advert eth 1

8/8/2019 Advert Eth 1

1/26

Journal of Advertising,vol. 38, no. 1 (Spring 2009), pp. 83107.

2009 American Academy of Advertising. All rights reserved.

ISSN 0091-3367 / 2009 $9.50 + 0.00.

DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367380106

The advertising industry has been and continues to be an

industry in the midst of radical transformation. It has experi-

enced a host of organizational, geographical, and technological

changes. Privately owned agencies led by great creative talent

have given way to publicly owned holding companies with

multiple agency brands and a plethora of marketing services

that are led by businesspeople. Once primarily domestic in

focus, the industry has undergone globalization as agencies

have followed their clients to far-flung parts of the world.

The advent of new technology has enabled new media to ex-

plode. Traditional mass media advertising is augmented by

nontraditional approaches, such as product placement, viral

marketing, direct marketing, and virtual community market-

ing on the Web. Given these dynamic changes, practitionersmust confront the challenges of the new advertising world

daily, and scholars are addressing the implications of revolu-

tionary change. As such, many questions confront the field of

advertising. One question is not always as obvious as others,

but it is equally important. What is the state of advertising

ethics? To answer it, we wanted a perspective that elicited

the ideas of thought leaders, knowledgeable participants, and

observers of the advertising industry. As such, we conducted

in-depth interviews with leading practitioners and academ-

ics. We supplemented these data by reviewing advertising

agency Web sites, advertising textbooks, and the academic

literature. We begin with a review of the academic literature

and then describe the research methods before turning to our

findings.

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ADVERTISING

ETHICS LITERATURE

Advertising ethics has been defined as what is right or good

in the conduct of the advertising function. It is concerned

with questions of what ought to be done, not just with what

legally must be done (Cunningham 1999, p. 500). Corpo-

rate social responsibility (CSR) is closely aligned with, and

at times overlaps, ethics. As such, our study deals with someaspects of corporate social responsibility. CSR encompasses

the obligations of the firm to society, or more specifically,

the firms stakeholdersthose affected by corporate policies

and practices (Smith 2003, p. 53). Berger, Cunningham, and

Drumwright (2007) reviewed definitions of CSR and identi-

fied three dimensions that demonstrate the interrelatedness of

CSR and ethics: (1) internal policies and processes that ensure

that a company conducts its operations in a responsible and

ethical manner, (2) external initiatives that contribute to and

improve the communities in which a company operates such

THE CURRENT STATE OF ADVERTISING ETHICS

Industry and Academic Perspectives

Minette E. Drumwright and Patrick E. Murphy

ABSTRACT: Given the dynamic change and radical transformation of the advertising industry, we interviewed industryand academic leaders to seek their perspectives on the current state of advertising ethics. We also analyzed advertising

agency Web sites, reviewed advertising textbooks, and surveyed the academic literature. We distinguish the ethics ofthe advertising message from the ethics of the advertising agency business. New and perplexing ethical issues related toadvertising messages have emerged with the advent and growth of new and nontraditional media. Because of the more

complex organizational structures of global communication agency networks, the temptations, risks, and rewards ofunethical behavior in the business of advertising are greater than ever. We recommend that both industry and academiabecome more proactive, individually and in consultation with one another, in dealing with ethical problems and in set-

ting norms.

Minette E. Drumwright (Ph.D., University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill) is an associate professor of advertising, Department

of Advertising, College of Communication, University of Texas at

Austin.

Patrick E. Murphy (Ph.D., University of Houston) is C. R. Smith

Co-Director of the Institute for Ethical Business Worldwide and a

professor of marketing, Mendoza College of Business, University

of Notre Dame.

The authors thank former Journal of Advertising editor Russell N.

Laczniack for giving them the idea for this paper and for encour-

aging them to undertake the project. They are indebted to their

informants for sharing their insights with them. They also thank

Mercedes Duchicela for her excellent research assistance, and Mary

C. Gentile, Russell N. Laczniack, H. W. Perry, Jr., William S. Smith,

and Patricia A. Stout for their helpful comments on earlier versions

of the manuscript.


2/26

84 The Journal of Advertising

as corporate philanthropy and employee volunteerism, and

(3) the impact of these initiatives on society.

Our purpose here is not to provide a comprehensive

literature review. We seek simply to characterize trends

through the decades. For in-depth reviews of the research on

advertising ethics, see The Handbook of Advertising (Tellis and

Ambler 2007) and its chapters on advertising ethics (Drum-

wright 2007); advertising to vulnerable segments (Bonifieldand Cole 2007); advertisings performance in a market system

(Wilkie and Moore 2007); and advertising, consumption, and

welfare (OGuinn 2007).

The subject of ethics in advertising has a long history, and

many of the same ethical concerns and criticisms of advertising

have persisted through many decades and into the twenty-

first century. More than 55 years ago, F. P. Bishop, formerly

a member of Parliament and editor ofThe Times of London,

published one of the first books on advertising ethics where

he chronicled several moral indictments of advertising:

It stimulates unworthy desires, misleads the consumer, and

encourages consumptionism. This 11-chapter book titledThe Ethics of Advertising (1949) examined many of the issues

that some believe still plague advertisers and agencies, and

his introduction addresses what many would consider a major

question currently facing advertising:

Advertising has come to occupy a key position in the greatargument of todaythe argument about the right balancebetween social control and individual liberty. Hitherto theeffect of its use has unquestionably been to promote individualliberty, at the expense, some would say, of good order andsocial discipline. (p. 13)

Another book by two journalists during that era dealt withethics in business (Childs and Cater 1954) and spoke directly

to advertising with the following:

The advertiser must accept some responsibility for the confu-sion of values that is a symptom of our times of troubles. Wordssuch as character, faith, belief, integrity, are used to commendthe quality of beer and pills. If you buy a certain car you areexalted, exultant, magnificently at ease. In some instances theadvertising mind is so dogmatic that any criticism brings asharp challenge as though it were heretical even to question.

About 45 years ago, Thomas Garrett, S.J. (1961), a philoso-

phy professor and priest, examined several ethical problems of

modern American advertising, including economic growth,persuasion, consumption, and potential monopoly power.

Garrett lauded Bishops work as an excellent book filled with

good sense and balanced judgment, but noted its limitation in

that Bishop is not an ethician and so avoids coming to grips

with what we may call the ultimates (p. 6). Garretts book

was both scholarly (a 25-page bibliography and footnotes on

virtually every page) and wide ranging, and it made the fol-

lowing timeless observation: Persuasive advertising, however,

poses a real problem sincesome of the persuasive techniques used

are intendedto by-pass the intellect and reduce rationality, and

may,ifsuccessful, lead to improvident actions (p. 173; emphasis

in original). Garrett concluded the book with a checklist of

questions for advertisers. These 13 questions are applicable

today and have been reprinted recently (Murphy et al. 2005).

His focus on both intent and technique represents critical is-

sues in the ongoing evaluation of marketing and advertising(Laczniak and Murphy 2006).

Around 35 years ago, Stephen Greyser (1972) outlined in

a Harvard Business Review article various attacks and coun-

terattacks on advertising, such as truthfulness, morality, and

exaggeration. Shortly thereafter, Wright and Mertes (1974)

edited an extensive anthology on advertisings role in society

and devoted one section of eight articles to ethical views toward

the subject. Among the featured authors were Wroe Alderson,

Theodore Levitt, and Garrett.

More than 20 years ago, a debate about the merits of adver-

tising took place in theJournal of Marketing. Richard Pollay

(1986) wrote an influential articlerecounting the positionsof humanities and social science scholars on advertisings

unintended social and cultural consequences. He concluded:

These ideas also deserve consideration because of their sober-

ing and substantial nature. Taken as a whole, they constitute

a major indictment of advertising (p. 31). Pollays critique

spawned a comment by Morris Holbrook (1987), who defended

advertising as pluralistic not monolithic, aimed at segments

and not the mass market, reflecting pop not high culture,

and mirroring not manipulating values. Pollays rejoinder

(1987) provided a point-by-point commentary on Holbrooks

arguments, but more significantly, it focused on values. He

argued that advertising communicates values and increasesthe saliency of certain values. He observed:

Of all the aspects of advertising that might be studied, valueshave the most profound implications and are the most mean-ingful to the larger academic community and the communityat large. (Pollay 1987, p. 107)

Much of the literature through the mid 1980s examined

ethics in advertising largely through commentary and philo-

sophical debate and from a macro perspective of advertisings

effects on society rather than at the micro level of the firm

and the practitioners working in it (Hunt and Chonko 1987).

