A Thesis Presented to
The Faculty of Alfred University
Unethical Marketing: Why the Bad Works so Good
by
Julie Canova
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
The Alfred University Honors Program May 2016
Under the Supervision of:
Chair: Amy B Rummel, Professor of Marketing
Committee Members:
Cole A Racho, Adjunct Professor of Marketing
Pamela D Schultz, Professor of Communication Studies
Abstract
Since the early 2000s, “business ethics scandals” have risen enormously.
More so, many researchers believe that marketing ethics was directly involved in many of these scandals (Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005). Unethical marketing is a large segment of marketing that is surprisingly used by many companies. The research and data collected for this project emphasizes that factors such as gender, age, and the “ethical conscience” of people effects their personal views toward particular advertisements that utilize unethical marketing tactics. In addition, this research theorizes that unethical marketing strategies generally have positive effects in terms of influencing consumer behavior. Therefore, this project illustrates how companies are capable of influencing consumer behavior in order to promote a company’s image and create brand loyalty with consumers despite the implementation of unethical practices.
It is important to note and understand now, that this research was done in order to explain how companies market and communicate underlying messages via unethical marketing advertisements. The creation of these messages by marketers and thus the anticipated understanding of these messages by consumers may be intentional or unintentional. Meaning that often, an advertisement may portray one thing (such as the company’s product), yet depict an underlying message (such as the objectification of women). These marketing strategies and advertisements are usually determined via the overall ethics of a company.
Keywords: marketing, unethical marketing, tactics, methods, usage, utilization
Introduction
The creation of the concept, “Unethical Marketing: Why the Bad works so Good”, is not something that came to me over night. The design of this thesis topic was actually quite a journey. While reflecting on my academic experiences of my undergraduate studies, I thought about a particular topic in marketing that is often undervalued and not explored enough. The topic, unethical marketing, is a facet of marketing in which I have minimal research background. The origin of studying this topic began as a result of some personal assignments that I completed during my sophomore year at Alfred University. In the fall of 2013, my first semester of my sophomore year, my curriculum required me to take a class titled Marketing 221: Marketing Principles and Management. Dr. Amy Rummel taught this class, an introduction class, in marketing. In this class, Dr. Rummel teaches about many of the foundations relevant to the field of marketing. One of the fundamental aspect’s that is greatly involved in business, especially in marketing, is ethics. The definition of ethics and its importance to marketing will be explained later, however, it is relevant to mention now in order to understand how my thesis topic developed.
After introducing the overall topic of ethics in marketing, Dr. Rummel incorporated the subtopic (although it is rather lengthy) of unethical marketing. Although the lesson on unethical marketing was limited to one class, and thus brief, it was obvious that unethical marketing is an issue of great importance. The main takeaway from the lesson was that unethical marketing could have effects on both marketers and consumers. In order to understand the topic of unethical marketing further, my class was assigned the task of finding an article/advertisement that displayed unethical marketing. After finding a
particular article/advertisement, we were to explain the effect(s) it had on both the company and consumers involved.
My assumption at first was that this was just another “typical homework
assignment”. The assignment would require approximately an hour worth of research, but not much more would come of it, aside from a grade. This, however, was not the case. As my research began, I became heavily invested in the topic and explored much more than just one article/advertisement. The assignment ended up becoming an eye opening experience for me. It had never occurred to me before that many of the companies that I purchased products from, as well as were loyal to, (due to their popularity and brand) were guilty of utilizing unethical marketing practices. Similar to many other consumers, I had not had this awareness prior because my focus was not on the companies’ marketing
strategies. The companies’ product/service and brand name were the only things that mattered to me at that time. Due to my concentration with the companies’ product/service and brand, it was easy to bypass the subliminal messages that the companies’
advertisements were portraying. I had never previously found the true relevance of advertisements, company messages, and even marketing strategies, until that day, when I completed that homework assignment.
For the assignment, my instinct led me to focus on familiar companies (ones that I normally shopped from). My interests/research directed me to the company, Abercrombie and Fitch. As a frequent shopper of Abercrombie and Fitch, I had never before questioned the company and their ethics. Abercrombie and Fitch’s clothing had long been the “in thing”
amongst teens such as myself. This belief soon changed for me, however, after learning that many unethical incidents hid behind the good-‐looking shirtless man from their
advertisements. Some of these incidences included but were not limited to: the objectification of women and men, cruelty towards people of larger size, and lack of approval for differences amongst people. Many of these occurrences went unnoticed until the company’s CEO foolishly admitted to some of them via an interview. My comments on these incidences will end here due to the fact that Abercrombie and Fitch is one of the company’s that is later discussed in my research.
