Ethical Dilemma: Perceived Potential Advertising Deception - Case Study Example

Ethical Dilemma: Perceived Potential Advertising Deception BY YOU ACADEMIC ORGANISATION Ethical Dilemma: Perceived Potential Advertising Deception Introduction This project focuses around a hypothetical situation in which Amie, a copywriter for Laird & Laird (L & L) Advertising, has been appointed the role of overseeing the Basils Best bacon account. Despite her exuberance in meeting and working with the assigned celebrity spokesperson for the product advertisements, Vin Diesel, Amie is somewhat plagued by an ethical dilemma in which she perceives a certain level of dishonesty on behalf of Laird & Laird. Vin Diesel has fulfilled the legal requirements of the upcoming endorsement by signing a statement swearing that he is a legitimate consumer of Basils Best bacon and that he can adequately testify to the products quality and tastiness. However, Vin Diesel has recently become a vegetarian and no longer consumes the product. Amie feels disturbed by the ethical ramifications of the celebritys endorsement and is pondering how to proceed with the advertising project in the face of ethical concerns. Performing an Ethical Evaluation Individuals in the advertising business, or even amongst general society, are often challenged when they consider ethics and legality to be similar; however ethics and the law are two very distinctly different things (Nickels et al, 2005). Amie, the copywriter for Laird & Laird, questions the ethical appropriateness of using recent vegetarian convert Vin Diesel as the spokesperson for Basils Best bacon. Because the celebrity no longer consumes the product, Amie feels that consumers may be unintentionally misled by the endorsement, since potential health issues are being intentionally omitted from Diesels promotion of the product. However, the Advertising Standards Association has established that so long as the endorser can accurately testify to verifiable personal use of a product, with no mention of strictly present usage, the celebrity endorsement is legally valid. I believe that Amie is engaged in such a dilemma to where she is ineffectively relating legalities with that of ethical issues, thus she is not able to separate the two very different viewpoints. The first step that Amie needs to take to satisfy her apprehension is to adequately measure her perceptions to determine whether an ethical situation actually exists. Marketing communications and advertising messages must consistently be accurate and truthful in order to meet appropriate standards (Gershon & Buerstatte, 2003). With this in mind, it has been clearly illustrated through both personal communications with Vin Diesel and in his legalised testament to his historical satisfaction with the consumption of Basils Best, that the celebritys endorsement is substantially valid; thus Diesels promotion of the product is perfectly ethical and candid. Not only does this convey adherence to legalities, but does not breach guidelines on morality or the expectation of ethical behaviour. If the celebrity had never consumed Basils Best and was allowed to promote its positive attributes, then both legal and ethical issues would have been breached. In Amies situation, neither aspect applies to the upcoming endorsement. Amie feels that Vin Diesel (and the ad firm) will be intentionally deceiving the consumer audience because the health issues which prompted the celebrity to abstain from eating bacon are being consciously omitted from the advertising campaign. However, literature suggests that the firm definition of deception in advertising implies success in causing someone to hold a false belief and relates to a purposeful attempt at dishonesty (Attas, 1999). There is absolutely no evidence that either the celebrity or L & L Advertising is knowingly attempting to deceive the consumer audience, moreover, the celebrity legitimately suggests that Basils Best bacon products are of the highest calibre of eating enjoyment. Amie is also concerned about her performance role in the product promotion based solely on the incompatibility between her own ethical programming and the overall failure to highlight Diesels vegetarian lifestyle. This role conflict represents a clash of her own belief system and the expectations of the firm (Tsai & Shih, 2005). However, the concept of ethical behaviour is very subjective, meaning that what seems morally inappropriate to one individual is substantially justified by another. For this reason, Amie should weigh whether she will receive adequate support for her concerns or whether she will negatively impact her future career opportunities before imposing a formal debate based on very abstract perceptions. In any ethical situation, the individual plagued by ethical dilemmas must consider this reality. Amie views her situation in this dilemma as acting under personal obligations for advertising morality as the firms moral agent to the consumer. Moral agents are highlighted as being responsible for acting, and imposing similar actions, on others in ways that are consistent with his or her own value system (Shaver, 2003). Obviously, to her credit, Amie is a stern believer in business ethics, which can be supported by her apparent anxiety borne of her own belief in moral character. However, Amie must take into consideration the ultimate impact of the advertisement on the firms stakeholder, in this case the consumer, and weigh her own personal beliefs against the value system of the stakeholder in terms of ethical behaviour. As one might assume, there are a substantial amount of consumers who routinely purchase bacon and, as Vin Diesel aptly points out in his discussions with Amie, these stakeholders might as well enjoy the quality of Basils Best brand since they are going to eat bacon anyhow. It is in no way the responsibility of Laird & Laird, or Amie for that matter, to judge whether the consumer should be notified of the potential cholesterol-enhancing properties of bacon; only that this particular brand cannot be outclassed with another competing product. In this situation, the only potential ethical issue lies with the manufacturer of Basils Best, who did not hire Laird & Laird to discourage stakeholders by mentioning health-related issues with their bacon brand. Thus, Amie should come to realize, before causing inter-company animosity or challenge her immediate superiors decision, that her role in the advertising is ethically sound, as well as the roles of L & L and its celebrity spokesperson. Some critics have offered that ethical problems are virtually inevitable simply due to the very nature of the sales and promotional functions (Boone & Kurtz, 2006). The only real challenge within advertising agencies is to understand the specific factors that drive consumer behaviour and how to position the product or service to adequately meet consumer demand (Stark, 2001). Laird & Laird maintains a contractual obligation to Basils Best to meet this criteria and Amies role in the matter does not extend further than to simply perform the promotion; considering that the legalities have been sufficiently complied with and the only ethical issues exist entirely in her own personal value system. It is not a surprise that Amie is questioning the potential ethical consequences of the health-related omissions, however there is little possibility that the consumer will perceive any attempt at deception on behalf of Basils Best and will respond positively to the celebrity acknowledgement of the bacons first-rate quality. Amie must be aware that the stakeholder will be the ultimate judge of the ethical content of the advertisements, and since the firm has taken significant steps to ensuring a fair representation of the product, it would be in the best interest for her career and for that of Laird & Laird if she simply come to terms with the imposition of her own somewhat distorted viewpoint. Research has shown that consumer perceptions of an advertisement as being unethical significantly and negatively impacts attitude toward the brand (Dean, 2005). In this scenario, the dangers of promoting adverse effects to Basils Best brand are substantially miniscule. Hypocrisy and Comparative Ethical Beliefs Individuals who face ethical issues are often tempted to place self-interest ahead of the reasonable and legitimate interests of others (Longenecker et al, 2003). Moreover, a person with integrity does not maintain divided loyalties, suggesting a person with duplicity (Maxwell, 1993). Despite Amies queries regarding the perceived ethical dilemma involved in the Basils Best marketing tactic, it does appear that she may be likely willing to forego her ethical consciousness for the sake of rubbing elbows with a renowned celebrity. Amie is questioning the integrity of both the celebrity and Laird & Laird, but she fails to recognise that her own self-interests are strongly dictating whether she should take action regarding her perceived role in promoting unethical advertising. As Amie ponders and prays for guidance regarding her situation, she is likely searching for an alternative solution which can satisfy the issues that she perceives as potentially unethical. Often, however, there are limitations on a persons ability to develop strong alternatives to ethical dilemmas as these limitations are caused by personal interest in the outcome of the decision (Gomez-Mejia et al, 2005). Amie is exhibiting a noticeable level of hypocrisy, as her potential willingness to deny her ethical value system so as to satisfy her "star struck" self-indulgence adds less credence to the overall validity of her ethical stance. Amie must take into consideration that both Vin Diesel and her advertising firm are strongly secure that their ethical obligations have been met, thus Amie must consider the consequences of disturbing the forward momentum of this (likely) profitable ad campaign as her justification for her arguments will likely face considerable managerial scrutiny. A primary aspect of making a sound decision regarding raising arguments about another entitys potential lack of ethical compliance is to consider ones own integrity and character and how this will be judged by others (Gomez-Mejia et al, 2005). This may seem