Since the beginning of the hard-working process of effective marketing, customer attraction concepts were warped in the wrong direction. Some of the consumers were trapped by the marketing tricks, but some of the advertisement campaigns did not target to confuse consumers, so it was done accidentally (Business Ethics Highlight, 2018). The main point of the article analysis is that some individuals are interested in whether it is possible to provide false information by its meaning without influencing the customer’s choice.
First and foremost, it is legally and morally possible to apply incorrect statements in the advertisement without misleading the customer. To be more specific, the approach involves implication of the detailed statement explanation at another part of the item wrote in the tiny font and provided with a “*” so that those customers who are interested whether the offer uses, as Business Ethics Highlights (2018) states, “x times more and x times as much interchangebly” (para. 4).
However, the main ideas of the correct market behavior and the ethics of providing false information on the product even if it does not mislead the consumer are put in the danger zone. This is due to the subjective attitude to different legal and moral explanations. For instance, some people might be misled by the statement because of the vision issues so that they cannot see the “*” and detailed product information. However, this situation might concern an effect of moral rights to object to the false attribution violation — it is really important for people to read the true information that does not deviate in any direction from the correct marketing campaign behavior.
When analyzing ethical and philosophical schools, Utilitarian would recommend giving them information that would most effectively satisfy the customer’s needs so that McCormick should rethink their marketing statement. In addition, the Kantian, who is usually opposed to Utilitarian, would imagine a world where every company would provide false information without any misleading effect on the customer (Formosa, 2017).
As a result, the world will be full of unimportant lies, which makes life only harder so that the maxima should be refused when trying to apply it in the future. Finally, providing false information without any general legal and moral rights violation is possible, but it will decrease the marketing campaign effectiveness from the ethical and philosophical point of view so that the effectiveness of such advertisement should be rethought.
References
Formosa, P. (2017). Kantian Ethics, Dignity and Perfection (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press.
The Editors. (2018). Can Ad Copy Be False but Not Misleading? If So, Is That OK? Business Ethics Highlights. Web.