Advertising and Promotion Ethics

Markets are always pressured to gain the publics attention. In order to intensify their efforts and increase the attention of customers, many advertisers are pushing the limits of ethical concepts while advertising to generate buzz consumers.

Ethical issues should be considered in integrated marketing communications.  But how do we define ethics? Should we base these matters off of our own personal beliefs/social-norms, or should we define ethical principles as laws to define what is or is not appropriate? As defined in our text, “Ethics are moral principles and values that govern the actions and decisions of an individual or group… Although particular actions may be within the law, still might not be considered ethical. (Belch & Belch, pg. 733)

There are numerous ads shown though televisions commercials, billboards and other forms of media that I have found to be disturbing. Nevertheless, all of these disturbing ads have the commonality of resonating a shock value. The marketer’s goal is to try and create an ad that would gain the audiences attention (because all publicity is good publicity, right?).

Starting off, I came across an ad created by Burger King while skimming through my nephews copy of Sports Illustrated Magazine (target market being tween males and older) that depicts a girl with her mouth wide open with and an elongated sandwich aiming for her mouth. If you did not find this distributing, maybe the caption will catch your attention. It reads, “IT’LL BLOW YOUR MIND AWAY.” Is Burger King using a sexually suggestive ad to market toward male audiences using sports illustrated as a medium?

Yes they are. Some may oppose to the actions on morals and ethical grounds this ad suggest, but I personally find it offense. This is literally equating the pleasure of a sexual act to how rewarding a man would feel after eating their sandwich. This ad might be viewed as inappropriate to some and stir up some controversy but in all is great publicity for the company. As our book suggested, many ads that have sexual appeal often demean women by depicting them as sex objects. Burger King successfully accomplished that portrayal by making women nothing more than a sex toy for the male audience. 

Moving forward, this next ad by Sisley Paris, a fashion line, uses a theme of drugs to advertise to the public. This ad shows the women snorting coke, where the coke is in the form of a white dress. I believe this ad has a very negative taste because they are trying to convey snorting coke to be “cool”, but in reality it is very harmful and dangerous. For this company in particular, I do not fully understand where the concept of drugs plays into the company selling more clothing, and makeup products to women, but I know this image is disturbing and would probably get my attention if I had seen it in a magazine.

Another adverting technique is just to gain shock value over other companies like American Apparel, who used naked models to sell their clothing line, although the models are naked, they are still selling American Apparel’s  “Lifestyle” and helping to create a brand image for the company. (I happened to find an ad on the company’s website that I felt was less racy, and more appropriate for the sake of my blog) American Apparel actively uses their female models as sexual object, just like Burger King. This ad shows a woman with her legs wide open, with only tights on and having the company logo placed right where her genitals are located. As a woman, I find this ad very explicit and very uncomfortable considering what a male audience might be thinking when looking at the same ad. American Apparel is know for their suggestive ads, which always creates distasteful ads.

Overall these three ads are examples of distasteful ads, or unethical examples. American Apparel, Burger King, and Sisley are not doing anything illegal, but they are pushing the limits of what people might find appropriate and inappropriate. These ads will undoubtedly have a social effect of customers, and the public but even if it generates a bad or good impression, the company is still winning due to the ad-generating buzz for the company. Advertising is a very powerful institution and can persuade an audience into buying their products. But is using the theme of sex, and drugs ethical? 

References:

American Apparel | Wholesale T-Shirts | Made in USA. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.americanapparel.net/wholesaleresources/?mpch=ads

Belch, GE. and Belch, MA.  Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective, 9th Edition.  McGraw-Hill Companies.  2012.

Burger King 'it'll blow your mind away' sexist or silly? - National sex scandal | Examiner.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.examiner.com/article/burger-king-it-ll-blow-your-mind-away-sexist-or-silly

Sisley-Paris Official Online Store: skincare, makeup, fragrance Paris. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.sisley-paris.com/en-US/?gclid=CJKjucO70b0CFe07OgodhkIAuA

Neuroscience and Advertising Effectiveness

Because there is not a set-in-stone way to test effective advertising techniques, problems with current research methods exist. Techniques based off of Neuroscience is used for companies use to measure advertising benefits. Although neuroscience is a specific science that focuses on the nervous system in all aspects, using this to base the effectiveness of advertising still has its pros and cons.

To combat this problem, steps are being taken in order to improve a way to measure how effective advertising is. Thus, the PACT (Positioning Advertising Copy Testing) criteria were established to test marketing effectiveness. The PACT is a set of nine principles that defines copy testing as research, and is based off of neuroscience. This criterion is supposed to aid in the judgment of specific advertising excruciations.  As learned in class and stated from our Advertisings and Promotion textbook, “Researchers can easily control the state of completion of the test communications through the PACT criteria,” (Belch, 628).  Although there are nine principles to test the effectiveness of marketing, there are still some problems that occur with our current research methods style. Using neroscience to aim at the consumers cognitive thought process is a great way to measure effectiveness, but there are always some pros and cons when evaluating how a consumer will perceive commercials. 

To begin, the message and budget are all placed in order to set the company’s marketing objectives. The objective is to attract audience members, and to get them involved in the promotion. This is where the IMC methods come into place.  Communicating a consistent brand message that is also in the ranges of the company’s budget is important. This seems like a straight-forward method but it is relatively complicated when trying to measure how influential an advertisement is when attracting the publics eye.

The 2^nd major problem when it comes to testing research methods is the cost. Providing multiple measurements requires more than just budgeting. This can be pricy, and still not give the advertisers the information that they would like to receive.  This is a major problem with the PACT Method. Principles 3,5, and 8 of the PACT methods is based on budgeting, if a company doesn’t have a spare income, this way might be troublesome for smaller companies with smaller budgets.

Next, the PACT requirements involving 4,7,9 also have some problems as well. To start off with Principle 4, it sates, “research should be guided by a model of human response to communication that encompasses reception, comprehension and behavioral reception” this is a great way to start developing information, but the problem with this is that this principle is barley intergraded into marketing strategies. Though these methods have existed for a long time, they are not effect because they also do not take into account the audiences feelings, and audience’s changes in perception of the brand overtime. So, it does not provide an effecting way to score or judge the audience’s thoughts and feelings toward the ad. Moving on, Principle 7, providing a nonbiased exposure, seem simple enough, but also another difficult procedure to follow. Using the principle to test provides the advertiser with artificial scores leaving the advertiser to developed faulty information about the public.  As stated in our text the Seagram and Time study can be used, but is not effective due to large tasks firms have to develop massive, and expensive advertising plans. If developed properly, this method could be effective, but in todays times, it is hard to develop more advanced strategies when information supporting these programs are faulty. Lastly, Principle 9 goes hand in hand with 7. Having concern for reliability and validity are a true concern. Developing way to tract effective marketing deals with having accurate information to base studies off of, without this information the study is useless.

All in all, although the PACT criteria have been around for years, there are still major problems that surround how to measure how effect advertising really is. Using neuroscience as a way to measure advertising effectiveness has its pros and cons, but for the most part, it is not a bad idea for advertisers to measure advertising effectiveness as a whole. Until technology improves, this is the only way to do the tasks.

If interested, check out the link below to read more about ineffective and effective advertising campaigns that are running right now! Feature Pillsbury, L’Oreal, Visa, and AT&T.

References:
Belch, GE. and Belch, MA.  Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective, 9th Edition.  McGraw-Hill Companies.  2012.

Top 10 Effective and Ineffective Advertising Slogans. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.qualitylogoproducts.com/blog/10-effective-ineffective-advertising-slogans