Drumwright (1993) characterized this work as pertaining toone of two discourses: (1) a legal discourse among lawyers

and regulators that focuses largely on the rights of advertisers

and on what they can and cannot do vis--vis deception and

fraud; and (2) a moral discourse primarily among philosophers,

social critics, and ethicists that raises broad and far-reaching

questions related to advertisings societal effects.

From the 1980s through the present, two empirical streams

of research on advertising ethics have developed. The larger


3/26

Spring 2009 85

of the two streams has focused on understanding consumers

perceptions of potentially objectionable advertisingfor

example, ads with persuasive appeals, ads with idealized im-

agery, ads for dangerous products, and ads targeting children

(see, e.g., Gulas and McKeage 2000; LaTour and Henthorne

1994; Tinkham and Waver-Larisay 1994; Treise et al. 1994).

Hyman, Tansley, and Clark (1994) provided an overview of

this work in aJournal of Advertising special issue on advertisingethics (vol. 23, September). The smaller research stream has

focused on examining the views of advertising practitioners

largely through scenario analysis (e.g., Davis 1994; James,

Pratt, and Smith 1994; Moon and Franke 2000) and mail

surveys (e.g., Chen and Liu 1998; Hunt and Chonko 1987;

Rotzoll and Christians 1980). Much of this work has been

descriptive as opposed to normative, as has been the case for

research in marketing ethics more generally (Dunfee, Smith,

and Ross 1999).

Debate concerning the nature and effects of advertising that

characterized the early literature has continued in more recent

years. One perspective was offered by Kirkpatrick (1986), whoargued that the charges against advertising of manipulative

deception, persuasive coercion, and tasteless offensiveness re-

sulted from a hostility toward capitalism and egoism. He drew

on Ayn Rands theory of rational egoism as a system of ethical

principles that can provide the best understanding and guid-

ance in business decisions (Kirkpatrick 1992, 2007). Approxi-

mately 10 years ago, the Catholic Churchs Pontifical Council

for Social Communications published a short treatiseEthics

in Advertising (1997). This 35-page monograph challenged ad-

vertising to follow three major principles: truthfulness, human

dignity, and social responsibility. Several papers examining this

document were published in the Fall 1998 issue ofJournal ofPublic Policy and Marketing. While the impact of this work

may not have been a sustained one, it did make the point that

advertising is not just a concern in the secular world.

In the early years of this decade, advertising ethics expanded

to concerns about new media such as the Internet.Advertising

Age columnist Bob Garfield (2003), who billed himself as

advertisings leading critic, wrote an irreverent book in which

he coined such words as advertrocities and shockvertising.

While his message was much broader than ethics, he did offer

observations on campaigns and practices that he considered

unethical, such as Benettons long-standing social issues

campaign, political advertising, and sexism. Garfields majorindictment of advertising was dishonesty (p. 145).

Drumwright and Murphy (2004) turned attention toward

advertising professionals and agencies. They conducted in-

depth interviews with advertising practitioners within the

context of the ad agency. The findings indicated that many

agency personnel suffer from what they termed moral myo-

pia, a distortion of moral vision that prevents moral issues

from coming clearly into focus, or moral muteness, mean-

ing that they rarely talk about ethical issues. Encouragingly,

a small minority of advertising practitioners was morally

sensitive and exhibited moral imaginationthe ability to

envision moral alternatives that others do not. An earlier work

(Krueger 1998) contrasted the cultures of two advertising

agencies using in-depth interviews and found one agencys

philosophy of advertising to be strongly shaped by its CEOs

personal moral (including religious) convictions.A recent book-length publication on advertising ethics

was written by two Australian academics (Spence and Van

Heereken 2005). They examined several of the continuing con-

cerns of advertising such as truth in advertising, stereotyping,

and targeted advertising. They concluded with a cautionary

note that the pervasiveness and unrestricted proliferation of

advertising that threatens to engulf all aspects of our private

and public domains remains the biggest ethical problem in

advertising (p. 122).

Despite attention to issues of advertising ethics through the

decades, it would be a mistake to assume that advertising eth-

ics has received coverage commensurate with its importance.While advertising ethics has been recognized for some time as

a mainstream topic (Hyman, Tansley, and Clark 1994), research

is thin and inconclusive in many important areas.

METHOD

Multiple methods were employed to examine the status of ad-

vertising ethics in industry and academia, including interviews

with practitioners; interviews with chairs and relevant faculty

of leading advertising departments; analysis of ethics content

in the largest agencies Web sites; and examination of advertis-

ing textbook coverage of ethical, legal, and social issues.We believed that in-depth interviews of thought leaders

would offer unique insights into the status of advertising today.

Eighteen industry and academic leaders were interviewed using

a semistructured interviewing approach with broad questions

that enabled the informants to determine what focus was

important. All informants were promised anonymity and con-

fidentiality for themselves and their organizations to mitigate

biases related to social desirability and posturing.

Nine leading advertising practitioners were interviewed by

telephone or in person to ascertain how they view the state of

the field of advertising ethics. Seven of the nine were senior

executives in advertising agencies that are ranked among the20 largest agencies in annual worldwide billings (Advertis-

ing Age 2006), and two were from leading U.S. industry

organizations who had previously worked in advertising or

marketing communication. The senior executives in agencies

held positions of chairman and/or CEO of a global agency

or president or COO of a major division of a global agency

(e.g., the U.S. division). We probed regarding three general

topic areas: (1) the advertising ethics issues that they see as


4/26


important now and in the future, (2) how one can create an

agency that supports ethical decision making, and (3) research

that academics could conduct that would advance the field of

advertising ethics. The interviews lasted between 30 minutes

and an hour and were audio recorded. In addition to the inter-

views, some informants provided ethics-related materials such

as transcripts of speeches or employee communications created

by their agencies. These data sources enriched the database andenabled us to check for convergence. Before the interviews were

conducted, the interview protocol, which is in Appendix 1,

was reviewed and critiqued by two professors specializing in

ethics and a professor with expertise in qualitative research. It

was pretested on two senior advertising executives.

Nine academic leaders from highly respected university

advertising programs that are typically ranked in the top 10

were interviewed by telephone or in person to examine three

issues: (1) the manner in which ethics content is integrated into

the university curriculum at the undergraduate and graduate

levels, (2) issues related to advertising ethics that they see as

important now and in the future, and (3) research that academ-ics could conduct to further the field of advertising ethics. Six

of the nine academic leaders were chairs or directors of leading

university programs in advertising, and three were academics

who teach and research issues of advertising ethics whom the

chairs directed us to interview. All informants were promised

anonymity and confidentiality for themselves and their uni-

versities to mitigate social desirability biases and posturing.

All interviews were audio recorded. Before the interviews were

conducted, the interview protocol, which is in Appendix 2,

was reviewed and critiqued by two professors, one who had

served as an academic administrator and one who specializes

in qualitative research.Because agency Web sites present the public faces of the

agencies and are frequently accessed for information about

the agencies, we also examined the Web sites of the largest

25 U.S. agencies as ranked by agency revenue (Advertising Age

2006) and analyzed their ethics-related content. We reviewed

each Web site thoroughly, followed every link, and read each

part. Web site information was coded using the template in

Appendix 3.

Textbooks on the fundamentals of advertising are de-

signed to introduce students in Colleges of Communication as

well as Colleges of Business to the field of advertising. These

textbooks are used both in required courses for advertising ma-jors and in elective courses for students who are not advertising

majors. As such, the manner in which the textbooks present

ethics in advertising is a reflection of the state of the field of

advertising ethics and an indication of the way in which new

entrants into the industry are being prepared. Seven of the

best-selling textbooks were selected from sales data provided

by publishers, and ethics-related content was examined and

categorized.

FINDINGS

Our reports on the findings from our interviews with industry

leaders are followed by the results of our analysis of agency

Web sites. We then report the findings from our interviews

with academic leaders, followed by our analysis of textbooks.

