A Case History of Good and Bad Marketing

What is good marketing? Good marketing connects what people need or value with what a company has to offer. It has a customer focus and a clear value proposition. It builds long-term relationships. In our textbook, we go further and suggest marketing should help create a better world. To quote from Essentials of Marketing:

Some critics argue that marketing primarily persuades people to make unnecessary purchases beyond their means. While some companies may engage in such practices, many businesses recognize that successful marketing creates genuine value for customers and society; good marketing contributes to a better world. 

What do we mean by a “better world”? Our definition follows our discussion of the marketing concept, social responsibility, and marketing ethics. We believe a better world is one where: (1) buyers and sellers make better decisions that have less adverse impacts on others; (2) buyers are healthier and make consumption choices that allow them to experience a better quality of life (including deciding not to consume); and (3) marketing strategy decisions address some of the world’s most challenging problems—including hunger, poverty, and climate change. (Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrel, Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases, 2015; Bhattacharya and Korschun, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 2008).

I believe that at a minimum, the vast majority of businesses seek to address the first logic “connect what people need with what a company has to offer.” Where it gets sticky, is when what a company has to offer makes them unhealthy or decreases their quality of life. This argument might be made for alcohol, tobacco, and gambling for example. Even for those examples, companies may have initially thought they were doing the right thing by customers, but later found out their products also caused significant harm.

I believe that is the case for ultra-processed foods, or foods that use lots of chemicals. According to Stanford Medicine, “These foods are generally understood to be mass-produced with some — or a lot — of industrially processed ingredients.” And these foods are not healthy.

I would argue that the firms creating these foods didn’t start out trying to make something bad for us to eat. They were part of helping America win two World Wars. They were trying to deliver lower-cost more convenient foods. That is what many consumers say they wanted. But what happens when firms find out that their product, often a very profitable product, is not good for its target market. How do they respond? At that point, most respond with bad marketing. They seek to discredit the science that says their product is bad. They ignore. And maybe, eventually, they find ways to improve their products. We are at a tipping point with ultra-processed foods.

The history of ultra-processed foods is told in this New York Times article, “How America Got Hooked on Ultraprocessed Food” (October 16, 2025). I post a “gift link” that should allow anyone to read this. I think the links last a year. Of course if you have a subscription to the Times (I got mine from my university), it should continue to work. This article is multimedia and it could either be assigned to your students, or simply scrolled through in class as part of a lecture. There are some great pictures and not a lot of text. After that, consider using some of the questions below to stimulate a class discussion. Note that ChatGPT was used to generate first drafts of some of the questions below.

Discussion Questions (and sample answers)

1. How does the definition of “good marketing” evolve when viewed through a social responsibility lens? (Chapters 1 and 19)
   • Traditionally, “good marketing” focused on profit and customer satisfaction.
   • Adding a social responsibility lens means marketing should also improve societal well-being (e.g., promoting health, reducing waste, ethical supply chains).
   • Example: Patagonia or Dove campaigns emphasize purpose, not just product benefits.
2. At what point does marketing shift from meeting consumer needs to creating harmful demand? (Chapters 1, 9, and 19)
   • When marketing promotes products that knowingly harm health or the environment (e.g., tobacco, sugary drinks, ultraprocessed foods).
   • The shift often happens when firms ignore new scientific evidence about harm.
   • Example: The tobacco industry’s historical denial parallels current resistance from the food industry.
3. How did post–World War II social and cultural changes shape the marketing of processed foods? (Chapters 1, 3, and 19)
   • Rising dual-income households and time pressure created a market for convenience foods.
   • Advertising targeted homemakers with messages of modernity and efficiency.
   • Example: TV dinners and Wonder Bread commercials linked products to progress and family health.
4. How did the food industry’s marketing to children in the 1970s–1990s shape long-term consumption habits? (Chapters 1, 15, and 19)
   • Cartoon mascots and Saturday morning ads normalized sugary snacks and cereals.
   • Early exposure built emotional brand loyalty and sugar dependency.
   • Example: Tony the Tiger or Count Chocula campaigns blurred entertainment and advertising.
5. What parallels can you draw between the marketing of ultraprocessed foods and the marketing of tobacco? (Chapters 1 and 19)
   • Both industries:
     • Targeted vulnerable groups (children, minorities).
     • Funded research or PR campaigns to question negative health findings.
     • Focused on “choice” and “freedom” messages.
   • Example: Philip Morris applied cigarette marketing playbooks to Kraft and Kool-Aid.
6. When companies discover their products are harmful, what ethical options do they have? (Chapters 1, 8, 13, 19)
   • Option 1: Reformulate products (e.g., reduce sugar or salt).
   • Option 2: Shift toward transparency and informed choice.
   • Option 3: Invest in new, healthier product lines.
   • Ethical marketing requires acknowledging harm and adapting — not hiding behind PR.
7. How might marketers help reduce society’s dependence on ultraprocessed foods? (Chapters 1 and 19)
   • Promote “whole food convenience” — healthy products that still save time.
   • Use positive framing (energy, wellness, longevity) instead of guilt.
   • Example: Marketing success of brands like KIND Bars or Amy’s Kitchen.
   • Partner with policymakers to support labeling and consumer education.
8. What lessons can marketing students take from this history about balancing innovation, profit, and public good? (Chapters 1 and 19)
   • Innovation should solve real problems, not just create addictive consumption.
   • Long-term trust and brand equity come from aligning profit with purpose.
   • Today’s marketers can lead change in sustainability, food systems, and health by designing value that genuinely benefits customers and society.