Critical Evaluation of Marketing - Essay Example

? Critical Evaluation Inserts His/Her Inserts Grade Inserts (25, October, Introduction Marketing has always been criticized for one reason or another. Some regard it as a waste of resource. Others censure the manipulation that marketing practices cause. The ethics of marketing is not a new subject and debate on the ‘deceptive’ side of marketing is often witnessed in the academic circles. The article by Hackley, Tiwsakul, & Preuss (2008) focuses on product placement and the ethical issues product placement pose. The article provides a comprehensive ethical analysis through different ethical theories of product placement. An attempt has been made, throughout the article, to identify whether product placement overall is a deceptive practice or not. In this paper we will critically evaluate the research article. The key arguments of the article will be discussed and logic of arguments will be examined. Critical Analysis The article starts with an introduction of the topic in general. The introduction is very well written with the help of previous literature. No major claims are made rather readers are informed regarding the main subject of the article. Overall the article seems to be written in a logical flow with each section placed in the right order. Introduction is strong and everything said in the introduction is substantiated with existing literature. Product placement is a practice of placing a brand or a product in the scene or script of news and entertainment. Product placement has been seen in the Hollywood movies for a long time (Fristoe, 2005). The article is trying to evaluate whether this type of marketing is ethical or not. Implicit product placement has also been discussed in the article. The legal status of product placement is also discussed. Although it is banned but still UK broadcasters are involved in product placement, and the industry is in favour of product placement as they see it as a new source of revenue. The article does not conclude that product placement is deceptive, nor it claims otherwise. The article through analysis of product placement through ethical theories is just trying to shed more light on the subject. Through ethical theories like utilitarianism, categorical imperative, and virtue ethics authors attempt to understand the ethical issues underpinning product placement. The article does not clearly see product placement as deceptive but it argues that there are aspects of product placement that may not be approved by ethical theories and general public. The article raises questions about the implicit aspect of product placement. The argument made by the article with regards to the implicit product placement is that people should be aware of product placement. If this is not the case then product placement might be deceptive. Existing literature has also raised questions on implicit product placement (Spence & van Heekeren, 2005). The authors argue that when people are not aware of the persuasion then it might be unethical according to categorical imperative and Aristotelian ethics. The former teaches to treat humanity as oneself, and the latter lay burden of right or wrong on the intentions of the actor. According to both ethical theories implicit product placement is unethical, given that people are not aware of such a marketing practice. A strong point of the article is that it has questioned an assumption that is mistreated as fact in the corporate world to justify excessive marketing. Studies have shown that uneducated people might not have a clear idea about how marketing works and they might not be aware of their rights (Culnan, 2006). Marketing can also manipulate people who are not emotionally or financially mature (Laczniak & Murphy, 2006). The assumption that consumers are smart and knowledgeable is not justified and the article too raises questions about it. The authors have tried to remain impartial throughout the article and have attempted to give a genuine account of ethical issues regarding product placement. But they have sometimes gone with the flow and have implicitly argued in favour of product placement. The treatment of utilitarianism in evaluating the benefits or harm of product placement is trivial and superficial. The authors argue that utilitarianism would approve of product placement because it is increasing the net utility of the society. Shareholders, customers, and brand owners will benefit from product placement according to the article. This is entirely not true as utilitarianist approach does not always favour marketing (Nantel & Weeks, 1996). The authors have overrated the potential benefits of product placement for the society. While answering the main question authors have also communicated that product placement is generally approved by audiences. Research suggests that people have favourable opinions about product placement (Tiwsakul et.al. 2005). This is not an assumption that has been made in the article which is a positive point. The authors have also remained impartial when drawing conclusions. They have not taken sides but have stated facts. They argue that in some cases product placement is ethical but there are some grey areas and they should not be ignored by marketers. The article is not propagating marketing prudence in product placement, although prudence is advisable (Robin & Reidenbach, 1987). Authors are more interested in reshaping product placement techniques and regulations than in abolishing the practice. Therefore this article cannot be presented as literature against product placement rather it is supporting the practice implicitly. The article calls for better regulations for governing product placement. It also argues that consumers should be made aware of the practice and there should be no implicit product placement as it may be in violation with virtue ethics and deontological ethics. Concluding remarks are also based upon the arguments given in the paper and no other claims are made. Conclusion The article under question is talking about product placement and whether the practice is deceptive or not. The authors have used different ethical theories to analyze whether product placement is deceptive or not. They have not made an extreme conclusion rather they argue that product placement has grey areas which should be handled. Overall they have not raised question on the fundamentals of product placement. The authors have a little bias towards product placement but overall the article has made logical assumptions and arguments. Bibliography Culnan, M. J. 1995. Consumer awareness of name removal procedures: Implications for direct marketing. Journal of Direct Marketing, 9(2): 10–19 Fristoe, R. 2005. Introduction to product placement in the movies. Accessed from http://www.turnerclassicmovies.com/ThisMonth/Article/0,,90481,00.html Hackley, C., Tiwsakul, R., & Preuss, L. 2008. An ethical evaluation of product placement: a deceptive practice? Business Ethics: A European Review, 17(2): 109-120 Laczniak, G.R. and Murphy, E. 2006. Normative perspectives for ethical and socially responsible marketing. Journal of Macro Marketing, 26(2): 154–177 Nantel, J., & Weeks, W. 1996. Marketing ethics: is there more to it than the utilitarian approach? European Journal of Marketing, 30(5):9 – 19 Robin, D. & Reidenbach, R.E. 1987. Social responsibility, ethics, and marketing strategy: closing the gap between concept and application. Journal of Marketing, 51(1): 44–58 Spence, E.H. & van Heekeren, B. 2005. Advertising Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Tiwsakul, R., Szmigin, I. and Hackley, C. 2005. Explicit, non-integrated product placement in British television programmes. International Journal of Advertising, 24(1): 95–111 Read More