like a rather straightforward concept, however Amie must assess how her implications will affect how others judge her own integrity in terms of her visible desire to work with a heralded celebrity. Taking Appropriate Actions Given the economic importance of advertising, promotional campaigns often come under a great deal of public scrutiny (Werhane & Freeman, 1998). Perhaps Amie is concerned about the long-term impact to Laird & Laird, as well as Basils Best, with her trepidation about whether the primary stakeholders will discover whether Diesel is actually a vegetarian and deem the advertisements as unethical. If this were the case, and Amie were to approach her superiors with the notion that she is merely trying to protect the companys profitability and public image, she may have a sound alternative to dealing with her perceived unethical situation. If Amie reaches the point where she cannot actively pursue the ad campaign utilising its current design, I would suggest that the copywriter promote her discontent by citing an attempt to sustain economic and public relations stability for all of the primary stakeholders; including L & L, Basils Best, Vin Diesel and, most importantly, to put her restless ethical consciousness at ease. In this scenario, the likely response from all of the parties involved will be a respect for her considerable dedication to the success of the campaign and she will be heralded for her ethical concerns. Advertising is, by its very design, ingenious in its simplicity: Promotional campaigns create consumer discontent by presenting ideal images that are impossible to obtain, and making consumers desire this particular good as more than a luxury, but to believe the item is a necessity (Henslin, 2003). Some individuals might argue that the entire act of over-enhancing a products attributes is unethical by design, however advertising generates substantial profitability for advertising firms and is not generally categorised as being an unethical business practise. With this in mind, Amie must also realise that she is part of this type of organisation which tends to exploit a product to make it appear far more spectacular than it actually is, thus if she had issues with the potential unethical aspects of advertising, she might have been better suited in a different career path. Should she raise alarm about her concerns with the nature of the Basils Best account, this may likely jeopardise how she is perceived as being capable of handling issues within that particular industry. This is a legitimate constraint to becoming a viable alternative for Amie, as she would be taking a stand on very intangible grounds in terms of unethical behaviour; and likely affecting her potential career growth. It is my ultimate advice that Amie recognise that her concerns about the morality of Vin Diesels endorsement are unsubstantiated and that she come to distinguish the distinct differences between deception and that of her own ethical value system. It is clear that both Laird & Laird and Vin Diesel view absolutely zero ethical conflict with the promotional campaign (nor does this author) and Amie must recognise that, in this particular situation, business is business and enjoy her experience with Diesel. Bibliography Attas, Daniel. Aug 1999. Whats wrong with deceptive advertising? Journal of Business Ethics. Dordrecht. 21 (1), p.50. Boone, Louis E. & Kurtz, David L. 2006. Contemporary Marketing. Thomson South- Western. United Kingdom, p.578. Dean, Dwane Hal. Winter 2005. After the Unethical Ad: A Comparison of Advertiser Response Strategies. Business and Society Review. 110 (4), p.434. Gershon, Howard J. & Buerstatte, Gary E. Sep/Oct 2003. The E in marketing: Ethics in the age of misbehavior. Journal of Healthcare Management. 48 (5). Gomez-Mejia, Luis R., Balkin, David B. & Cardy, Robert L. 2005. Management: People, Performance, Change. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. London, p.113. Henslin, James M. 2003. Sociology: A Down-To-Earth Approach. 6th ed. A & B Publishers. London, p.418. Longenecker, Justin G., Moore, Carlos W., Petty, J. William & Palich, Leslie E. 2003. Small Business Management: An Entrepreneurial Emphasis. 13th ed. Thomson South-Western. London, p.27. Maxwell, John C. 1993. Developing the Leader Within You. Thomas Nelson Publishers. p.36. Nickels, William G., McHugh, James M. & McHugh, Susan M. 2005. Understanding Business. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin, London. p.102. Shaver, Dan. Dec 2003. Toward an Analytical Structure for Evaluating the Ethical Content of Decisions by Advertising Professionals. Journal of Business Ethics. Dordrecht. 48 (3), p.292. Stark, James W. 2001. Marketing Decisions Made Accurate and Easy. Primis Custom Publishing. London, p.112. Tsai, Ming-Tien & Shih, Chia-Mei. 2005. The Influences of Organizational and Personal Ethics on Role Conflict among Marketing Managers. International Journal of Management. Poole. 22 (1), pp.58-59. Werhane, Patricia & Freeman, Edward R. 1998. The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Business Ethics. Blackwell Publishers. Malden, p.6. Read More