Marketing Ethics as a Dimension of Social Responsibility - Research Paper Example

Marketing Marketing Ethics There has for long existed moral condemnations of marketing, even before marketing came into being a field of study. The past few decades experienced a remarkable increase in ethical concern. Arguably, marketing is predominantly susceptible to disapproval of moral practices. Marketing subdisciplines offer extensive opportunities for unethical conduct (Arnold, 2009, p. 123). Commercialism and marketing activities have not fared well in view of most ethicists, and it is only in recent times that a more thorough evaluation of business ethics occurred. Pride and Ferrell (2012, p. 104) describe marketing ethics as a dimension of social responsibility that involves principles and standards that delineate satisfactory behavior in marketing. Marketers should be careful and conscious of moral principles for tolerable behavior from numerous stand points such as the industry, company, consumers, society, and exceptional interest groups. When marketing actions diverge from the established principles, the exchange practice can collapse, resulting in consumer frustration, lack of reliance and law suits (Arnold, 2009, p. 113). An ethical issue is an identifiable dilemma that necessitates an organization or individual to decide amongst numerous procedures that must be assessed as wrong or right (Pride & Ferrell, 2011, p. 104). Any time an activity causes marketers or consumers in their target markets to feel manipulated or cheated; a marketing ethical situation exists, despite the legality of the activity. Ethical issues in marketing arise from product, distribution, promotion, and pricing issues. Target marketing ethical issues The concept of segmentation and target marketing has been on the increase in the contemporary world. Market promotion and targeting can generate moral matters in a multiplicity of ways, among them forged and deceptive adverts and controlling sales advertising and targeting a market segment (Moore, 1990, p. 45). Marketers have fragmented consumer markets resulting to increased need for focused target marketing. Despite the role of recognizing and fulfilling customer wants, more target marketing has come with augmented denigration. Though target marketing is widely regarded as the embodiment of marketing conception, it has in certain cases been disparaged as unethical (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p. 1). Particularly, widespread media focus has been dedicated to the aiming of grown-up customer sections referred as susceptible with manufactured goods mulled over as damaging. This disapproval of targeting has engrossed merchandises such as weight loss items, furniture, fast foods, contraceptives, and lottery tickets. Case: RJR’s Uptown and Dakota Cigarettes This case is about a cigarette company whose new product introductions were terminated impulsively. This is not because they failed to achieve reception and approval with their target markets but because of controversy over their targeting. In 1989, RJR Tobacco Company publicized its arrangements for Uptown, a cigarette proposed to please Black American smokers. The companies were seeking new consumers for the tobacco revenues were acutely dilapidated (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p. 2). During this period, 29 percent of all the adults were smokers with 39 percent being blacks. A market research conducted by the company indicated that a majority of Black Americans preferred menthol and that most of them would favor Uptown’s menthol. The company put up advertisement on the new product to be launched into the market which targeted the Black American Race. The adverts suggested glamour, night life and high fashion. Unfortunately, Louis W. Sullivan, a black Health and Human Services Secretary, attacked Uptown cigarette and charged that the brand is scathingly and intentionally targeted towards Black Americans. Sullivan asserted that the brand only put up deceiving information of the effects of the cigarette while, in the real sense, the cigarette would bring about health hazards. Because of this, RJR called off its plan to launch the product (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p.2). Ethical issues with regard to targeting include studies related top direct marketing because of privacy worries and of targeting the elderly and children. These consumers are regarded as vulnerable consumers because they are not able to make lucid and grown-up choices (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p. 3). Certainly, it is this susceptibility that renders restrictions on tobacco advertising under the Food and Drug Administration. However, in the case above, the targeting by RJR Company was on nonelderly, adult customers, a group capable of making rational and mature decisions. This case prompts writing on aiming at adult customers considered susceptible with produce deemed detrimental. In reference to Pollay, Lee and Carter (1992, p. 48), ethnic segmentation and targeting started long ago. They assert that condemnation of market division has taken place simply with challenging items and, for this regard, market division’s effectiveness conveys fewer advantages and more bereavements and diseases providing a disservice other than service. According to Spratlen (1993, p. 447), the targeting of Black Americans is unethical due to the susceptibility of the market and the disproportional unconstructive impacts on this segment’s use. Needless to say, the policy on moral values of the American Marketing Association notes that marketers should be conventional to the basic statute of professional ethics not to harm people intentionally, and they should proffer goods and services that are harmless. For this reason, targeting could be disparaged and assessed as unethical when it engrosses products identified as harmful because of the marketer’s obligation to avoid causing harm. When considering the vulnerabilities of the segments, it is imperative to consider the economic viability and access to health care. In reference to Smith & Cooper-Martins (1997, p. 4), vulnerable consumers are regarded as the unusually prone group of consumers who have distinctive responses to products that are differently risk-free when used by most people. The topology on vulnerability encompasses physical and