My classmates explained that other companies had also utilized unethical marketing methods just as Abercrombie and Fitch did. Companies such as Reebok, Peta, and Burger King were all examples given. Conversely to the situation Abercrombie and Fitch faced, the overwhelming majority of these companies used unethical marketing tactics with no
negative responses resulting. The ads of these companies worked to the extent that the negative effects we’d assume (decrease of brand awareness, decrease of product/service purchase, decrease of likeliness, etc.) were seen minimally or even not at all. This
information was surprising to me, and thus from all of this evidence, my first theory about unethical marketing arose. My theory was that unethical advertisements, and their true meaning(s), tend to go unnoticed by consumers. As a result, marketers tend to use unethical marketing tactics to their advantage because it does not negatively affect their brand or theirs sales. The key question that remained for me then was, “how do marketers do this?”
Once again, the ability to explore the topic of unethical marketing arose later in that same semester of the fall of 2013. This time, however, the research was done in order to complete a leadership issues paper for the Alfred University Women’s Leadership Academy. This time however, the focus for my research was “how unethical marketing
negatively affects women”. While studying advertisements, it was apparent that unethical marketing strategies were widely used by various marketers and companies. In particular, it was recognizable that although marketers do not want consumers to view their company, products, and services negatively, the objectification of women is a reoccurring strategy that is used. Why then do marketers use unethical marketing methods? Is there an underlying motive that we, as consumers, are not aware of? Is unethical marketing beneficial?
In those questions lies the origin of my research for this thesis. The answers to these questions lie ahead in this project. My lack of understanding about the accurate outcomes of unethical marketing in the past essentially was what led to this hypothesis and research. The reality, as you will see, is that many consumers tend to dismiss or forget about companies unethical actions due to the appeal of unethical advertisements. In
addition, consumers’ tend to have strong loyalty to brand(s). Consequently, consumers are likely to ignore/not worry about ethics when it comes to making purchasing due to the fact that they are more concerned with the appeal of products and or services rather than the
“unethicalness”.
There is some prior research that studies the dynamics of unethical marketing such as: Exonerating Unethical Marketing Executive Behaviors: A Diagnostic Framework
(Mascarenhas, O. J. 1995), The Ethical and Unethical Dimensions of Marketing
(Vassilikopoulou, A., Siomkos, G., & Rouvaki, C., 2008), and Marketing Mix-‐ An Area of Unethical Practices? (Siham, B., Dr. 2013). Though I mention these works here, I simply provide them as additional resources since they too discuss unethical marketing.
Nevertheless, I will not make any references to these articles throughout my own work
because my work is principally different from these studies, due to the fact that my focus is on how unethical marketing tactics work well. Little to no data exists today about the beneficial usage of unethical marketing strategies. This data is valuable because it
addresses how/why marketers use unethical marketing tactics. In addition, the outcomes of the usage of these unethical marketing methods are significant in showing the effect(s) these methods have on both marketers and consumers.
The research of this project, therefore, focuses on the methods of unethical marketing and why/how they works so well in advertising products and services to consumers despite their immoral nature. The title, “Unethical Marketing: Why the Bad Works so Good” was created in order to emphasize that unethical marketing tactics are morally deemed “bad” by society and most consumers, however, the usage of the unethical marketing is generally “good” for companies. This concept will be further explained
throughout the project.
The usage of unethical marketing tactics can have various effects on the relationship between marketers and consumers that sometimes may be negative. However, this
research attempts to explain that the general outcomes of unethical marketing methods are almost always positive. The positives that are highlighted throughout this research explain that frequently companies use the (sometimes) negative outcomes of unethical marketing to their advantage in order to create “good” outcomes. For example, unethical marketing tactics can in a sense “backfire” due to public backlash, however, this project explains how companies use this to their advantage in order to better understand their consumers. When unethical marketing strategies “fail” at achieving a goal such as selling a product or service, increasing brand loyalty, and/or promoting a company, companies are able to discover and
often fix issues that exist both internally and externally. This is beneficial for companies in order to improve their product/services and thus maintain brand loyalty amongst
consumers. Various examples of unethical marketing strategies and effects (both positive and negative) but overall “good” will be shown throughout the project in order to
understand the depth of the hypothesis.
Literature Review and Research
Ethics in Marketing
The book, Ethical Marketing, by Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein (2005) is from a series of books by Prentice Hall called, Basic Ethics in Action (p. xix). The book provides the definitions of ethical and unethical marketing, as well as, helps the reader understand the frameworks of both of these segments of marketing. “Between 65 and 75 percent of all managers do indeed face major ethical dilemmas at some point in their careers. An ethical dilemma is defined…as a situation where it is not clear what choice morality requires”
(Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005). This fact is relevant in understanding the basis of how/why marketers fall prey to utilizing unethical marketing tactics. Although unethical marketing methods are deemed wrong morally, their usage is extremely effective. We will later see this theory defended with real world examples from ten companies, as well as, with data that has been collected in order to further explain/prove the effectiveness of unethical marketing tactics.