Because the managerial insights on ethical decision making

and directions for future research are based on the interviews,they are reported as findings.

Perspectives of Industry Leaders

We were curious to see whether our industry leader informants

believed that the ethical issues in advertising have changed

in recent years. The answer was yesand no. Our informants

drew a distinction between traditional and new ethical issues.

That is, despite changes, many of the traditional ethical is-

sues are essentially the same. New and significantly different

ethical issues are emerging as a result of the electronic envi-

ronment, however. In our interviews, we quickly saw anotherdistinction. There are ethical issues related to the advertising

message, and there are issues related to the advertising busi-

ness. Message ethics has to do with creating and delivering

the commercial message, while business ethics deals with the

processes involved in running the advertising agency. Are new

issues related to messaging ethics different from traditional

issues? Our informants persuaded us that yes, new messaging

ethics issues are different in kind from traditional issues. Are

new issues of business ethics different from traditional issues?

No, our data indicated that new issues are not different in

kind, but they often are different in degree when compared to

traditional issues of business ethics; the risks, the rewards, andthe temptations are often greater. In addition to message ethics

and business ethics, our informants often brought up issues

that we categorized as CSR that encompassed contributions

to the larger community such as pro bono work promoting

social causes.

Message Ethics

The traditional challenge of advertising is to create a commer-

cial message that is both effective in selling and truthful. Our

industry leaders did not find this to be a difficult or perplex-

ing issue with respect to traditional mass media. In contrast,however, issues that are both difficult and perplexing arise in

the environment created by new and nontraditional media.

Traditional Media. The age-old question of truth in advertis-

ing as it relates to traditional media is perceived to be simple

and straightforward by industry leaders. Academics that we

interviewed suggested otherwise, and there is debate in the

scholarly literature, but industry leaders did not perceive truth


5/26

Spring 2009 87

in advertising in traditional media to raise difficult issues. As

one said:

The message must be true to what the product or serviceis. . . . I shouldnt say it is simple, but it is very simple tome. . . . If youre talking about existing communication models[mass media advertising] . . . I think that people are groundedand do the right thing.

Another went so far as to view it as a nonissuea moot

point:

Is advertising truthful? Its very much an overblown and un-realistic criticism. . . . Advertising does not fabricate storiesabout products or brands because that is self-defeating. . . . Ithas become almost a moot point. Advertising, as far as productclaims are concerned, is truthful, and I dont think that is anongoing ethical issue.

A third explained, The philosophy with which we approach

our work is rooted in the truth. Yet another said, Our job is

to help our clients find the inherent drama in a product andto tell that in an ethical way. One informant pointed to the

checks and balances of traditional media:

The risk of advertisers not telling the truth in advertising[in traditional media] is quite low. There are checks andbalances.

These checks and balances encompass laws, regulatory over-

sight, self-regulation, media guidelines, and various other

policing mechanisms.

Academics, however, were not as sanguine as practitioners

concerning issues related to truth in advertising in traditional

media. One academic voiced his concerns:

I dont think that we are clear-cut about what deceptive ad-vertising is and what we can allow and what we cannot allow.I see a lot of advertising, and I am just appalled that it is evenallowed. I say to myself, We make a big deal about decep-tion in some areas, and in other areas, we just wink and turnour heads and dont clamp down. Sometimes its politicallydriven; it depends upon certain industries that are lobby-ing. . . . Im just appalled at some of the infomercials . . . orsome of the get-rich-quick schemes . . . Medical claimsweneed to clean up our act.

Scholarship also raises debates concerning ethical issues related

to traditional media (e.g., Pollay 1986; Spence and Van Heer-

eken 2005). Nonetheless, industry leaders were almost universal

in their belief that these issues pose few problems today.

New and Nontraditional Media. Once the topic shifted from

traditional media to new and nontraditional media, the tenor

of the conversation with practitioners and academics alike

changed dramatically.

The challenge is where we are going in the future as commu-nication media evolve. I say that is where the open questionis. . . . Every single day, everything we do is continually evolv-ing. . . . The world we are living in is increasingly gray.

The ethical issues presented in new media and nontradi-

tional media are different in kind. Industry leaders perceived

a host of ethical issues arising out of the Internet and the

blogosphere we live in. The concerns have largely to do

with the absence of checks and balances, the advertisers loss

of control, transparency, and privacy. Moreover, no consensus

has emerged regarding what is ethical behavior, and there is

no sense that industry participants are collaborating to build

consensus on these topics.

Technologically driven new media were characterized

as The Wild Westa rough and tough, no-holds-barred

context in which the regulations, guidelines, and controls of

traditional media are absent. One industry leader voiced the

concerns of many:

[W]hen clients say, I want to reach a certain audience, wecan go around the system, meaning we can go on the Inter-net or on other things that are uncontrollable. . . . You canadvertise anything. . . . How do we do the right thing in amedia environment that is agnostic to being right?

Another elaborated:

Nobody regulates the Internet. Its like Howard Stern livingdown to his image. People can make more money by pander-ing to the lowest common denominator because the Internetprovides a way to advertise around traditional media.

An additional frequently cited problem was the advertisers

loss of control over the message itself. In traditional media,

advertisers create commercial content, but in new media,

consumers also generate content, which creates new and dif-

ferent ethical issues:

New media, new ways to reach people, everyone has accessto everything. . . . Anybody can say anything about anybodyor anything at any time.

Another lamented the lack of ethics demonstrated by some

consumers and noted the increased importance of a defensive

role for advertisers and their agencies.

There is so much going back and forth between consumerson the Internet that shouldnt be from any standpoint ofmorality, legality, or ethics. Advertising has to be doublycareful about what it associates its clients products andbrands with.

Despite the problem it creates, the active participation of

consumers and their ability to create messages can have up-

sides. It can provide a potential check on unethical behavior


6/26


by advertisers. Though an atypical response, one industry

leader noted:

There is such a forum for reaction [on the Internet]. . . . Itsharder and harder to become unethical if you were intendingto do that. Things get uncovered so rapidly with blogs andpostings and everything else. . . . The public sits in judgmentmore readily than ever before.

Nonetheless, the situation is complex. An academic predicted

that firms will eventually be held responsible for what consum-

ers say about brands on the Internet:

A company could hide behind individual consumers on blogs.I dont think this is going to go on forever. I think that some-body is going to say, Youre providing the consumer witha way to make a public commercial message. Therefore, youare responsible for it. . . . but consumers could hide behindfree speech.

This is an interesting observation. Although this is not the

place for an extended discussion of the First AmendmentandFirst Amendment doctrine is in fluxthe ability to regulate

corporate speech differs from the ability to regulate the speech

of individuals. In short, our informants saw major changes

regarding accountability, checks and balances, and regulation

when it came to new media.

Issues of personal data and the related privacy issues also

quickly came to the fore in discussions of new media. As one

industry leader explained:

You go to a store. You walk in; you walk out. Very little isknown about you. You go to a Web site. Much more is knownabout you.

Knowledge about consumers is power, and that power

can easily be abused, especially in a world of one-to-one

communication:

One of the biggest issues as we move to more one-to-one com-munication is data and how can you use it. . . . How manytimes have you seen a major marketer let a bunch of data outabout people? Clearly, where I get the most troubled aboutethics is when people know things about me that I dont wantthem to know that I consider my innermost private informa-tion. That data is known by the marketer, by the advertisingagencymaybe blind, maybe not. Its known by a lot of

people, and as that circle of people increases, there are moreand more opportunities for that to break down.

Again and again, our informants raised questions regarding

appropriate use, but solutions were not offered:

In the emerging digital marketing frontthe world we livein nowhow much information is permissible? How muchare you willing to share? . . . What are the norms of appropri-ate practice?

Issues related to transparency were raised regarding new

media (e.g., the Internet) and nontraditional media alike. Non-

traditional media encompasses the likes of paid viral marketing

and product placement, and the use of it is mushrooming. One

industry leader characterized the underlying ethical issue as,

How transparent does a company need to be in general? For

example, when people are hired to give seemingly spontaneous

product testimonials and recommendations as in buzz or viralmarketing, do the message recipients have a right to know that

the messages are paid, commercial messages? Does product

placement in movies and television shows use entertainment

to mask commercial messages? A specific example of transpar-

ency issues is a blog praising Wal-Mart called Wal-Marting

Across America that appeared to be a grassroots effort created

by a man and woman traveling across America in an RV and

staying in Wal-Mart parking lots (Gunther 2006). The blog

was actually created by three employees of Edelman Public

Relations, for whom Wal-Mart was a paying client.

