Irony and pity: Can a marketer be ethical and still make a living?
Nicole Green, a marketing student at the University of Cincinnati, has graciously allowed me to reprint an opinion piece she wrote for The News Record.
An old boss of mine shared with me an anecdote about her young nephew. The boy had overheard his parents arguing over finances, and naturally he wanted them to stop. He opened the door to the room in which they were arguing and profoundly stated he had the answer to their problems: debt consolidation.
Be not fooled; this boy was no seven-year old financial prodigy. His knowledge was derived solely from a thirty second commercial that probably interrupted his after- school cartoons.
I wondered about the way this commercial had stuck in the memory of the child. He may not have known what debt consolidation was, but he knew that whatever it was, it fixed money problems.
I was reminded of this story when I read about “pester power.” The term is used to describe the ways marketers endorse their products through the relentless way children nag their parents for goods. Not only do marketers recognize this behavior in children, they target and thrive from it. The goal is to appeal to a child so intensely that a child will whine and beg to receive a certain product.
Fast Food Nation, by Eric Schlosser, discusses “pester power” and other marketing initiatives directed at children. According to the book, the synergy of marketing executives and psychologists is becoming increasingly common. The goal is to explore and understand the psyche of children and direct products to children based on the results. The research includes observation, dream interpretations, interviews, and the creation of kids’ clubs.
There is an ethical defect in this marketing trend. Not only is it invasive, it is manipulative and far too noticeably resembles brainwashing to be ethically acceptable.
Marketers are manipulating the innocence and newness of a child’s mind to create brand loyalty.
The irony is that I am a declared marketing major.
Excavating the minds of children for the purpose of controlling their behavior as consumers is unethical. I wonder how difficult is it to remain loyal to my ethics and still make a living. When I am not the boss and someone else is calling the shots, are ethics the opportunity cost of a paycheck?
“In studies where consumers are asked about ethics in different professions, advertising executives are ranked low,” said Elaine Hollensbe, assistant professor in the Department of Management in the College of Business.
“In the last decade, businesses have become aware of their social responsibility to give back and behave ethically,” said Hollensbe. “Companies are starting to realize that it is not profitable to be unethical. There are a lot of watchdogs out there now.”
The American Marketing Association has a code of ethics that ambiguously addresses their responsibility in marketing toward children. It states, “We will recognize our special commitments to economically vulnerable segments of the market such as children, the elderly and others who may be substantially disadvantaged.”
Diction makes the intentions of this statement rather cryptic. The statement would better address the manipulation of child consumers if “mentally” was substituted for “economically.” A deceitful code of ethics? How ironic.
January 19th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Nicole: It’s great to see that someone planning to go into marketing has a conscience and is raising such important issues.
Sad to say, though, results from a new study reported in this month’s Harvard Business Review suggest that doing good doesn’t mean doing well. Joshua Margolis and Hillary Elfenbein gathered data from 167 studies over the past 35 years on profit from socially responsible corporations. Doing the right thing didn’t hurt shareholders, but in only 2% of the studies did it help with profits. Scandals, not surprisingly, do hurt the bottom line, but the authors observed that only anecdotally, and they noted that it’s difficult to estimate the likelihood of getting caught in the first place.
All of this brings out the commie-pinko-creep in me that predicts that as long as business leaders and their stooges in government, the mass media, and the academy embrace the bottom line as the only bottom line, you will have a challenge on your hands as a Future Ethical Marketer of America. (Wait, FEMA–that doesn’t work).
Still, I am heartened to read your thoughtful essay on the subject. Dig hard and stay true to your values. You will find a way to effect positive change, even in your line of work.
January 29th, 2008 at 8:29 am
Great question and I think: “yes” it is.
As a marketer with experience in a variety of companies I can say that there are lots of marketing opportunities out there that one can do without parking your conscience at the door. First there are many products not targeted to kids…health care products, household goods, cars, etc. And, yes, a marketer sometimes has the opportunity to exploit another group of folks besides kids marketing these products.
But, a it depends on the product and company. Many, perhaps the majority of companies do NOT advertise, instead rely on distribution to sell the product (many office products, many hardware items, etc.) Many companies, not the glamorous ones merely create a good product and sell it folks.
And…if you are interested in children’s products, there are a number of up and coming companies that sell products that are good for kids. Is it bad to use marketing tactics to encourage kids to pester their parents to buy products that are good for them?
This new generation of marketers will have to answer that question.