“Marketing ethics is the systemic study of how moral standards are applied to marketing decisions, behaviors, and institutions” (as cited in Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, &
Klein, 2005, p. xvii). Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, and Klein (2005) add to their earlier definition of unethical marketing saying that the definition also includes, “practices that
emphasize transparent, trustworthy, and responsible personal and or/organizational marketing policies and actions that exhibit integrity as well as fairness to consumers and other stakeholders” (p. xviii). Ethics in marketing is tricky to determine due to two factors:
morality and the normative of marketing ethics (Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005, p.
xviii-‐xix). Fundamentally, morals are defined as a person’s values that arise from their background (family, friends, religion, etc.). Morality, in regards to ethical marketing, focuses on the intentions and consequences of particular situations (Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005, p. xviii). Examples of these situations include the creation of a marketing strategy and promotion of products and/or services. The normative of marketing ethics therefore focuses on what is morally acceptable (Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005, p.xix).
The role of marketing ethics includes a personal view, organizational view, an industry view, a societal view, and a stakeholder view (Murphy, Laczniak, Bowie, & Klein, 2005, p. 2-‐10). For the purpose of this project, the main views, in order of least importance to greatest, include personal (my own), industry, and societal. This is due to the research method that is later employed.
Unethical Marketing Strategies
“Ethical marketing is less of a marketing strategy and more of a philosophy that informs all marketing efforts” (“Ethical Marketing”, n.d.). The concept behind ethical marketing is to be straightforward and authentic so that customers believe in a company and its products and/or services. Every company usually has a code of ethics. However, some utilize unethical marketing approaches because it is not illegal (“Ethical Marketing”, n.d.). It is hard to determine a standard of ethics for marketing because what may be right
to one company could be wrong to another. Marketing is all about gaining a competitive advantage (“Ethical Marketing”, n.d.). Unethical marketing, therefore, can allow companies to achieve this by making their product/service seem more desirable. Therefore, unethical marketing tactics can be just as successful, if not more successful than ethical marketing tactics.
“Ethical Marketing” defines seven various types of unethical marketing. They include: surrogate advertising, exaggeration, puffery, unverified claims, stereotyping women, false brand comparison, and children in advertising (“Ethical Marketing”, n.d.).
This list, however, does not include every type of unethical marketing that exists.
Stereotyping women is also linked to the objectification of women. As this project will later discuss, women are often used as sexual objects in marketing to make a company’s
project/service more desirable and appealing to consumers. Another general type of unethical marketing that is not referenced in this article, but is well known, is what I would term “offensive marketing”. Examples of offensive marketing include: when companies target particular people or groups of people, negate (based on age, gender, race, and other factors) certain consumers, or use inappropriate language or pictures. When people in society recognize this occurrence, it is likely, that they will make it known to others via media outlets. This concept is extremely relevant throughout this work.
Stan Mack, a business writer, defines four types of commonly used unethical marketing approaches: misleading advertising, exploitation, spam, and pushy sales tactics (Mack, n.d.). For the purpose of my research, understanding the methods of misleading advertising and exploitation are important. Misleading advertising includes making claims for a product/service that it cannot actually fulfill (Mack, n.d.). For example, many weight
loss pills promise that you’ll lose 10lbs in one week. This claim makes the product look more appealing, however, without scientific proof this assertion cannot be made.
Exploitation involves taking advantage of people due to their fears or their lack of knowledge (Mack, n.d.). For example, some insurance companies may trick buyers into purchasing more insurance than they need for their house, car, and even lives. The
insurance seller institutes fear into the consumer and makes it seem that without this extra insurance he/she will be in danger if something bad happens.
Importance of Communication to Marketing and Ethics
In any business, communication is a key attribute to a company’s success. Business communication occurs both internally, and externally in a company (Vitez, n.d.). The most fundamental and common steps for marketing communications include: “creating a message, selecting a communication channel, sending the message and responding to feedback” (Vitez, n.d.). In order to be successful, marketers must be able to effectively communicate some sort of message via a network to a consumer. These networks are more formally known as communication channels (Vitez, n.d.). Communication channels include but are not limited to: “television commercials, radio advertisements, [and] print media ads”(Vitez, n.d.). By using these various communication channels, markets can deliver a message from the company to the consumer.
These messages are broken into two strategies: direct and indirect (Vitez, n.d.).
Determining which strategy to use is dependent upon what message a marketer is trying to produce to their audience (consumers). It is quite possible at times, that marketers using unethical marketing tactics, do not want their consumer to be directly aware of the message their advertisement promotes. In these circumstances, an indirect method will
likely be utilized. Later, this project will show that unethical marketing methods tend to not be explicit and are in actuality promoted via subliminal messages that are possessed within advertisements.
Furthermore, “marketing communication helps to develop brand awareness, which means that consumers translate product information into perceptions about the product’s attributes and its position in within the larger market” (Greene, n.d.). Brand awareness is one of the key aspects involved in marketing communication. If consumers don’t know about a brand, how does a company expect to sell its product and/or service? Brand
awareness is, therefore, tied in with the concept of brand recognition. Although consumers may be aware of brands, it does not mean that those brands will remain in the forefront of their minds. In order to be recognizable, brands need to create a particular logo, slogan, or trademark that makes them stand out. Companies with the most loyal consumers tend to have strong brands that are recognizable and can be easily remembered by consumers.