This practice of planting information on blogs has been

dubbed flogging. An academic informant reported that hehad been contacted by a company wanting student interns to

masquerade as consumer bloggers. The company representa-

tive claimed that he had already signed up one university to

participate in the internship. Do consumers have a right to

know when they are being subjected to a commercial message

in a blog or another supposedly objective source? Do they have

a right to know who is creating the message? An executive

made an insightful observation on the changing role of the

messenger:

It used to make sense not to kill the messenger. Now Im notso sure. It used to be that the medium was the message. Nowthe messenger is the message.

Some industry leaders saw problems with paid viral marketing

and flogging. As one noted:

I dont think people like to be conned. I dont think peoplelike people who trick them . . . pretending to be tourists,hanging out in the bar, pretending to be regular consumerswhen they are being paid by the advertiser. How do peoplefeel about that?

However, practitioners observed a lack of consensus within

the industry regarding issues of new and nontraditional

media:

I dont think that the norms have been established becauseeverything is evolving so quickly.

The lack of consensus is reflected by the fact that major market-

ers such as Ford with the introduction of the Focus (Murphy

et al. 2005) and P&G with its Tremor word-of-mouth market-

ing use forms of paid viral marketing (Wells, Moriarty, and


7/26

Spring 2009 89

Burnett 2006). One industry leader called for collaboration

within the industry to come to consensus regarding what is

and is not ethical, but he observed that such dialogue is not

occurring:

When it comes to ethics, there needs to be a lot more col-laboration within the industry. . . . We need as an industry to

come together and talk about this stuff more and come to someconsensus. And that is not happening. The debate about whatsright or wrongwhats ethical or notis not being discussedvery much in this industry. And I dont know why. . . . Theindustry is not a collaborative industry.

Another practitioner informant expressed concern regarding

who might create new industry standards in the future and

what those norms might be:

Were [i.e., the United States] behind much of the world inwireless and the use of the Internet. . . . China has more cellphones than the U.S. . . . In the past, everyone learned [ad-vertising] ethics from the U.S. In the future, the world may

be learning [advertising] ethics from China, where they haveno restrictions on private data.

Business Ethics

Our informants described new issues in business ethics in

ways that suggested that they simply differ in degree rather

than in kind. That said, issues are seen as more complex with

higher stakes. The temptations are greater, and the risks and

the rewards are higher.

The issues are still the same. Dont lie. Dont cheat. Dont steal.Its just that now there are more opportunities to lie, cheat,and steal, and they are bigger and more lucrative. . . . Its moresophisticated now. . . . The stakes are higher, the risks are big-ger, the rewards are bigger. But more people are watching.

Industry leaders tied the difference in degree to structural

changes in the industry. Bigger organizations are global in

scope and now offer much more than the traditional advertis-

ing services.

The business is more complex. [Advertising agency] organi-zations are bigger, international, and with multiple productlines. . . . There are more ways to do paper tricks, to fool thetax man, the home office, the client. These are largely due to

structural changes in the way the business is run.

Certainly, a major structural change with the potential to

affect business ethics is the advent of publicly traded holding

companies as owners of multiple advertising agency networks

and specialized marketing services companies. Organiza-

tions such as Omnicom, WPP, and Interpublic have been

dubbed global network communications agencies (Tharp

and Jeong 2001). They certainly increase the complexity of

traditional business ethics issues. For example, conflicts of

interest resulting from clients who are competitors have long

been recognized as a potential ethical quagmire, but because

of the complex organizational structures of holding compa-

nies, who is a client of whom is more complicated now. Take,

for example, a recent predicament of the holding company

Omnicom. One sibling, Tribal DDB in Dallas, was working

with another sibling, GSD&M, to pitch Wal-Marts $560million account, while Tribal DDB in Chicago was working

with another agency sibling, DDB, on JCPenneys $430 mil-

lion account (Williamson 2006). Tribal did not disclose the

relationship with JCPenney to Wal-Mart and was dropped

from the pitch (Williamson 2006).

When asked about the effect of holding companies on

business ethics, there was no consensus, and the responses

ran the gamut. Some practitioners asserted that the pressures

on holding companies to meet quarterly financial goals had a

negative effect. As one said, Public companies want the big-

gest return from the smallest investment, which heightens the

temptation related to the traditional ethical issues. Anothercommented, Unethical things can happen when wonderful,

upstanding people become fixated on bottom line results.

Others felt that the holding companies had no effect because

holding companies leave the agencies free to pursue their own

strategies, unlike parent companies that tell their subsidiaries

what to do and how to do it. Still others asserted that hold-

ing companies had a positive effect on ethics through their

processes and demands for accountability. Some practitioners

acknowledged that it is very difficult to assess the net effect of

holding companies on ethics because of countervailing pres-

sures. They both increase financial pressure and also demand

increased transparency and accountability:

Its difficult to assess the effects of holding companies. Thereare colliding factors. Holding companies demand that agen-cies deliver results in no uncertain terms. They bought theagencies for one reasonto make a profit. On the other hand,they have implemented processes, rigor, discipline, and rou-tinized approaches that create a higher level of transparencyand accountability. Plus, the holding companies take Sarbanes[Oxley] very seriously.

While there was not consensus regarding the effects of

holding companies, there was consensus that changes in the

nature of the advertising business had made it a more difficult

business in which to succeed:

The fact that advertising is a harder business with morefinancial pressure now than ever before has heightened thetemptation [related to issues of business ethics].

Given growing business pressures, along with the structural

changes, industry leaders understood that business ethics

problems could develop. Referring to the much-publicized


8/26


conviction of Ogilvy & Mathers Shona Siefert for business

ethics issues related to the Office of National Drug Control

Policy account (Edwards 2005), one informant commented:

If you ask anybody in the industry about the Shona Siefertthing, the first thing that youll hear is I cant believe thathappened to her. Thats a tragedy, but I can understand howthat happened.

Corporate Social Responsibility

When we asked about positive developments related to eth-

ics in the advertising industry, industry leaders were quick

to talk about what might better be labeled corporate social

responsibility (CSR). For the purposes of our study, we made

a distinction between the manner in which an advertising

agency creates messages and runs its business (ethics) and

an advertising agencys pro bono work and other efforts to

make positive contributions to its community and to society

at large (corporate social responsibility). Although CSR is

related to and often overlaps with ethics, in some ways it issubstantively different. In fact, one can imagine corporate

social responsibility being used to mask poor ethical behavior

or to assuage consciences. Industry leaders raised two issues of

corporate social responsibilitypro bono work and workforce

diversity. Nonetheless, our informants saw their pro bono work

as evidence of ethical behavior.

Industry leaders spoke enthusiastically of the power and

impact of the pro bono activities that their agencies undertake

to promote social causes. As one said:

We tithe our time and talents by allowing people to use theirtime and talents to make a difference using the power of media.Are we using advertising to make money, or are we using itto make a difference, and can both of those happen? I thinkthat they can. Making a difference is keymake a differencefor your people, make a difference for your clients, and makea difference for society.

Another stated:

When we do pro bono work for causeswere donating,among other things, the priceless value of an idea. Weredonating talent. Thats quite powerful. . . . The talent thatwe have persuades for the common good. Its something veryfew industries do.

Whether for the local homeless shelter or an international

nonprofit, advertising agencies provide generous donations

of their talents and energies.

The lack of diversity of the advertising industry workforce

was raised by industry leaders and academics alike. One in-

dustry leader asserted:

One of the most compelling ethical issues is diversity, andwere not making enough progress there. If anything, were

regressing. . . . Our industry is not accurately representing themakeup of the U.S. population. Were not creating enoughopportunities for minorities.

An academic identified and elaborated on a pipeline prob-

lem, which affects the advertising industry and advertising

education alike:

Weve got to get enough people in the pipeline who areinterested in advertising. Traditionally, minorities have notgravitated toward advertising as a field. . . . When you look atthe agencies, their record is abysmal. You might fault them fornot including diverse talent, but on the other hand, when youlook at people coming out of school with degrees, the pickingsare fairly slim. . . . We have to go down to the high schoolsand start generating interest and identifying advertising as apotential field of study for minority groups.

