Day 065 - 09 Dec 94 - Page 41

     
     1   Q.   No, I am talking about research of a kind which can
     2        respectively be regarded as providing reliable data; is
     3        that good enough?
     4        A.  Yes, I accept that definition.
     5
     6   Q.   You yourself in your paper "Advertisers' Dream, Nutrition
     7        Nightmare?" have cited a good deal of what one might call
     8        academic research, have you not?
     9        A.  Yes.
    10
    11   Q.   On page 21, if you would like to turn it up, you have a
    12        section which is entitled "Children's Understanding of
    13        Advertising".  In this section in the first paragraph you
    14        say:  "Young children are still learning to process
    15        information about their world and they may lack the skills
    16        to assess or understand the purpose of advertising".  Do
    17        you see that as an important question in this area?
    18        A.  Yes, I think I have said why this is relevant.  But it
    19        is also only part of the whole picture.
    20
    Q.   I understand that.  My question was only this:  Do you
    22        regard that as an important question in this area?  It does
    23        permit of a simple answer.
    24        A.  Yes, it is one of those questions indeed.
    25
    26   Q.   Yes, I know it is only one of the questions.
    27
    28   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Mr. Rampton put "important" in.  What do you
    29        say about that?
    30        A.  I accept that it is important and it is important in
    31        the context in which I have talked about this kind of
    32        information.  Yes, I do not disagree at all.
    33
    34   MR. RAMPTON:  It is important enough, is it not, Ms. Dibb, for a
    35        whole section of your -- I know it is only half a page --
    36        report to be devoted to this question?
    37        A.  Yes.
    38
    39   Q.   You go on:  "Rossiter found", that is the chapter we have
    40        just looked at, "found that children watching a lot of
         television advertising are no more sophisticated in their
    42        understanding of television commercials than those who
    43        watched less often".  I make no comment about that
    44        interpretation of the Rossiter passage.
    45
    46        You go on:  "Children's ability to understand advertising
    47        varies enormously according to age, with young children
    48        predictably the most impressionable.  Zuckerman and
    49        Gianinno found that three-quarters of four year-olds were
    50        unable to differentiate between programmes and adverts. 
    51        Neither could over a third of seven year-olds or one in 
    52        five ten year-olds". 
    53
    54        The last time we met, Ms. Dibb, I asked you what you meant
    55        by the words "unable to differentiate".  You told his
    56        Lordship that you meant "unable to tell the difference
    57        between".  Do you remember giving that answer?
    58        A.  I am sure you are correct in that.
    59
    60   Q.   This is a work by a couple of researchers in this area.  It