Although codes of ethics can vary by company, the American Marketing Association (AMA) does have a standard of ethics that is vital to marketing communications (Ashe-‐
Edmunds, n.d.). The statement from AMA “requires its members to do no harm, foster trust in the marketing system, and embrace ethical values” (Ashe-‐Edmunds, n.d.).
Communicating ethical messages, as this project will show, tends to be more beneficial to marketers. Companies that use unethical marketing strategies end up having to use the
“bad” (unethical marketing methods) to find “good”.
Brief Overview of Consumer Behavior
When studying consumer behavior, one thing is obvious, “humans rarely choose things in absolute terms” (Ariely, 2009, p. 2). Dan Ariely, in his book, Predictably Irrational:
The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions, makes a “fundamental observation: most people don’t know what they want unless they see it in context” (Ariely, 2009, p. 3). This explains why consumers respond so immediately to advertisements. Advertisements are a quick picture that implements a message into the consumer’s mind about the company’s product and/or service. Ariely proposes that consumers are always relating things to what surrounds them (Ariely, 2009, p. 7). As a result of this, consumers are likely to compare items on a daily basis. Marketers are aware of this, and thus work to position themselves in the best way possible in order to gain a competitive advantage.
Habitually, it is thought that people like choices. One will come to learn, however, that this is not the case once they begin to study consumer behavior. In the book, “The Paradox of Choice: why more is less”, author, Barry Schwartz, explains how consumers in reality don’t prefer having a variety of choices and thus don't like making decisions (Schwartz, 2004). Every choice a person makes has an impact on their life. Whether it is choosing which cereal to buy at the store, or whether or not to attend college, every choice made, big or small, has an effect. The problem most times is that “we’re so caught up in doing, there’s really no time to stop and think” (Schwartz, 2004, p. 22). Although some consumers plan to go shopping, once they arrive at a store, it is unlikely that their decisions will be based on intense thought. Think, for instance, about when you, a consumer, go to a grocery store. Even though consumers may make lists, when purchasing certain items, it is probable that their decisions will be made based on price and need. It is also plausible to assume that when grocery shopping, consumers tend to purchase from the same brands.
Humans are creatures of habit.
“As our material and social circumstances improve, our standards of comparison go up” (Schwartz, 2004, p. 183). When this occurs, we increase our expectations and strive for excellence. When we fall short, we become upset. We are always looking to improve
situations for ourselves not just for our own personal gain, but also in order to adapt and fit in with society’s norms. In Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our
Decisions, the author briefly touches on how the emotions of consumers can influence their decisions (Ariely, 2009,). Based on empirical evidence, Ariel concludes “to make informed decisions, we need to somehow experience and understand the emotional state we will be in at the other side of the experience” (Ariely, 2009, p. 134). With that in mind, we must understand that consumer behavior is always changing. Although it is studied and many things do still apply in regards to the nature of humans, we must keep in mind that society is constantly shifting. What is in style now, is not likely to be popular next year. Therefore, marketers are always looking for ways to appeal to consumers and studying consumer behavior is a great way to do just that.
Ruth Bernstein, cofounder and chief strategic officer of YARD (a New York strategic image-‐making agency), depicted a real life example of my previous statement when she spoke about how consumer behavior is constantly changing (as cited in Schlossberg, 2015).
Bernstein’s remark explains that sex has always been a strong selling factor to attract consumer attention, but the methods of promoting sexual appeal are changing (as cited in Schlossberg, 2015). She describes the transition as, “a modern take on the same dynamics, that infuses meaning, that leaves room for imagination, that allows for a greater range of identity and orientation” (as cited in Schlossberg, 2015). These ideas presented by
Bernstein are significant not only to the study of consumer behavior, but also, in supporting
data later in this project. Although the projection of “selling sex” may be toned back, Bernstein validates that sex in some way will always sell (as cited in Schlossberg, 2015).
Evaluation of Companies’ and their Unethical Behavior
As you will later see, a survey was conducted for this project, in order to test the effectiveness of unethical marketing strategies. This section, the evaluation of companies’
and their unethical behavior, therefore, is relevant in order to understand a particular question (#9) that exists within said survey. Question #9 asks respondents to view ten advertisements, and choose four out of the ten advertisements that are most appealing to them. Prior to creating this question, ten advertisements needed to be chosen. In order to do so, research was conducted to determine which companies (and their advertisements) had utilized unethical marketing methods. However, in order to prevent biased data, there also needed to be options of advertisements that did not exhibit unethical marketing tactics. Therefore, of the ten companies provided, five companies were associated with unethical marketing strategies, while the other five companies were associated with ethical marketing strategies.
Company #1: Abercrombie and Fitch
Abercrombie & Fitch is a young adult retail store that sells clothing for both men and women (Lutz, 2013). The company has been well known for its “near-‐luxury lifestyle”
brand (Darroch, 2014). The brand, according to market specialist Jenny Darroch, has always been clear, and successful in identifying a particular target market (Darroch, 2014).