The problem of attracting minorities to advertising programs

was likened to the problem of attracting minorities to busi-

ness schools:

One of the reasons that we didnt have a lot of minorities inbusiness schools is because business was not seen as a careeroption. A lot of minorities coming to college are not comingfrom families that own businesses or that have investmentsin stocks and bonds, so its just a foreign field. Minoritiesare consumers of advertising, but advertising has not beenpresented to them as a career option, at least not one that hasbeen stressed. . . . Weve got to go to the high schools to exposeminority students to career opportunities in advertising, andweve started to do this, but we need to do more.

One can see the vicious cycle. Because relatively few minori-

ties work in advertising, young minorities do not know people

in advertising. Thus, they are not exposed to the career of ad-vertising, and as a result, they do not consider advertising as a

career option or study it in college. Consequently, few minorities

seek jobs in advertising. This issue escalated to the point that

the New York City Commission on Human Rights reached an

agreement with leading advertising agencies to set quotas for

African American hires (Anderson 2006; Gatling 2006).

As can be seen, our interviews covered a wide range of topics.

Understanding how industry leaders view ethics, we believe,

is of surpassing importance. To be sure, they are not impartial,

but they have unique and powerful insights. Because of who

they are, understanding their understanding is important.

Their perspectives will shape future actions of the industry. Asscholars, however, we recognized that there are other indicators

of the state of ethics in the profession. We turn to them now,

starting with Web sites.

Analysis of Advertising Agency Web Sites

Web sites are increasingly the public faces of agencies, reflect-

ing their personalities and what they value. As such, it seemed


9/26

Spring 2009 91

appropriate to analyze them for ethics-related content as an

indication of both the prominence given to ethics and how it

is conceptualized and presented. We are not suggesting that

the prominence of ethics on the Web sites equals the ethical

sensitivity of the agency; it might be a public relations effort

to overcome past ethical lapses. Corporations with elaborate

codes of ethics may not be the most ethical. Nevertheless,

in the current and relatively new world of the Internet andwith the growing importance of Web sites, it is interesting

and instructive to see how issues related to ethical behavior

are portrayed. Because the Web is constantly changing, and

because all of the agency Web sites are likely to change dur-

ing the time lag between our research and the publication of

this paper, we do not identify the specific agency Web sites.

Moreover, our goal is not to focus on specific agencies, but

to characterize agency Web sites in general.

A content analysis of the Web sites of 25 of the largest U.S.

advertising agencies ( Advertising Age 2006) revealed much

similarity in beliefs, aspirations, and goals. All agencies be-

lieve in the power of great ideas, aspire to create great brands,and thereby, be the best at what they do. The dominant values

revolved around creativity, imagination, curiosity, and pas-

sion. Often graphics and high-tech entertainment seemed to

be of preeminent importance.

Most agency Web sites did not present significant ethics-

related contentneither messaging ethics nor business eth-

icsin a prominent, comprehensive, easily accessible way. As

we elaborate below, almost two-thirds of the leading advertis-

ing agencies had little or no treatment of ethics on their Web

sites. Only one Web site had comprehensive ethical content

that was presented in a coherent and easily accessible manner.

A second Web site had substantial ethics emphasis, but itwas not presented in a coherent or easily accessible manner.

Five Web sites had brief but fairly prominent ethics-related

statements regarding the truthfulness of their work. Two

other Web sites had brief but fairly prominent and accessible

ethics-related statements about how they interact with or

hire people. Six Web sites had minimal ethical content, and

10 Web sites had no ethical content. Regarding CSR, eight

Web sites featured the agencys pro bono work, but only one

Web site had substantial corporate social responsibility con-

tent unrelated to pro bono work. The agency with the most

substantial CSR content was not the same agency with the

most comprehensive ethics content.The Web site with comprehensive ethics-related content

had statements regarding the centrality of truthfulness to the

work the agencys workers create, their fiduciary responsibil-

ity to their clients, messaging ethics, business ethics, and

workforce diversity. A link labeled Corporate Compliance

was prominently featured at the top of the home page, so the

information was easy to find. The agencys Code of Business

Conduct was presented with links to specific topics such as

gathering information about our clients competitors, cli-

ent invoicing, and entertainment, gifts and gratuities. A

brief section on Truth in Advertising was included, but it

did not deal specifically with issues of new or nontraditional

media that troubled our industry leaders. There was also a

letter from the CEO stressing the importance of ethical and

lawful behavior and tying compliance with the code to excel-

lence in client service. Mention was made of a complianceofficer, and both a hot line telephone number and an e-mail

address were provided if one had an ethical concern.

A second Web site had substantial ethics-related content,

but it was not presented in a coherent or easily accessible

manner. Most of the statements were buried in a subsection

of History about the agencys founder. They were disbursed

amidst other information from 6 to 18 clicks away from the

home page. An interested visitor had to hunt for the ethics-

related statements, all of which were brief, and piece them

together. Nonetheless, the Web site had statements about

creating truthful work, fulfilling fiduciary responsibility,

treating employees compassionately, considering characterin promotions, and not offending the mores of the countries

in which the agency does business.

Five agencies had Web sites that presented ethics as central

to the agencys work output by making a general reference to

the truthfulness of their work. The statements were featured

in sections that were likely to be visited frequently, such as

Our Mission or About Us. The comments were brief and

without elaboration, however. Some were direct and strong,

while others were broad and vague, such as doing whats

right or knowing the truths of the marketplace. Three of

the five also had a passing reference to how people are treated

(e.g., with respect or dignity). Two of the five Web sites in-cluded integrity amidst a list of values or characteristics.

One had a statement of commitment to supplier diversity.

Two Web sites had ethics-related statements regard-

ing how they interact with or hire people. One focused on

respectingand treatingcustomers for who they are:

human beings. However, the elaboration provided sounded

primarily like a marketing approach: weve taken the best

aspects of human relationships and applied them to improved

marketing. The other Web site featured the agencys com-

mitment to employee and supplier diversity and claimed to

employ people with integrity.

Six Web sites had minimal ethical content, consisting ofa single line buried amidst other information. Typical were

claims to be respectful partners, individuals who play fair,

or equal opportunity employers. Ten Web sites had nothing

that could remotely be considered ethical content.

Regarding corporate social responsibility, nine Web

sites had substantial content. Eight of them highlighted

the agencys pro bono work for nonprofit causes. Only one

Web site had substantial content unrelated to pro bono


10/26


work. It described the agencys participation in three pro-

grams designed to expose minority public school students

to advertising as a career, as well as an annual day in which

agency employees volunteer for nonprofit organizations. It

is interesting to note that none of the Web sites dealt with

issues related to preserving the natural environment, which

is a frequent topic in the corporate social responsibility sec-

tions of corporate Web sites.Again, we do not mean to suggest that the design of Web

sites is directly correlated to ethical behavior. As with cor-

porate codes of ethics, however, attention or the lack thereof

given to ethics by a firm as it seeks to convey its mission and

principles may be reinforcing.

Perspectives of Academic Leaders

As explained in the Methods section, we interviewed depart-

ment chairs and directors of leading advertising programs in

universities to understand how ethics is incorporated in the

curricula of their programs and their perspectives on teachingadvertising ethics. Our questions focused on undergraduate,

masters, and Ph.D. programs. Academic leaders reported that

ethics has been on the agenda more prominently in recent

years and recognized the importance of exposing undergradu-

ates to issues of ethics in advertising. On the other hand,

some academic leaders expressed an ambivalence regarding

incorporating ethics into the curriculum. The ambivalence

stemmed from concerns that discussions of ethics would have

negative effects on students, such as creating doubts about the

profession and reducing their ability to succeed. All programs

had a required undergraduate course with a substantial ethics

component, but none had an equivalent required course as apart of their graduate programs at either the masters or Ph.D.

level. Efforts to integrate ethics into other aspects of the un-

dergraduate or graduate curricula could not be characterized

as organized or systematic.

