy.wride@latimes.com.