ADVERTISING & INTERNET

The internet has become a ongoing emerging source that tends to expand more and more. The growth of this particular media attracts the attention of advertisers as a more productive source to bring in consumer. A clear advantage a consumer has with online advertisement is that he or she has control over the item, choosing whether to check it out or not.[1] Online advertisements also can offer various forms of animation... In its most common use, the term online advertising comprises all sorts of banner advertisement, e-mail advertising, in game advertising, and keyword advertising, on platforms such as facebook, Twitter, or Myspace has received increased relevance. Web related advertising has a variety of sites to publicize and reach a niche audience to focus its attention to a specific group. Research has proven that online advertising has given results and is a growing business revenue.[2] For the year 2012, Jupiter research predicted $34.5 billion in US online advertising spending. Online advertising encompasses a range of types of advertising, some of which are deployed ethically and some are not. Some websites use large numbers of advertisements, including flashing banners that distract the user, and some have misleading images designed to look like error messages from the operating system, rather than advertisements. Websites that unethically use online advertising for revenue frequently do not monitor what advertisements on their website link to, allowing advertisements to lead to sites with malicious software or adult material.

FAST FOOD NATION

America is becoming an obese country and needs to act upon the fast-food chains. The book continues with an account of the evolution of fast food and how it coincided with the advent of the automobile. He explains the transformation from countless independent restaurants into a few uniform franchises. This shift led to a production-line kitchen prototype, standardization, selfservice, and a fundamental change in marketing demographics: from teenager to family-oriented. Regarding the topic of child-targeted marketing, Schlosser explains how the McDonald's Corporation modeled their marketing tactics on The Walt Disney Company, which inspired the creation of advertising icons such as Ronald McDonald and his sidekicks. Marketing executives theorized this shift to market toward children would result not only in attracting children, but their parents and grandparents as well. More importantly, the tactic would instill brand loyalty that would persist through adulthood via nostalgic associations to McDonald's. Schlosser also discuss the tactic's ills: the exploitation of children's navet and trusting nature. In marketing toward children, Schlosser suggests, corporations have infiltrated schools through sponsorship and quid pro quo. He sees that reductions in corporate taxation have come at the expense of school funding, thereby presenting many corporations with the opportunity for sponsorship with those same schools. According to his sources, 80% of the sponsored textbooks contain material that is biased in favor of the sponsors, and 30% of high schools offer fast foods in their cafeterias. The wound ration of youth employees within the United States is
1

approximately two times greater to fully developed employees. [5] Anecdotes are given suggesting that students that disregarded sponsorships could be punished, such as the case with high school student Mike Cameron. He was suspended from school for an incident on "Coke day"; while his fellow students wore red or white T-shirts and posed collectively as the word COKE while aerial photographs were taken, Cameron instead wore Pepsi-blue. In his examination of the meat packing industry, Schlosser finds that it is now dominated by casual, easily exploited immigrant labor and that levels of injury are among the highest of any occupation in the United States. Schlosser discusses his findings on meat packing companies IBP, Inc. and on Kenny Dobbins. Schlosser also recounts the steps of meat processing and reveals several hazardous practices unknown to many consumers, for example, the practice of rendering dead pigs and horses and chicken manure into cattle feed.

Product Safety and Liability

As people become increasingly dependent on the use of engineered products, product safety and liability become issues of worldwide importance. In many countries, however, there are no strong traditions promoting safety standards in the technical design and testing of consumer products, nor are there methods of legal redress when such standards are not met. The ethics of product safety and liability is thus reasonably addressed by treating the world prior in number, with the inclusion of some supplementary references to related developments in other countries. It is also necessary to acknowledge the role of product safety standards in relation to global trade practices.

U.S. perspective
According to figures from the Internet site of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), consumer products are annually responsible for more than 22,000 deaths and 29 million injuries (more than two deaths and 3,000 injuries per hour) at a total annual cost (including property damage) of more than $700 billion. Although the magnitude of these numbers may be subject to argument, they support the contention that product-related injuries were the primary factor in deaths of people from ages one to thirty-six, exceeding deaths from cancer and heart disease (Andre and Velasquez 1991).