Some attributed increased attention to ethics to the

Enron plus effect in which the plus encompassed the

well-publicized scandals involving advertising agencies such

as the Gray/Color Wheel scandal (Edwards 2004) and Ogilvy

and Mathers Office of National Drug Control Policy scandal

(Edwards 2005). As one said, The [ethics] advocates have

had a context in which to make their case that they didnt

have before.All of the academic leaders acknowledged the importance

of exposing undergraduate students to ethical issues in ad-

vertising. As one said:

The fact that we wake up in the morning and look ourselvesin the mirror and say that we teach advertising calls an ethicalissue into question itself. . . . I think that we as professionalsand as educators cannot ignore that [exposing students toethical issues] is one of our fundamental responsibilities.

Another expressed the dangers involved in not incorporating

a discussion of ethics into the curriculum:

Without discussing the topic of advertising ethics, advertis-ing very quickly falls into being a device that is amoral, andI think that we have an obligation to work with our studentsto help them understand that advertising is not amoral. It isnot intended to be a vehicle to sell anything to anybody.

Several academic leaders emphasized the importance of helping

students understand that they have choices to make regard-

ing the manner in which they practice their profession. As

one said:

Students dont understand that they have choices. Makingstudents aware of the fact that they can make choicesI thinkthat is more important than anything we can do.

A second academic elaborated:

Our responsibility is to teach students that they do have a

choice in how to communicate with people, and they can doit in a way that does not encroach on peoples rights, modifytheir cultural beliefs, or offend their religious beliefs.

One informant likened discussions of ethical issues to lifetime

career counseling:

The reason these discussions are important is because theyare more along the lines of lifetime career counseling thananything else. Youre really saying to people, Chances are,you are going to be better doing things that are inspiring toyou, and chances are . . . that you are not going to be inspiredby doing things that are harmful to people. Money will onlygo so far.

Some academic leaders, however, asserted that ethics is still

not getting the attention it deserves. One observed: Ethics is

a very important topic. I dont think that many [faculty] are

treating it as seriously as they should. Another said:

Other than a few lectures in a couple of classes, there is no-body really agonizing over ethics too much, and maybe theyshouldnt. This [department] is pretty clearly a commercialenterprise and pretty clearly designed to generate revenuefor business.

Yet another observed:

I dont see many people sitting around talking about eth-ics. Theyre sitting around talking about, Does advertisingwork?

The above comments allude to a worry when there is an em-

phasis on advertising ethics, which can result in ambivalence

toward incorporating ethics into the curriculum, or worse,

omission of ethics. An academic leader elaborated on concerns


11/26

Spring 2009 93

that teaching ethics might have a negative effect on students,

making them less likely to succeed in advertising:

[When we talk about teaching ethics], a reservation gets raisedin one form or another. Hey, were churning out profession-als to be effective in this business; were not churning outsocial workers. Because were churning out professionals tobe effective in this business, we dont want to be, in a sense,

planting tremendous doubts about the efficacy about whatwere doing.

Another asserted, We dont want to turn out people who will

only take on idealistic clients. Yet another expressed concern

about the tenor of discussions of ethics and took a defensive

position:

How come every time we talk about ethics in advertising weend up with advertising bashing? . . . Talking about advertis-ing ethics typically is bashing the profession.

Required Undergraduate Courses with a SubstantialEthics Component

When asked if their undergraduate programs had system-

atically integrated ethics into the curriculum, all academic

leaders answered, Yes. It quickly became clear that they

answered affirmatively because their programs typically have

a required course in which ethics is a substantial component.

The courses have titles such as Advertising and Society or

Mass Communications Law, and they cover law as well as

ethics, typically placing as much or more emphasis on law

as in ethics.

Only one program has a required course totally focused

on advertising ethics. The academic leader reported that the

faculty had debated whether to have a stand-alone ethics

course or to weave ethics into all of the coursework, but the

symbolic value of having a required course with ethics in

the title was the determining factor:

The faculty felt that having ethics as a required piece of thecore . . . where the students see the topic of ethics [as the coursetitle], particularly at the undergraduate level, that really settlesfor them the idea of how critically important ethics is.

Several academic leaders indicated that resources were a

constraint. As one said, Wed like to make ethics a requiredcourse. We just dont have the staff to do that. Others indi-

cated that ethics courses have much competition from other

areas of advertising practice that are evolving quickly. One

informant expressed the departmental philosophy for new

course development as, Generally, we target practice-oriented

issues. Faculty and departments are faced with the question

that one informant raised, Should we take up one of our rare

required spots to have ethics?

One informant indicated that ethics is seen as more cen-

tral to public relations than to advertising. As this person

explained:

Some of us teach public relations as a management issuenot a marketing discipline. When you begin to teach it as amanagement discipline, you begin to focus on the issue thatthe real essence of public relations is changing organizationalbehavior to better conform to the values and expectations ofthe publics upon which your organization depends for survival.Ethics becomes a core responsibility in PR.

A systematic approach to incorporating ethics into the cur-

riculum would be expected to involve more than part of one

course, but academics were often unsure of how and in which

other courses ethics was being taught. Perhaps this was because

the heightened emphasis on ethics is relatively new:

The reason that I am so vague [about when and how ethics istaught] is that the ethics component and sensitivity has comeabout during the past two to three years.

One academic leader described the process of integrating eth-

ics into the curriculum as organic rather than organized. In

fact, none of the academic informants described an organized

or systematic approach to integrating ethics into the courses

other than the one required course. One suggested that a

departmental directive to take a more organized approach

would be helpful, but none of the academics reported such a

directive or a systematic approach. On the other hand, another

leader asserted that strong norms regarding academic freedom

provided an impediment to a more organized approach:

Ive never heard anybody talk about how we cover ethics inspecific courses. . . . I think that people would really bristleif we told them that they had to cover ethics. . . . Academicfreedom is strong in this college.

Another informant suggested that her departments emphasis

on ethics was less systematic than that of her colleagues in

business schools. Because coverage of ethics is evaluated for

business school accreditation, the number of hours dedicated

to ethics and specific areas of ethics instruction covered have

to be documented.

Incorporating Ethics into the Graduate Curriculum

Perspectives and practices regarding ethics in graduate pro-

grams differed from those of undergraduate programs. While

all programs have a required course with a substantial ethics

component in their undergraduate curriculum, none had a

similar required course in their graduate curriculum. The pri-

mary reasons given were that graduate programs are often cus-

tomized to the individual student and that graduate students


12/26


are older and more experienced, and thus, less in need of ethics

in the curriculum. Two of the masters programs had elective

courses with a significant advertising ethics component. In

some Ph.D. programs, students can opt for an elective course

in mass communication law, but none of the programs require

or offer Ph.D.-level courses specifically on ethics.

Analysis of Advertising Textbooks

To understand better how students are introduced to advertis-

ing ethics, we examined seven leading advertising and market-

ing communication texts. Table 1 lists each of the textbooks

and the pages of coverage each gives to important topics related

to ethics, advertising regulation, and societal and economic

impacts of advertising. As elaborated below, these texts take

a broad-brush approach to the coverage of ethics. Only Belch

and Belch (2007) has two chapters devoted to ethics-related

topics. Also, it is the only textbook with any mention of ethi-

cal theory or reference to sources of theoretical discussion of

ethics in marketing and advertising.Content and placement of the chapters with ethical discus-

sion vary. Such chapters cover social, regulatory, and ethical

issues. Two texts (Arens 2006; Lane, Whitehall King, and

Russell 2005) also have substantial coverage of economic

arguments concerning advertising, mostly positive ones, and

the chapters begin with these arguments. Only Shimps text

(2007) begins with a discussion of ethical issues, and it is the

only one to include environmental issues. The placement of

these chapters is interesting in that four of them are rather

early (chapter 3 or 4 out of approximately 20). Two texts place

the chapter with ethical discussion as the last one in the book,

and one has it as chapter 20 out of 22.The titles of these chapters are illuminating. The Wells,

Moriarty, and Burnett (2006) text uses advertising and society

as its chapter title. As noted above, two chapters focus initially

on economic issues and then move to social and regulatory/

legal issues (Arens 2006; Lane, Whitehall King, and Russell

2005), and their titles reflect these topics. The Duncan (2005)

and OGuinn et al. (2006) titles are virtually identical: Social,

Ethical and Legal/Regulatory Issues/Aspects of Advertising.

