There should be no ads during TV programs specifically aimed at children

I accept. As Con, I am arguing that ads specifically aimed towards children should be allowed during TV programs. Since Pro has presented his arguments in the first round, I will also proceed with rebuttals and arguments. Rebuttals: 1. " Now think about what that would sound like to a young child" An annoying jingle will sound like an annoy jingle to children. I do not understand what Pro is implying with this vague statement. I ask the Pro to explain. 2. "If these ads are aimed at children, they will remember those ads for a long time" I would like some evidence that substantiates this claim. Why would ads be memorable if they are intended for children? According to numerous researches, adults, who have much more complex and developed brains and memory systems than children's, only retain information that is deemed necessary. [1] Because of the stupendous amount of information that bombards a human being every day, one does not retain most of the information the brain receives. If adults can not remember most of what happens in their daily lives, it is obvious that children do not remember those insignificant ads for a "long time" 3. "then during the ad they will actually pay attention" Another ambiguous statement in need of evidence. According to the research by Jeffrey G. Johnson, PhD; Patricia Cohen, PhD; Stephanie Kasen, PhD; Judith S. Brook EdD, viewing television actually evokes attention difficulties. [2] Thus, it is misguided to think that children pay attention to ads on the television. 4. "Also humans have a balance of what they need as opposed to what they want" Do humans really have a clear distinction between their needs and wants? It is extremely common to hear people say that they need things that are actually redundant in their lives. Again, when adults are having trouble distinguishing between what they truly need and what they merely want, children generally wouldn't be able to discern the differences very well. 5. "We know that everything we need, we can somehow manage to get it for ourselves without needing to be talked into it." Need is defined as "circumstances in which something is necessary; necessity:" by Oxford Dictionary. [3] People don't need cell phones or computers. They need air, water and shelter. These vital necessities are not advertised because, as Pro mentioned, people will get them without needing to be talked to. 6. "Ads trigger this feeling of need and can then result in the watcher feeling inadequate" How do Ads trigger the feeling of need? What is this "feeling of inadequate" that you are talking about. I ask Pro to expound his statement in future rounds. Now for my arguments. 1. Financial Aspect Advertising directed at children is estimated at over $15 billion annually " about 2.5 times more than what it was in 1992. [4] Television advertisement is a billion dollar industry. If this industry was to be banned, all the revenue will disappear into the thin air. Thousands of people will lose their jobs. National GDP will fall. If advertising in TV is banned, the whole economy will be negatively affected. 2. Impracticality of Prohibition Banning advertisements specifically intended towards children is, quite frankly, impractical. First of all, the law that indicates this prohibition will have to be passed. However, since large corporations that create those ads are largely involved in Politics, sponsoring numerous political candidates, these laws will never get passed. Secondly, the implementation of this law is also impractical. How are the Ads to be determined as children targeting? What would be the age range of children? Merriam-Webster defines child as "a young person." [5] The sheer scale of things that needs to be defined, regulated and implemented marks its improbability. I would like to end this round with one of my strongest argument. 3. Civil Rights Banning Ads directed towards children would be a form of censorship. Censorship is an extremely controversial issue that will add to the impracticality of banning children targeting Ads. There are numerous documents that oppose banning of any media. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." [6] Banning advertisements can be argued as a violation of the First Amendment. Also, the internationally recognized United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states the freedom of press. The article 19 states "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." [7] As such prohibition of advertisements targeting children will be a violation of inherent human right established in some of the most revered documents. I await Pro's rebuttals and arguments. [1] http://www.lucid-research.com... [2] http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com... [3] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [4] Susan Linn, Consuming Kids: The Hostile Takeover of Childhood (New York: The New Press, 2004) [5]http://www.merriam-webster.com... [6]http://www.law.cornell.edu... [7]http://www.un.org...