In the article, “Targeting: A Mandate for Brand Success”, author Walker Smith, the Executive Chairman of The Futures Company, explains that the concept of targeting is significant in supporting the mission and purpose of a company (Smith, 2013). By
targeting, companies are able to identify and thus provide products and/or services that are particular to the needs/wants of the consumers they are focusing on (Smith, 2013).
In studying consumer behavior, I have learned that consumers’ age plays a big role in identifying the appropriate target market. When considering age, marketers must consider what group (Baby Boomers, Millennials, Generation X, Generation Y, etc.) a consumer is a part of. Generally, the age of a consumer, will determine his/her current identity,
experiences, and amount of income. Retail analyst with SG Cowen, Lauren Cooks Levitan makes a meaningful point that teens “disposable income equals their spendable income”
(as cited in Bayot, 2003). This is significant for companies because it allows them to in a sense take advantage of teens. During the teenage years, there is nothing more important than social acceptance and the need to belong. Having brand name clothes and wearing what everyone else does is of the upmost importance to most teenagers. Abercrombie and Fitch’s “retail concept is exclusionary by design” and “targets certain kind of teens” (Smith, 2013). By doing so, Abercrombie and Fitch create a demand amongst teens and becomes popular.
In the past (I discuss the past due to the advertisement used in my survey), Abercrombie and Fitch focused on sexualized marketing especially via their
advertisements. Vox Media, a digital media company, runs an editorial brand called Racked.
In an article from Racked, writer Erika Adams quotes the Senior Vice President of Marketing for Abercrombie and Fitch, Craig Broomers, saying, “If you think about
Abercrombie and Fitch ten years ago, that was some of the best retail theater in the world”
(Adams, 2015). Laura French, a writer from WorldFinance.com validates this with numeric values in her article “Jeffries and Abercrombie’s Ugly Truth” (French, 2015). French reports
from Business Insider that, “Looking back, success [for Abercrombie] was undeniable.
Between 1995 and 2008, sales grew 20-‐fold and net income increased more than 56-‐fold each year” (as cited by French, 2015). The CEO, Mike Jeffries, converted Abercrombie from a sporting good/hunting store into a well-‐liked clothing store for teens (French, 2015).
During this time, sex was the main selling factor for the company. French once again reports critical data to support this notion. French states that from 1992 to 2012, Abercrombie went from having 36 stores with an annual profit of $50 million to having 1,000 stores with an annual profit of over $4.5 billion (French, 2015). Abercrombie and Fitch employees were called “models” and had to fit the “ideal standard” and a particular clothing size that the company set in order to be hired. Abercrombie & Fitch’s largest sizes for women were a large in shirts and a 10 in pants (Lutz, 2013).
On May 3, 2013, Ashley Lutz, a writer of BusinessInsider.com, wrote an article titled,
“Abercrombie & Fitch Refuses To Make Clothes For Large Women”. In her article, Lutz (2013) explores the exclusion of particular consumers (extreme targeting) and the
negative effects it has on Abercrombie and Fitch’s sales and reputation. The company then stated that the only reason sizes XL and XXL were offered for men was due to the fact that attractive/muscular men, such as athletes, wear those sizes (Lutz, 2013). Abercrombie &
Fitch didn’t want “overweight women wearing their brand” (Lutz, 2013). The reason for this, according to Abercrombie & Fitch, was because plus size women were not considered conventional beauty and thus not cool enough to wear the company’s clothing (Lutz, 2013).
Occurrences such as these led to investigation into the company and questioning/controversy surrounding their ethics.
In order to determine what was going on with Abercrombie and Fitch’s marketing strategy and unethical methods, a look into the company's past was required. In 2006, Salon Magazine interviewed the CEO of Abercrombie & Fitch, Mike Jeffries. It wasn’t until seven years later (2013) that society became more aware of this interview and thus the truly unethical behavior that the CEO and Abercrombie & Fitch portrayed. Two major statements that CEO, Mike Jeffries made in this article are as followed. In his interview with Salon, Jeffries stated, “In every school there are the cool and popular kids, and then there are the not-‐so-‐cool kids…we go after the cool kids…a lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely” (Lutz, 2013). Jeffries didn’t want fat people to work or shop in his store because it threw off the company brand and image. Good-‐looking models were hired in order to attract others just like them.
Jeffries explained, “We want to market to cool, good-‐looking people. We don’t market to anyone other than that” (Lutz, 2013).
Abercrombie & Fitch’s marketing strategy was unethical due to the excessive usage of sex as a selling point, the offensive targeting of particular consumers, and the
objectification of both men and women. Much of this would have likely been ignored were it not for the reappearing of Jeffries interview. Jeffries comment angered many people, even current (soon to be former) consumers of the company’s products (French, 2015). In
opposition to Jeffries and Abercrombie, a petition, eventually signed by 68,000 people surfaced on change.com (French, 2015). Although Jeffries did apologize, the company would soon plummet downhill. Evidence of various lawsuits against Abercrombie came to the attention of the media and critics of the company arose (French, 2015). Dwight Hill, a Partner at MacMillian Doolittle commented on the situation saying that Abercrombie was
in an “ethically in tune market” and the company’s failure to adapt was what caused their demise (as cited in French, 2015).
