teachthe4ps.com - For instructors of marketing.

A few weeks ago we posted the “Ethics of Sunscreen” – from Seth Godin – and a counterpoint as well.

My friend Stefanie Boyer (Bryant University) has pointed out some additional reading which will give you an even better background on this issue.  She pointed us to the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) Sunscreen Hall of Shame.  EWG points out specific, deceptive claims being made by some brands — and also suggests better brands.  The site also includes a page with some surprising, scientifically backed claims, “Sunscreens Exposed:  9 Surprising Truths.”

I am using all this information as part of my “Is Marketing Good or Evil?” exercise in class tomorrow.  I ask students this question and then provide some examples on both sides of the debate.  Like most tools, marketing can be used for good or evil — it is really who uses it.  The question that continues to be debated is the extent to which regulation should be introduced to prevent abuse.  No answers, just useful questions for our students to consider.

Thank you Stefanie!

Regular readers of T4Ps know that we enjoy Seth Godin’s pearls of wisdom.  In “The ethics of sunscreen,” Godin argues that consumers need regulation to protect them from greedy, self-interested companies.  He uses the behavior of firms that make sunscreen as his example — though he suggests it generalizes to all firms.   I think Godin’s arguments hold up best for credence goods (products for which the utility is almost impossible for a consumer to assess – even after consuming the product). For a contrary view, check out “The ethics of sunscreen” at Often Wrong Never in Doubt (June 27, 2011).  What is a firm’s responsibility?  What are consumers’ responsibilities?

The articles might stimulate a discussion of marketing ethics and regulation in the product or promotion units.  Also posted at Learn the 4 Ps.

Here are two very powerful examples of how marketing that helps make the world a better place.  The first one (an ad created by Ogilvy, Dublin, Ireland) is especially hard to watch — but as you will see that is the point.  I don’t want to say anymore, because the ad and video explain themselves, and need no further introduction.  Also posted at Learn the 4 Ps.

Facebook’s image has always bounced between good and evil.  Privacy advocates have complained about the company.  It turned out that most users didn’t much care about privacy.  “The Social Network” did not paint a very pretty picture of founder Mark Zuckerberg.  Then this week we start off with a very favorable cover story in Bloomberg Businessweek that lauds the company’s COO and #2, see “Why Facebook Needs Sheryl Sandberg,” (May 12, 2011).  Bad timing for Sandberg, because now Facebook is getting more bad press for more bad actions “Facebook Admits It Hired PR Firm to Smear Google” (Adweek, May 12, 2011).

Yikes, lots of stuff here.  The Sheryl Sandberg story in BusinessWeek provides a neat profile of the COO and gets you up to date on some Facebook initiatives — like advertising and whether the firm should enter China.  The more interesting issue is the ethical lapse by Facebook.  It also makes you wonder about a PR firm that would take on (or maybe even suggest) such a tactic.  Neither looks very good here.  Also posted at Learn the 4 Ps.

Great scenario to use to discuss ethics in class.  How does a PR firm – even a big, well-known firm like Burson-Marsteller say no to Facebook?

I enjoy bringing social marketing examples to my classes.  Here is a useful definition for social marketing that I like:  applying marketing concepts to “bring about social change or achieve behavioral goals for a social good” (Fiehn, 2009)

Examples of social marketing educate students by showing them marketing concepts in a different context.  For marketing skeptics in your class, it demonstrates marketing in a positive light.  This example deals with drinking and driving — something relevant to many of our students.  The 1:44 video was developed by Oglivy Brazil.

This short article, “Misleading Claims on ‘Green’ Labeling” (Wall Street Journal, October 26, 2010 – non-subscribers may have to click here) calls attention to the troubling ethical and environmental problem of greenwashing.  For more detailed coverage, check out TerraChoice’s “Greenwashing Report 2010.”

Some highlights in the TerraChoice report:

• 4744 products in 2010 claimed to be “green” (up 73% from 2009)
• 95% of these committed at least one of the sins of greenwashing.

File under product labeling, product, ethics, social responsibility or sustainability.  What responsibility do marketers have?

This article in the British newspaper, The Guardian “Unilever unveils ambitious long term sustainability program” (November 15, 2010) describes Unilever’s Sustainable Living Plan.  The company outlined a 10-year plan to cut its carbon footprint as well as the water and waste impact of its products.

Interestingly, this comes at a time when there are questions about consumer interest in sustainability.  An article in Advertising Age, “Has Green Stopped Giving?” (November 8, 2010 – you may need to be a subscriber to link through) notes:

In recent months, sales have begun to slow in categories such as green cleaners and grow in not-so-sustainable ones like bottled water as shoppers decide they may not be worth the tradeoff. And a September study showed big swings in the number of consumers who believe environmentally friendly alternatives are too expensive, don’t work as well as other products and aren’t actually better for the environment — all of which seem to add up to what Timothy Kenyon, director of the GfK Roper Green Gauge study calls “green fatigue.”

The Wall Street Journal has been keeping an eye on marketers efforts to track our online behavior.  Check out this page – “What They Know” for links to all the articles and videos in this series.

We first posted a great WSJ video on this topic back in August – “How Advertisers Use Internet Cookies to Track You,” (Teach the 4 Ps, August 8).  If you showed that video in class, your students might find the video below “What They Know:  Websites Move to Curb Cookies,” (Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2010).  to be an interesting follow-up.   The 4:24 video discusses how many websites are responding to privacy and revenue pressures to try to curb the number of cookies.

OK, so about a week ago we made a rather disheartening post “It’s Better for Whose Environment,” (Teach the 4 Ps, October 17, 2010) that described how Sun Chips abandoned an environmentally friendly (but noisier) package when sales dropped.

Well, maybe we marketers just need to figure out the best way to change consumer behavior.  This fascinating article “The Secret to Turning Consumers Green” (Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2010 – click here if non-subscriber - then link through).  The article describes a variety of techniques — most relying on perceptions of peer behavior — that have been shown in research to change behavior.  Let’s hope we can nudge people to make more sustainable choices.

This might be fun to talk about when talking about consumer behavior or social responsibility.

Consumer interest in making sustainable choices may be limited.  Sun Chip is ditching its environmentally-friendly compostable (but noiser) bag.  Sales of the snack dropped after the new bag was introduced (“It’s Better for Whose Environment?“, Wall Street Journal, October 8, 2010 – note this link takes you to a back door for non-subscribers). This sentiment is also expressed at Adweek, “Consumers Don’t Warm to Eco-Friendly Products” (October 12, 2010).  It might be interesting to ask students why they think this is happening?   Note:  Also posted at Learn the 4 Ps.