Day 047 - 07 Nov 94 - Page 40

     
     1        A.  In life, they do, yes.
     2
     3   MS. STEEL:   So the reasons for that regulation having been
     4        brought into existence, the concerns that existed----
     5
     6   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  It seems as if, for better or worse, the line
     7        has been drawn at the moment between advertising which will
     8        positively urge them to ask their parents to follow a
     9        certain course, on the one hand, and advertising a product
    10        which may have result in asking their parents to follow a
    11        certain course?
    12        A.  That is correct. I have found the specific context in
    13        the code.  It says: "Advertisements must not exhort
    14        children to purchase or to ask their parents or others to
    15        make inquiries or purchases."
    16
    17   Q.    What is that in?
    18        A.  That is appendix 1, paragraph 5, under "Direct
    19        exhortation".
    20
    MS. STEEL:  But the effect is that they do -- well, the effect
    22        is that children do nag their parents, as you have said.
    23        So are you saying that that is not something that people
    24        should have a right to be concerned about?
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  He has said on two or three occasions,
    27        when asked in questions, he has on occasions doubted the
    28        extent of the concern among the public in general as
    29        opposed to bodies with a particular interest, but he has
    30        readily accepted on two or three occasions that it is a
    31        matter which should be taken into account, and so properly
    32        and seriously considered.  (To the witness)  Is that right?
    33        A.  That is so, my Lord.
    34
    35   MS. STEEL: But if people think it does have a detrimental
    36        effect, then they have a right to express that, do they
    37        not?
    38        A.  Of course they have a right to express it.  That is
    39        called free speech.  What we are talking about is what I
    40        would consider the good manners of an advertisement.  We
         are not saying that other people should not express that
    42        view.  They are perfectly entitled to express their view.
    43        But the ITC, or any other organisation responsible for
    44        advertising codes, does not have to take that expression of
    45        a view as being the end of the subject.  It is a point of
    46        view.
    47
    48   Q.   Right.  There is actually widespread concern from parents
    49        about the effects of advertising on children, is there not?
    50        A.  I have no reason to think that that is so. 
    51 
    52   Q.   Are you aware of the MORI survey commissioned by the 
    53        National Food Alliance?
    54        A.  Yes, I am.
    55
    56   Q.   Have you read it?
    57        A.  Yes.
    58
    59   MS. STEEL:   Perhaps the court -- it is behind the statement of
    60        Sue Dibb.