Product Liability
product liability in the responsibility of manufacturers, distributors and sellers of products to the public, to deliver products free of defects which harm an individual or numerous persons and to make good on that responsibility if their products are defective. These can include faulty auto brakes, contaminated baby food, exploding bottles of beer, flammable children's pajamas, or lack of label warnings. Examples: Beauty Queen Hair Products makes a hair-permanent kit in which the formula will cause loss of hair to women with sensitive scalps, and Molly Makeup has her hair done at the Bon Ton Beauty Shop and suffers scalp burns and loss of hair. Molly has a claim for damages against Beauty Queen, the manufacturer. Big Boy Trucks makes a truck with a faulty steering gear, bought by Tom Holdtight. The gear fails and Holdtight runs off the road and
2

breaks his back. Holdtight can sue Big Boy for the damages. The key element in products liability law is that a person who suffers harm need not prove negligence, since the negligence is "presumed" and the result is "strict liability" (absolute responsibility) on the seller, distributor and manufacturer. An injured person usually need only sue the seller and let him/her/it bring the manufacturer or distributor into the lawsuit or require contribution toward a judgment. However, all those possibly responsible should be named in the suit as defendants if they are known. (See: warrant, warranty)

How Safe Is Safe

It ensure the level of product safety that is important for the society Parents are often advised to do many things to keep their kids safe and prevent unnecessary injuries. I think that although many parents understand the need to be mindful of their children's safety, they still often wonder if they really need to do everything that is recommended. Do you really need locks on your cabinets, covers on electrical outlets, or a gate around your pool? Can your kids be too safe? Personally I think that you can never be too safe. That doesn't mean that your children have to wear pads and a helmet at all times, but the more chances you take, the more likely your children will get hurt at some time. It is important to remember that accidents (unintentional injuries) are the leading cause of death for children over age 1 years (and the 7th leading cause of death for children under a year old). Even though unintentional injuries is a better term than accidents, it is even better to call these preventable injuries, since very often (but unfortunately not always) they can be prevented with the proper safety measures. Here are the leading causes of death for children age 1 to 18 years in 2006: Unintentional Injury (8.644 deaths) Homicide (2,338 deaths) Malignant Neoplasms (1,796 deaths) Suicide (1,296 deaths) Congenital Anomalies (1,036 deaths) Heart Disease (674 deaths)

(196 deaths) As you can see, none of the other leading causes of death even comes close to the numbers caused by accidents. Which injuries and accidents cause the most deaths?
3

Here is the 2006 data: Unintentional MV Traffic accidents (5,205 deaths) Unintentional Drowning (948 deaths) Unintentional Poisonings (532 deaths) Unintentional Fire/Burns (449 deaths) Unintentional Suffocation (308 deaths) Unintentional Other Land Transport accidents(220 deaths) - (including ATV accidents, horseback riding accidents, etc.)

The regulatory bodies put penalties on organization in doing any sort of unethical practices

Product Liability Reform

Businesses have sought relief from state legislatures and Congress regarding product liability, contending that the shifting legal standards make them vulnerable to even the most suspect claim. Some states have passed laws that provide manufacturers with the right to defend themselves by showing that their product met generally acceptable safety standards when made. This assertion is known as the state-of-the-art defense, which relieves manufacturers of the task of attempting to make a perfect product. An injured consumer cannot recover on the theory that the product would have been safe had the manufacturer incorporated safety features that were developed after the product was made. Consumer advocates have opposed such laws because they allow manufacturers to avoid liability. The advocates argue that these laws discourage innovation because higher safety standards are set as improvements are made. Businesses have also attempted to set maximum amounts that persons can recover for Punitive Damages. Some states have capped awards for punitive damages. In 1996, President BILL CLINTON vetoed a bill that would have limited punitive damage awards to $250,000, or two times the economic and non-economic damages, whichever amount was greater, stating that it would deprive U.S. families of the ability to fully recover for injuries caused by defective products.

Product liability Doctrine

The responsibility of a manufacturer or vendor of goods to compensate for injury caused by defective merchandise that it has provided for sale. When individuals are harmed by an unsafe product, they may have a Cause of Action against the persons who designed, manufactured, sold, or furnished that product. In the United States, some consumers have hailed the rapid growth of product liability litigation as an effective tool for Consumer Protection. The law has changed from caveat emptor ("let the buyer beware") to Strict Liability for manufacturing defects that make a product unreasonably dangerous. Manufacturers and others who distribute and sell goods argue that product liability verdicts have enriched plaintiffs' attorneys and added to the cost of goods sold. Businesses have sought tort reform from state legislatures and Congress in hopes of reducing damage awards that sometimes reach millions of dollars.
4