Belch and Belchs (2007) first chapter title reflects its focus

on regulation of advertising and promotion, while the second

chapter title indicates that the content pertains to evaluating

the social, ethical, and economic aspects of advertising. Shimpsbook (2007) lists ethics first and refers to environmental is-

sues in the title.

As noted above, the textbooks take a broad-brush approach

as is indicated by the low numbers (mostly one page or less)

in Table 1. Like principles of marketing texts, breadth rather

than depth is the order of the day. Some topics such as regu-

lation and self-regulation warrant greater attention, and the

FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is examined in some depth

in every book. Only three other social and legal topics receive

more than two pages of coverage: commercial speech/First

Amendment (Lane, Whitehall King, and Russell 2005), ste-

reotypes in advertising (Belch and Belch 2007), and targeting

of children and teens (Shimp 2007).

Ethics, the focus of our analysis, has uneven treatment across

the books. The Lane, Whitehall King, and Russell (2005)

text only contains one box on the 4As code, and the Wells,Moriarty, and Burnett (2006) book has only a few pages on the

topic. A strength of the Wells text is that a helpful distinction

is made between personal, professional, and social ethics (pp.

8688). The others have several pages devoted to defining

and discussing ethics codes that are followed in advertising

agencies. A trend in these texts, like principles of marketing,

is the use of ethics boxes. The Arens (2006) text has one in

virtually every chapter, while three others have ethics boxes

in more than one-third of the chapters. The boxes in Duncan

(2005) are much longer and more substantive than the ones

in OGuinn et al. (2006).

Many additional topics that could be considered ethical areoften covered in other parts of these texts. For example, puffery,

targeting children and teens, sex appeal, and manipulation are

all issues that one might classify as ethical, and they are some-

times examined elsewhere in these books. As indicated above,

notably absent from all of the textbooks except one was any

mention of ethical theory or reference to sources of theoretical

discussion of ethics in marketing and advertising.

Managerial Insights on Ethical Decision Making

We began by asking industry leaders broad questions about

the state of advertising ethics, and their responses are re-ported above. We proceeded to ask how one can encourage

ethical decision making in an advertising agency. We turn

now to their views. Their responses dealt with two general

topics: (1) barriers to ethical decision making, and (2) the

role of organizational culture. Perceived barriers emanated

from a general ambivalence toward management, the client-

based nature of the advertising business, and the pressures

of constantly having to deliver new ideas under deadline

pressure. The leaders widely recognized the importance of an

organizational culture that supports ethical decision making,

and they elaborated on the crucial role of agency leaders in

creating such a culture.

Management

In business, management systems, processes, policies, and

codes are important ways that organizations encourage ethi-

cal behavior. Advertising industry leaders, however, expressed

antipathy regarding methods of management. For example,

one practitioner asserted, Building process in and of itself has


13/26

Spring 2009 95

TABLE1

Compar

isono

fLea

ding

Advert

ising

Tex

tboo

ks:Page

Coverageo

fEconomic

,Social,R

egu

latory,a

ndEthicalIs

sues

Au

thor

Wel

ls,

Belchan

d

Lane,

King,

OGu

inn,A

llen,

Moriar

ty,a

nd

Arens

Belch

Duncan

andRussell

andSemen

ik

Shimp

Burnet

t

Year

2006

2007

2005

2005

2006

2007

2006

Edition

10th

7th

2nd

16th

4th

7th

7th

Chapter/lastchapter

3/18

21,22/22

20/22

24/24

4/20

3/20

3/19

Openingscenario

Abercrombieand

OTC

Censorship

Database

Nutrition

Offensive

FitchQuarterly

advertisin

g

marketing

plus

advertising

DoveBeauty

transfat

(CalvinKlein,

labeling

Benetton,etc.)

Econom

icimpac

t(benefits)

GDP

(1)

Abundanceprinciple

(1)

Argumentsproandcon

(2)

Choice

(1)

Economiesofscale

(1)

Addedvalue

(1)

(1)

Social

impac

t

Controversy/problems

(1)

(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

(1)

Stereotypes

(2)

(3)

(1)

(1)

(1)

(2)

Proliferation

(2)

(.5)

Taste/offensive

(1)

(2)

(.5)

(1)

(1)

Unintendedmessages

(1)

Manipulation

(1)

(1)

(2)

(.5)

Sexappeal/sexism

(1)

(.5)

(1)

Obesity

(1)

(.5)

Demandcreation:Mirror

versusshaper

(1)

(continues)


14/26


TABLE1(continued)

ComparisonofLeadingAdvertisingTextbooks:PageCoverageofEconomic

,Social,Regulatory,andEthicalIs

sues

Author

Wells,

Belchan

d

Lane,King,

OGuinn,Allen,

Moriarty,and

Arens

Belch

Duncan

andRussell

andSemenik

Shimp

Burnett

Criticisms(micro)

Puffery

(1)

(1.5

)

(2)

(.5)

(.5)

(1)

Dangerousproducts

(tobacco,alcohol)

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(2)

(1)

(2)

Targeting:children,teens

(1)

(2)

(1)

(3)

(1)

Targeting:elderlyand

economicallydisadvantag

ed

(2)

(1)

Advertainment

(1)

Legal/regulatory

International

(1)

(1)

Costs+benefits

(1)

Commercialspeech:

FirstAmendment

(1)

(2)

(1)

(4)

(2)

Privacy

(1)

LanhamA

ct

(1)

(2)

Trademark+copyright

(1)

(1)

Agencies

FTC

(4)

(8)

(1.5

)

(3)

(3)

(4)

(4)

Rules

(1)

Deception

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(2)

(1)

Unfairness

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(1)

(1)

Comparative

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)

Remedies

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(1)

(1)

Corrective

(2)

(.5)

(1)

(1)

Substantive

(1)

(.5)

(1)

Evaluation/status

(1)

FDA

(1)

(1)

(.5)

1

(.5)

FCC

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(.5)

BATF

(1)

Stateandlocalregulation

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(1)

Self-regulatory

CARU

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(.5)

Principles

(1)

(1)


15/26

Spring 2009 97

BBB/NARC/NAD

(2)

(3)

(3)

2

(1)

(1)

Advertisingagency

(1)

(1)

(1)

Tradeassociation

(1)

(1)

(1)

Media

(2)

(3)

(1)

(.5)

Consumergroups

(1)

(.5)

Socialcauses

Adcouncil

(2)

Cause-related

(2)

Socialmarketing

(1)

Socialresponsibility

Definitions

(1)

(.5)

Probono

(1)

Ethics

Definition

(1)

(1)

(.5)

(1)

(1)

Theories

(1)

Levels:personalversus

organizational

(1)

(2)

Values

(1)

Corporateethics

(1)

TestsGoldenRule,televis

ion

(1)

4AsCode

(1)

(1)

(1)

(1)Creative

Code

AAFCode

(1)

(1)

Ethicsboxes

(17)

(7)

(11)

(7)

Ethicschecklist

(1)

Packagingandbranding

(1)

Salespromotion

(1)

On-linemarketing

(1)

PR/publicity

(1)

Other

Discussionof

Onlybook

Full-page

Strongest

Sectionon

Sectionon

Good

levelsof

withtwo

ethicsboxes

defenseof

other

environmental

distinction

ethical

chapterson

in11

advertisings

promotional

orgreen

betweenthe

responsibility

thesetopics

chapters

socialand

tools

marketing

personal,

economic

communication

professional,

benefits

andsocial

ethic

Ethicalissues

7veryshort

boxesinall

ethics

18chapters

boxes

Notes:OTC=over-the-counter;GDP=grossdomesticproduct;FTC=FederalTradeCommission;FDA=FoodandDrug

Administration;FCC=FederalCommunicationsCommission;

BATF=BureauofAlcohol,Tobacco,andFirearms;CARU

=ChildrensAdv

ertisingReviewUnit;BBB=BetterBusinessBureau;NARC=NationalAdvertisingReviewCouncil;

NAD

=NationalAdvertisingD

ivision;4As=AmericanAssociationofAdve

rtisingAgencies;AAF=AmericanAdvertisingFederation.

Numbersinparenthesesindicatethepagesofcoveragegiventothetopicint

hedesignatedtextbook.