At the time, Abercrombie and Fitch failed to see that society was revolutionizing. In America, especially, obesity was becoming more common and women were likely to be more curvy and plus sized than that had been in the past (Lutz, 2013). Being plus sized didn’t make these women any less beautiful than skinny women, so it was a mistake on Abercrombie’s part to personally attack this group. Although the company’s marketing strategy focused on targeting, the CEO should have never have made such blatant and offensive comments towards larger women and “uncool kids”. In addition, Abercrombie’s biggest competitor, American Eagle, saw how society had changed and thus added up to size XXL for both men and women (Lutz, 2013). Abercrombie’s standards were too
outdated and it is cost them not only customer loyalty, but also gave them a bad reputation.
Thus far, the example of unethical marketing usage for Abercrombie and Fitch seems to only have had negative outcomes, but that is not the case. The reality of the situation is that Abercrombie and Fitch actually ended up benefiting from their usage of unethical
marketing methods by learning from their mistakes. Due the public backlash the company received, together with their decrease in sales, the company became aware that it was time to make massive changes. Beginning in 2015, “the company began a revamp that included everything from its fashions to its sexy advertising” (Garcia, 2015). Mallory Schlossberg of BusinessInsider.com emphasizes that Abercrombie’s rebranding is noticeable due to fewer logos on products, adherence to new trends, cutback of employee hiring policy based on physical attributes, and abandoning of sexual marketing tactics (Schlossberg, 2015).
Another writer, Tonya Garcia, from MarketWatch.com, further highlights five things Abercrombie and Fitch has done right since the reveal of their unethical marketing
methods (Garcia, 2015). These five things include: redesigning/restocking stores with new inventory, expanding international markets, remodeling of physical store layouts,
diversifying staff (no longer called models), and widening the variety of items available in their children’s department (Garcia, 2015).
A representative of Abercrombie and Fitch states,
“As a company, we are focused on our customers and providing them with a great experience. We announced a number of changes to our policies earlier this year, including the elimination of sexualized imagery…many of these changes were based on feedback from our customers and we are pleased to see that our updated imagery is resonating with them” (Schlossberg, 2015).
Abercrombie and Fitch, is the first of many companies that used unethical marketing methods in order to help rebrand. Later data will show that despite this rocky history, Abercrombie and Fitch is still a popular company amongst consumers and for various reasons.
Company #2: Bud Light (Budweiser/Anheuser Busch)
The Anheuser Busch Company is a company built on tradition, and thus has been crafting numerous beers the same way for approximately 160 years (“Our Company”, n.d.).
On Forbes Lists, Anheuser Busch InBev is #461 for America’s Best Employers, #193 in sales, #41 in profit, #186 in assets, #22 in market value, #79 innovate companies (2014) and as of May of 2015, has a market value of $205 billion (Forbes, 2015a). “Best known for its fine American-‐style lagers, Budweiser and Bud Light, the company’s beers lead
numerous beer segments and combined hold 46.4 percent share of the U.S. beer market”
(“Our Company”, n.d.). “Bud Light is the top selling beer in the U.S.” (“Our Beers”, n.d.).
In the United States, it is legal for anyone over the age of 21 to buy and consume alcohol. Discussing alcohol usage and ethics today is quite complicated because there are (and probably always will be) people who say that alcohol usage is ethical and others who say that it is unethical. Professor and author, Dr. Arthur Dobrin comments on this situation saying, “The difficulty is deciding whether drinking should be condoned or condemned is, in part, because of the morally ambiguous environment in which we live” (Dobrin, 2012).
Dr. Dorbin further explains that the ethics relative to alcohol consumption in most cases a social aspect (Dobrin, 2012). Therefore, people tend to make a decision to drink alcohol based on “proper social context” of where they are, whom they are around, and the current situation (Dobrin, 2012).
Societal pressures often push people to conform and make some unethical decisions, in regards to alcohol, such as drinking underage, drinking excessively, and/or drinking too often (alcoholics for example). In the U.S., I would argue that alcohol usage is generally not seen as unethical issue. Alcohol is quite common in the U.S. and it is an especially popular product sold at major sporting events (NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA, WNBA). In addition, many other facets of American society are connected with alcohol consumption such as cocktail parties, going to the bar for drinks with friends/coworkers, New Years Eve parties, and more. Data collected later in this project will further support these statements.