mental competency, physical hypersensitivity and the level of complexity. In addition, RJR Company could be charged for product related ethical issues. Product associated moral matters occur when marketing managers fall short of the disclosure of perils linked to a product or information regarding the rationale, application or significance of a product. In this case, RJR Company failed to notify the Black Americans about the harmful effects of smoking Uptown cigarette and instead branded advertised it as full of glamour, night life and high fashion. This case is similar to Heileman’s Power Master Malt Liquor. In 1990, Heileman had witnessed a decline in its sales and was frantic for new glorious items. Malt Liquor, an item used by the African Americans and the poor was one of the growth opportunities (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p. 2). In order to woo more consumers to take the company products, the company came up with a new product known as the Power Master which had a high alcohol content of 5.9 percent. This made Power Master have 65 percent more alcohol than ordinary beer. This raised a lot of uproar among the African American leaders and anti- alcohol groups. Since there had been a report that African Americans had a 42 percent superior mortality rate due to liver cirrhosis than whites, Heileman was requested to cease the production and distribution of the Power Master drink since high alcohol beverages could not be marketed in such a place where the people already suffered from alcohol and drug dilemmas and who were susceptible to alcohol related diseases. Heileman was accused of targeting vulnerable groups of people (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p.2). A similar case is that of the breakfast cereal manufacturers who deceive consumers that their products are natural, yet they contain a lot of toxic substances. Such companies include the Kellogg’s, Barbara Bakery and PepsiCo. These companies put up misleading information about the products thus deceiving the consumers. This is similar to RJR’s case where the company put up deceiving information about its products. The cereal companies brand their products as natural yet they have toxic substances. Consumers think that they are receiving high quality, healthy products while the products are genetically modified. This deceives the consumers and is unethical (The Conscious Marketer, 2011). When marketing products, the marketer should be honest to the consumers. In this regard, the marketer should always give correct information about a service or product. Misinformation may create a short term outcome but can result to unfavorable long term effects (Pride & Ferrell, 2012, p. 105) Similarly, Johnson & Johnson, an organization renowned for its high ethical standards, has more recently received criticism for not disclosing the dangers of acetaminophen, a key component in Tylenol. Unconscious of the perils, some of the consumers overdosed on the drug. This caused health risks to the consumers which resulted to the company being compelled to pay damages to the consumers. This was because they failed to inform consumers of the perils associated with the excessive use of the drug (Pride & Ferrell, 2012, p. 106). In this case, Johnson & Johnson’s failure to inform the consumers amounted to dishonesty about the nature of the product. What I have learned The process of ethical evaluation can be identified by incorporating public harmfulness and target vulnerability. When a marketer develops a marketing strategy, its primary attributes are the product and the target group. Opinions on product injuriousness and target susceptibility impact the public’s conclusion on the ethics of the stratagem, which in turn affect the behavioral reactions (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p.12). Approval and disapproval conducts give response to the salesperson and affect consequential marketing stratagems. It is in this regard that marketers should be aware of the public uneasiness over ethical issues of certain targeting strategies (Pride & Ferrell, 2012, p. 107). The targeting of vulnerable products cannot be subject to criticism not unless the products are harmful. This is because, targeting of vulnerable consumer groups such as the minority groups in America with less harmful products has been praised such as the “All skins” make up which involved the African Americans. In this regard, Uptown, Johnson &Johnson, Power Master, Kellogg’s, Barbara Bakery and PepsiCo cereals and Power Master were questioned due to their harmful nature (Smith & Cooper-Martins, 1997, p.14). Needless to say, it is the amalgamation of apparent product injuriousness and target susceptibility that causes criticism of targeting. In essence, targeting a harmful product to vulnerable consumer segment is bound to elicit public concerns since they are considered less ethical. Lastly, marketers require to comprehend public opinions of product injuriousness and customer susceptibility. In essence, the concept of choosing between alternative stratagems is not clear-cut. The marketing managers may not choose with intent between stratagems that engross items of greater or lesser damage or between targets of high or low vulnerability. In order to control the exposures to the risks of targeting, the marketers should identify public opinions on consumer vulnerability and product harm when making decisions on product developments. Works Cited Arnold, C. Ethical marketing and the new consumer. Chichester, U.K: Wiley, 2009. Print. Moore, L. Target Marketing OK: Professor. Sunday Tennessean, 1990. Print. Pollay, R. W., J. S. Lee, and D. Carter. "Separate but not Equal: Racial Segmentation in Cigarette Advertising." Journal of Advertising 21 (1992): 45-57. Web. Pride, W. M., and O. C. Ferrell. Marketing. Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning, 2012. Print. Smith, N. C., and E. Cooper-Martin. "Ethics and Target Marketing: The role of Product Harm and Consumer vulnerability." Journal of Marketing 61.3 (1997): 1-20. Web. Spratlen, T. "Trageting Vulnerable Segments in Cigarette Advertising: Etgical Criteria and Public Policy Implications." Developments in Marketing Science 16 (1993): 446-4450. Print. The conscious Marketer. "The controversy in ‘natural’ foods marketing." the conscious marketer. N.p., 17 Oct. 2011. Web. Nov. 2012. . Read More