Category Ethics
eBrand Media Research: Morally gray marketers and the hideous advertising pollution they create!
Continuity programs have been around for years. Videoactivereport.com defines continuity programs this way: “An infomercial/DRTV product purchasing program that encourages consumers to purchase the first in a series of products, often for a lower-than-normal price, then continue purchasing the entire series for a higher price. Extensively used for music and book series. Concept also employed successfully for beauty, diet and self-development products.”
Given the limited, vanilla, definition; they apparently don’t want to step on any toes.
We discussed one of the most reprehensible continuity programs on the internet, and other types of continuity programs, in an article written on May, 22nd, 2008.
Most continuity programs use the “make sick, make well” marketing approach. They identify a mass audience pain points; wrinkles, yellow teeth, weight, debt, or a need for money and the ability to make transactions with a debit/credit card, and run campaigns that bring the pain, real or imagined from the background to the foreground of the consciousness. Pharmaceutical companies are real experts at making large segments of our society sick; with messaging like this: “Are you feeling depressed, lethargic, or irritable? Then you may be suffering from…”
Posted by eBrand Media Research Department in Ethics, Marketing on September 14th, 2009
Not a shocker, folks: Facebook is forever
By Bob Sullivan, The Red Tape Chroicles
I know a computer science professor who runs the same Facebook experiment every semester. He invites his students to stand up in front of the room and show everyone their Facebook page on the big screen. No one has ever taken him up on the offer.
Why? They’re embarrassed, of course.
Moments later, the irony sinks in. Every one of them seems happy to share all those funny photographs, witty Wall postings and status updates with everyone on the planet. They just don’t want to do it in public, in person.
Facebook puts a lot of people in a lot of twisted situations, including those who try to rationalize their use of the site (Want to be safer on Facebook? There are tips below).
Studies show that about two-thirds of Americans say they care a great deal about their privacy, yet fewer than 10 percent ever do anything about it, such as destroy a store loyalty card or browse the Web with an anonymizing tool.
So it is with Facebook. This week, a dust-up — no, a tornado — hit the service when users found out about a subtle change to Facebook’s terms of service. A blogger at the Consumerist Web site posted the change, noting that Facebook now asserts the right to “copy, publish, store, retain,” anything you contribute, and that the firm’s rights to your material survive “any termination of your use of the Facebook Service.”
In other words, whatever you put on Facebook cannot be deleted. Even closing your account, removing all your pictures, and “de-friending” your friends doesn’t get your data back from the Facebook.
Everyone seems shocked by the idea that Facebook is forever, but that’s nothing new. In fact, I believe Facebook deserves some kudos for finally fessing up and including this concept in its terms of service. I’m thrilled that people are now discussing this issue.
Posted by Tom Polanski in Ethics, Facebook, Opinions on February 20th, 2009
Other aspects of the Facebook phenomenon
By Tom Polanski, EVP, eBrand Media and eBrand Interactive
Over the years we’ve compiled a large database of contacts who did not respond to our attempts to engage them regarding our services. Last month we decided to try and connect with these, “not viables”, through the social media site, Facebook. We weren’t expecting much. However, much to our surprise, 98.2% of those business contacts, those who already had Facebook pages, people who wouldn’t return an e-mail or a voicemail, accepted our invitation to be “friends”; thereby allowing us access to intimate details about their lives, families, and friends.
To be clear; we didn’t, and still don’t, try to hide the fact that we’re marketers; it’s right there on our Facebook page under the “Info” tab. We were, and still are, stunned by the positive response to our invitations. Why would they do that? Why invite us into their private worlds when they wouldn’t, otherwise, give us the time of day?
Maybe people just automatically respond to a “friend” request. There’s a likelihood that the branding process we initiated with our repeated attempts to contact them achieved enough of a familiarity where that person felt they probably knew us. I suspect that there’s no easy answer. However, Facebook has succeeded in creating a positive experience which, in turn, breeds trust. Another key driver may be the need, particularly when times are tough, to feel good about ourselves. Membership in a community and the accumulation of lots of friends, who without fail will post positive comments about our pictures, and musings, is a way to do that.
Speaking of which; we’ve yet to see a negative comment from, or directed to, any of the hundreds of people who are now in our circle of “friends”. This attests to the power of “Social Proof” which means we determine what is correct by what other people think is correct. The downside is that, as Walter Lippman put it, “Where all are thinking alike, no one is thinking very much.”
Posted by Tom Polanski in Ethics, Opinions on February 18th, 2009
Ethics in Marketing – A Clear Conscience Is Better Than a Fat Wallet
By Tom Polanski
Marketing created to exploit the uninformed is reprehensible. For better and for worse, depersonalization and anonymity are part and parcel of the web. Since online companies no longer have to live and work in the communities they sell their products and services too, they’re left with names and numbers without a human connection. Too many online marketers have forgotten that we’re still doing business with people who have hopes, dreams and fears just like we do. Many of us have lost or have never been granted the gift of empathy and, interestingly, isn’t a lack of empathy one of the hallmarks of the sociopath?
Posted by Tom Polanski in Ethics on May 22nd, 2008