Beginning in 2013, Bud Light began, what is referred to, as their biggest and
possibly best campaign ever, The “Up For Whatever” Campaign (Event Marketer, 2015). To summarize, the campaign was a new marketing strategy for Bud Light in order to reach a
specific target market, millennials (ages 21-‐27). The concept was to pull Bud Light away from the older generation and bring it back into the younger generation. The new motto for this campaign, in order to appeal to millenials, was “the perfect beer for whatever happens”
(Event Marketer, 2015). The first segment of the campaign was released via a commercial during the 2013 Super Bowl; it featured a millennial consumer engaging in a crazy night out playing games and going to a concert, and overall living in the moment (Event
Marketer, 2015). As a result of this commercial, Twitter was flooded with #UpForWhaveter tweets and marketing agency, Mosaic turned these tweets into live news feed via Bud Light’s YouTube channel (Event Marketer, 2015). This however, was only the beginning to what would become a viral campaign.
The campaign kept growing, and in March of 2014, Bud Light transformed a town in Crested Butte, CO into an actual place called Whatever, USA (Event Marketer, 2015). For 3 months, Mosaic hosted over 22,000 events and various contests for the “Up for Whatever”
campaign with the winners being granted (1,000 people total) a 3 day stay in Whatever, USA (Event Marketer, 2015). This approach was extremely revolutionary and by doing so, Bud Light was able to create an enormous brand image/loyalty amongst consumers.
Despite the success of the Up for Whatever Campaign, Bud Light did make one huge mistake that was regarded as unethical by many women. To coincide with the Up for Whatever Campaign, Bud Light made tweeted constantly and made various new labels for their beer bottles and cans. The tweets and labels both related to the overall marketing message of the campaign of being carefree, having fun, and making spur-‐of-‐the-‐moment decisions. However, two occurrences thus far took wrong turns and the messages ended up being extremely offensive.
The first was a tweet from St. Patrick’s that said, “You can pinch people who don’t wear green. You can also pinch people who aren’t #UpForWhatever” (Strom, 2015).
Although some may argue that this message is harmless, there were critics that felt the tweet was promoting sexual harassment (Strom, 2015). The reason most likely is due to the fact that you cannot touch people without their consent. In response to the critics, Bud Light deleted the tweet. This incident, however, would not be the last related to the “Up for Whatever” Campaign.
Shortly after the tweet, a controversial label related to the “Up for Whatever”
Campaign was created. The label stated, “The perfect beer for removing ‘no’ from your vocabulary for the night” (Strom, 2015). During a time when rape is a continual topic of discussion, especially date rape on college campuses, Bud Light did not think this message through before marketing it. Critics of the label said it was not only offensive to women but also to men, who as well may be victims of rape and sexual assault (Strom, 2015). In
addition, Nita Lowey, Democratic congresswomen from New York wrote that the label could insight ideas of drunk driving and extreme alcohol consumption (as cited in Strom, 2015). In light of the negative public backlash, Bud Light did the appropriate thing and removed the slogan from its marketing strategy (Strom, 2015). Furthermore, Alexander Lambrecht (Vice President of Anheuser Busch) issued a public apology saying, “It’s clear that this message missed the mark, and we regret it…we would never condone
disrespectful or irresponsible behavior” (Strom, 2015).
Although these situations with Bud Light may not seem extreme in the big picture of the overall “Up for Whatever” Campaign, they are still significant in regards to the usage unethical marketing tactics. The two incidences both utilized unethical marketing
strategies via indirect sexual misconducts. The tweet and label both caused public backlash, but Bud Light was able to diffuse the situations and thus still remains popular amongst consumers. The Bud Light examples are relevant in showing that despite unethical happenings, consumers are likely to remain loyal to brands that they like. Later in the project there is data that further supports this notion.
Company #3:Marlboro
Marlboro is a famous brand of cigarettes owned and manufactured by the company, Phillip Morris International (PMI, n.d.). The Marlboro brand was originally founded as a women’s cigarette, but with the creation of the Marlboro Man, it soon became marketed and made for men (Forbes, 2015b). The company began producing this brand of cigarettes in 1924 in Richmond, Virginia (PMI, n.d.). “By the mid-‐1950s, the Company had become a part of American culture, and soon after it launched Phillip Morris International (PMI) to manufacture and market its products around the world” (PMI, n.d.). Similar to alcohol, cigarettes are always a controversial issue in regards to ethics. To some people, smoking cigarettes may be seen as a vice that causes lung cancer and other health issues, but to other people it may be seen as a habit of leisure and relaxation. The discussion in regards to ethical issues related to tobacco (cigarettes being included in this) seems to be ongoing and endless.
For the purpose of this research, there is no need to discuss at length all of the ethical issues associated with the tobacco industry. What is, however, necessary, is addressing the current marketing campaigns that Marlboro has been utilizing. The most recent marketing campaign (as of 2011) of Marlboro is the “Don’t be a Maybe”, “Be Marlboro” (Boseley, 2014). Multiple Marlboro advertisements have been promoted with
young people doing radical things as the focal point. For example, the one used later in this research has two young people, a man and a woman, kissing with the slogan “Maybe Never Fell in Love”, “Be Marlboro” (Boseley, 2014). Many critics are scolding Marlboro saying that the advertisements are aiming to “recruit new young smokers” (Boseley, 2014). Although Marlboro states this is not the case, it is hard to believe otherwise since the advertisements associate being young, cool, and adventurous with smoking cigarettes. John Stewart, the Challenge Big Tobacco campaign director at Corporate Accountability International called out Marlboro’s tactics saying, “This report shines a light on the often illegal and always unethical tactics PMI uses to continue to addict people to its deadly products” (as cited by Boseley, 2014).