16/26


zero value. Another said, Ive never seen a unilateral process

that can be applied to advertising. While holding companies

have policies related to obeying the law encompassing issues

such as discrimination and sexual harassment, we found scant

evidence of codes of ethics or other management processes at

the agency level. In fact, some practitioners expressed skepti-

cism regarding whether it would even be possible to create a

viable code of ethics, especially for messages. One informantsaid: Frankly, I think that it would be impossible to write

something sensible. Youre trying to define good taste and

responsibility, and I dont know how you define it.

The ambivalence toward management appeared to be due,

at least in part, to a perceived tension between management

and creativity. Management processes are often thought to

be a potential impediment to creativity. As one practitioner

said: Advertising is unlike manufacturing in which process

is required to create a product. Process can get in the way in

advertising. Process can interfere with and hamper creativ-

ity. Creative people are not like other business people, their

work tasks are not the same, and thus, managing them andproviding them with processes that encourage ethical decision

making is difficult:

A lot of people who exist in our business are not businesspeople. They are artists. We dont pay them to think in termsof P&L and what their ethical responsibility is. We ask them todo what has never been done before, to drive to higher levelsof creativity, and that is an onerous task. . . . As a result, thosepeople are a different breed . . . and it is a bit difficult to say,Now heres your process [to be ethical]. Getting them tofill out time cards at times is hard enough.

It was perceived to be difficult to institute processes that en-

courage ethical behavior without restricting the freedom that

creativity requires to flourish:

The question then becomes, How can you integrate processinto advertising agencies in a way that does not hinder cre-ativity? . . . It involves striking a balance between havingenough process for control and accountability and havingenough freedom to do the job.

Our informants observations seemed to be in sync with

the description of the advertising industry given by Shona

Seifert, the Ogilvy & Mather executive who was convicted for

fraud: an industry that has historically placed a higher value

on creativity and ideas than process (Creamer 2005). Ms.Seifert wrote this statement in the preface to a code of ethics

for advertising that the judge who sentenced her required

her to write. (The code can be accessed at http://adage.com/

article?article_id=46685.)

A minority of our informants argued that the advertising

industrys antipathy toward management has had ramifica-

tions. For example, the advertising community has not had the

same emphasis as big businessits clientson understanding

and applying management concepts and approaches such as

those related to ethical decision making:

Big business (our clients) has paid a lot of attention to orga-nizational development and change management, but thoseareas havent been a focus or a commitment inside the agencyworld. Instead weve focused on human resourcesfindingtalent, hiring talent, retaining talent. How can you instituteand implement a change management program? How can youdesign an organization to be ethical?

Relatedly, advertising agencies have not had the same focus

on management training and education related to ethics that

other businesses have had. As one practitioner asserted, Ad-

vertising agencies are too cool for school. Yet another noted

that training in the advertising business has concentrated on

doing better advertising and selling things to the client

rather than on management practices. Whether or not the

industry leaders are correct in their assessment that manage-

ment processes necessarily inhibit creativity, it seems to bethe conventional wisdom.

Dynamics of the Advertising Industry

Other barriers to ethical decision making are related to the

dynamics of the industrythe deadlines, the fast pace of the

work, and the constant pressure to produce new and better

ideas. These pressures, our informants told us, can cause ad-

vertising practitioners to lose perspective:

Whats unique to this industry is that you are so consumed

on a daily basis with coming up with ideas for your clients.It consumes you because clients need ideas faster and betterthan ever before. Theres no time to take a deep breath. . . . Thedeadline pressuretheres no time to get a bigger picture.

Client-Based Nature of Advertising

Our industry leaders identified another set of barriers to ethical

decision making that emanate from the client-based nature of

the advertising business and the appropriate role of an agent

in ethical decision making. Advertising agencies typically have

many diverse clients, and as a practitioner explained, responsi-

bility for decisions related to a code of ethics may be perceived

to be in the purview of the client, not the agency:

A lot of our clients have developed their own codes. . . . Wereworking within the guidelines of different clients. We havebusiness practices that ensure that things are truthful andproven, but whether you advertise to these people or howin our business, that is driven by the clients themselves.We need to mold and adapt to what their core ethical beliefsystem is.


17/26

Spring 2009 99

Perceiving an obligation to mold and adapt to a clients ethi-

cal standards can be problematic. A practitioner spoke of this

predicament:

[W]hen you have clients that say, I want to do this on a pornosite, or I want to do thiswhatever. And the [agency]people say, Is that really the right thing to do? And theclient says, Well, it is what I want you to do.

Delegation of ethical decision making to the client and ratio-

nalizing that the client is always right are problems seen

in many businesses (Drumwright and Murphy 2004). The

industry leaders whom we interviewed for this paper did not

agree that such delegation was appropriate, but they acknowl-

edged that the client-based nature of advertising exacerbates

the problem.

Some asserted that the advertising industrys emphasis on

clientsa client obsessionhas other negative effects that

are more subtle. That is, the strong focus on serving clients

detracts from the agencys emphasis on managing its own

employees in a respectful and ethical way and on developing

a culture that supports ethical behavior.

Advertising agencies put more emphasis on clients than on thepeople working on the clients accounts. This client obsessionresults in not enough emphasis on people and culture.

Organizational Culture

Industry leaders generally viewed organizational culture, rather

than management processes, as key to mitigating the barriers

to ethical decision making and encouraging ethical sensitivity.

As one executive stated:

I think that culture is probably the most important factor ofall when it comes to ethics. The degree to which an organiza-tion really accepts and buys into high standards is a cultureissue and a leadership issue.

While our informants were quick to endorse the importance of

culture, one executive asserted that the nature of the advertis-

ing industry and the people who populate it predispose many

industry participants to be less interested in culture than in

the work itself:

We have to be right, and we have to be creative. . . . So wehire scientists and artists, and both scientists and artists arenot as interested in the culture around them as they are intheir art or their science.

Leaders were viewed as crucial to creating and maintaining

culture both through the example they set and through the

programs they initiate. As one practitioner said, You create

culture by example. Another practitioner spoke of the pow-

erful negative effect that top executives can have when they

behave unethically: The first time a senior person is known

to say one thing and do something else or is known to have

misrepresented something, it starts to erode the culture, and

it goes down from there.

Agency executives reported that they often use storytelling

to communicate the importance of ethical values. As one said,

The best thing that happens to bring something [related toethics] to life is storytelling. Another informant said:

We talk about our values and how we came up with them. Wetell stories of our culture and our values. . . . Weve institu-tionalized redundancy without being boring. . . . Redundancyis the queen of learning. Tell people the same thing, but tellit differently.

Practitioners also pointed to the importance of openly and

candidly identifying unacceptable and unethical behavior and

of talking about it. As one practitioner said, You fess up when

you mess up. Another said:

You call out [unethical] behavior with clarity and candor.Because we live in more of a gray world, it makes respondingto those issues . . . all the more important.

The importance of broadly disseminating information about

behavior that is not acceptable was also noted: When I spot a

problem, I talk about it philosophically without calling names

in newsletters, e-mails, and speeches. By exhibiting ethical

leadership, helping workers identify ethical issues, and gen-

erating organizational discourse (both positive and negative)

about them, the practitioners quoted above believed they were

assisting their coworkers to avoid problems.

Informant Recommendations

for Future Research

As we noted earlier, academic research in advertising ethics

is thin and inconclusive in many areas; as such, there is need

for more research. When we asked our industry leaders about

research that academics could do on advertising ethics that

would be helpful, some expressed skepticism regarding the

usefulness and viability of such an undertaking. For example,

one industry leader said:

Most academic opinions about and observations about the realworld of business are irrelevant. I think that having academicsgive recommendations on how to conduct business in the realworld is a waste of time. . . . I think there is a big disconnectbetween how the academic world sees the world and how theworld really is.

Others, however, called for a closer link between the academy

and the profession, with more dialogue and greater collaborative


18/26


efforts. For instance, another industry leader, arguing that

academics in general and ethicists in particular should not be

discounted as eggheads, called for a better partnership.

Some industry informants recommended research on topics

pertaining to management issues and ethics. One suggested a

project that involves studying the cultures of companies and

advertising agencies to identify things that companies with

great cultures do that agencies do not do that would includeand yet not be limited to topics related to ethics. Another

proposed a study on understanding the organizational change

needed to create a more ethical agency organization:

If you are asking people to

advert eth 1

Documents