4-6 pages double-spaced Business Ethic Paper!!!
Maoxiaoying
sher.pptxBusiness Ethics
Ethical Advertising
Sher’s goal
Sher is trying to provide a framework that marketers can use to assess whether a marketing tactic is immorally manipulative.
A marketing tactic can be immoral for many different reasons, but Sher is only concerned with immoral manipulation.
Sher’s framework
Sher thinks that marketers can figure out whether a marketing tactic is immorally manipulative by asking two questions:
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
2. If so, are there any redemptive moral considerations to take into account?
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
“A marketing tactic is manipulative if it intends to motivate by undermining what the marketer believes is the audience’s normal decision-making process either by deception or by playing on a vulnerability the marketer believes exists in his/her audience’s normal decision-making process.” (99-100)
Let’s break this definition down.
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
“A marketing tactic is manipulative if it intends to motivate by undermining what the marketer believes is the audience’s normal decision-making process either by deception or by playing on a vulnerability the marketer believes exists in his/her audience’s normal decision-making process.” (99-100)
For Sher, it is not the harmful effects of a marketing tactic that make it manipulative, but the intent of the marketer.
A marketing tactic is only manipulative if a marketer intends to manipulate the audience.
If a marketer intends to manipulate the audience but fails, the marketing tactic is still manipulative.
Intentions are not always conscious—unconscious ones matter too. Marketers should honestly examine their intentions and how they may be influenced by personal or institutional incentives.
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
“A marketing tactic is manipulative if it intends to motivate by undermining what the marketer believes is the audience’s normal decision-making process either by deception or by playing on a vulnerability the marketer believes exists in his/her audience’s normal decision-making process.” (99-100)
It doesn’t matter what a marketer is motivating the audience to do, it is the attempt to alter their decision-making process that is wrong.
All marketing tactics involve persuasion, but there are better and worse ways to persuade.
Ideally someone is persuaded by presentation of evidence to rationally consider an option, and at worse someone is coerced by having their options effectively reduced to one thing.
Manipulation is somewhere in between— it alters the decision-making process in a way that to some extent deprives people of their ability to choose for themselves.
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
“A marketing tactic is manipulative if it intends to motivate by undermining what the marketer believes is the audience’s normal decision-making process either by deception or by playing on a vulnerability the marketer believes exists in his/her audience’s normal decision-making process.” (99-100)
A marketer can try to alter an audience’s normal decision-making process by deceiving them. A tactic is deceptive if it “intends to bring about consumer misconception by providing what marketer believes is false evidence, omitting key evidence, or misrepresenting what evidence means” (104).
Deceptive if it presents false evidence: Even if the marketer is just unsure or suspects it may be false.
Deceptive if it omits important facts: A marketer should provide information that a consumer needs to make a decision.
Deceptive if it misrepresents what evidence means: The same facts can give rise to different interpretations, so being intentionally ambiguous or presenting facts in a way that you know will cause a misconception is deceptive.
1. Is the marketing tactic manipulative?
“A marketing tactic is manipulative if it intends to motivate by undermining what the marketer believes is the audience’s normal decision-making process either by deception or by playing on a vulnerability the marketer believes exists in his/her audience’s normal decision-making process.” (99-100)
A marketer can also attempt to alter an audience’s normal decision-making processes by taking advantage of vulnerabilities they believe the audience has, such as:
emotional vulnerabilities
perceptual vulnerabilities
cognitive vulnerabilities
ethical failings/character flaws
What’s wrong with manipulation?
What’s wrong with manipulation?
It attempts to use people—treats them as a means to an end.
It violates the autonomy of consumers—doesn’t treat them as capable of making their own decisions.
It is a violation of trust between marketers and consumers.
It could result in the distrust of the company or marketers as a whole.
It violates the general obligation not to harm.
2. Are there any redemptive moral considerations?
Manipulation is always morally wrong, but it may be justified if these wrongs are outweighed by other beneficial consequences for the general good, consumers, or marketers.
Examples:
Product will benefit the consumer but she won’t buy it without manipulation
Consumer won’t understand why product is so good without manipulation
The marketing tactic itself will benefit the consumer