Although this campaign has not been used in the US (due to the strict laws against marketing tobacco products to children), it has been executed in over 50 countries (Stampler, 2014). Phillip Morris International spokesperson, Iro Antoniadou denied all allegations against Marlboro’s campaign and was quoted in an email to TIME saying, “Our Marlboro campaign, like all of our marketing and advertising, is aimed exclusively at adult smokers and is conducted in compliance with local regulations and internal marketing policies…Allegations to the contrary are unfounded and based on subjective interpretation”
(as cited by Stampler, 2014). Despite the critics, Marlboro is one of the few company’s that stays loyal to their marketing strategies. Although this seems risky, there have been no truly negative consequences for Marlboro. Marlboro has for now “snuck by” and gotten away with utilizing what many believe to be unethical marketing strategies. The “bad” for them, is still working rather “good” since 1972, as Marlboro remains the world’s #1 brand for cigarettes (Forbes, 2015b). “Marlboro commanded 43.8% of the U.S. cigarette market in
2014, bigger then the 11 next brand combined…Outside the U.S., Marlboro’s share is bigger than the next two largest brands combined” (Forbes, 2015b). On Forbes List of The World’s Most Valuable Brands, Marlboro ranks #27 and has a brand value of $19.7 billion as of May 2015 (Forbes, 2015b). For Marlboro, it seems that many consumers remain loyal to their brand, even though, the company is heavily accused of utilizing unethical marketing tactics.
Company #4: SKYY Vodka
“Inspired by innovation, driven by progress, and motivated by taste” these are the phrases used to described the story of SKYY Vodka on their website (SKYY Vodka, n.d.). The short story regarding this vodka’s history was that in order to make a better martini, there first needed to be better vodka (SKYY Vodka, n.d.). In the Bud Light section, the ethics of alcohol was briefly discussed. The same information is applicable to SKYY Vodka. The difference between Bud Light and SKYY Vodka’s marketing strategies is extremely
apparent. Though Bud Light did utilize some unethical marketing methods, SKYY Vodka’s use of unethical marketing tactics is much more consistent, and easily observable to consumers.
In 1998, SKYY Vodka approached Lambesis branding company, knowing fully that their company was entering into an extremely competitive market (Lambesis, n.d.). Many brands of vodka were already in existence, and popular amongst consumers, so SKYY had to do something special. “To distinguish the brand from the rest of the market, Lambesis set out to develop communications that would be image-‐based stories of cinematic cocktail moments featuring the distinctive blue bottle” (Lambesis, n.d.). SKYY campaign entered the product into the realms of TV & film, interactive online ads, print ads, out of home ads (billboards and posters), and even unique packaging design. SKYY’s campaign allowed it to
become of the most successful vodka’s (Lambesis, n.d.). The brand has received numerous awards and recognition such as “the prestigious Hot Brand Award” for the past eleven years (Lambesis, n.d.). “Lambesis’ campaign for SKYY has been cited as a case study in effective positioning, branding and creative strategy in multiple marketing and advertising textbooks (Lambesis, n.d.). Despite the usage of very sexy ads, SKYY Vodka has received minimal public backlash for its unethical marketing method.
SKYY’s print ads tend to be extremely sexual, as will be shown later in the methods employed section. SKYY tends to “push the limit” and often makes innuendos to sex. The ad shown later depicts a SKYY bottle with a cherry stem at the top. The stem has two cherries attached to it, with the cherries being held on each side by women’s lips’ (so it looks like).
The claim to “get your head out of the gutter” could be made in this situation, by looking at SKYY’s ads as a whole, it is unlikely that a viewer of this ad would be wrong to think in terms of sex. There was one particular article from USAToday.com in which writer, Bruce Horovitz commented on SKYY Vodka’s tendency to use sex (Horovitz, 2010). Horovitz article was in reference to the sexual insinuation of one of SKYY’s ads that feature the SKYY Vodka bottle being caressed by women’s legs in red leather boots (Horovitz, 2010). In his article, Horovitz quotes branding expert, Steven Addis saying, “It’s just jamming a bottle up a woman’s crotch…A great ad uses heart or mind. This one’s starting below the waist” (as cited by Horovitz, 2010). In response to the comment, Maura McGinn, SKYY’s marketing director countered saying, “It’s about the content of our product…we’re an adult product consumed mostly in the evening and in flirtatious situations” (Horovitz, 2010). Not many other criticisms of SKYY Vodka’s advertisements can be found, which leads me to believe that similar to Marlboro, SKYY Vodka is simply “good” at selling the “bad”. The company
