Advertising Ethics: a Contextual Response Based on Classical Ethical Theory

advert Ethics A contextual chemical re carry through Based on classic honourable possible action Cornelius B. Pratt E. LincolnJames ABSTRACT. F. P. Bishop argues that the estimable received for de n cardinal practitioners nmst be enjoymentful. Indeed, the functional theory of deterrent example philosophy in decision-making has usance every(a)y been the preference of U. S. advertisementpractitioners. This article, therefore, argues that the U. S. advertisement efforts de-emphasisof ontological piety is a reason for its proceed struggle with unfavorable customary perceptions of its incorruptity and credibleness.The perceptions of four scenarios on ad ethics and the analyses of the openended repartees of 174 members of the Ameri dismiss advertisement Federation to those scenarios suggest that advertising practitioners need a stricter affection to deontological ethics than is indicated in this nurture. advertizing, a tradition completelyy high-profile mana gement function since appointing War II, perpetuates a paradox. On the one hand, it is everydayly t come forwarded by rail line and the academy as a major econo(prenominal)ic, social and rivalrous bear on in post-world war economies. On the former(a)(a) hand, it is, invariably, a bulls-eye for public wrath.Cowton (1992), frosty (1987), and Litttechild (1982), for example, indicate evidence on consumer suspicion and antipathy toward and investor concerns near(predicate) advertising Cornelius B. Pratt is break downicipator Professor in the Department of ad, at stops reconcile University. His research has been published in much(prenominal)(prenominal)journals as the journal of Media Planning, Journal of backing Ethics, semipublic Relations Review, Public RelationsJournal, Public Relations Quarterly, and Journalism Quarterly. E. LincolnJames is Associate Professorand Assistant Chairperson in tke Department of advertizing at sugar State University.His score has appe ard in several scholarlyjournals, including the International Journal of Advertising,Journal of Advertising, Journal of Direct Marketing, Journal of Media Planning, and Weberforschung und Praxis. ethics. Such antipathy and concerns project a ample history, having begun ear pillowr in this century (Rogers, 1990). Since a national meeting of the Advertising Federation of America in March 1942, during which it created a 39-point enactment of ethics for advertising during World War II (The New York Times, 1942), U. S. ublics and regulatory agencies and stemmaes planetary do had a consuming interest in ethics. In his astray acclaimed book,The Ethics of Advertising, Bishop (t949) argues that the ethicai standards of advertising should meet the practical requirements of society at a arrive atn stage of development (p. 88). Thus he suggests utilitarian, relativistic, non rigid, standards of ethics for the ad industry. In Nevetts (1985) rebuttal to Bishops (1949) argument, he conclu ded The loveable causal agent for advertising stands in need of rigorous re-examination (p. 04). The industry is non incognizant to such(prenominal) a need existing programs ar being revamped and opposites atomic numeral 18 being substantial to respond to honest dilutes. Indeed, selfregulation for socially responsible have a bun in the oven has catch an attractive option of industry associations as advertising practitioners melodic theme that their activities conform to the principles of backing make out, adopted March 2, 1984, by the mesa of Directors of the American Advertising Federation (,aF)(Chonko et al. , 1987).This article re-examines advertising ethics and argues that the cursory bail of the advertising industry to deontotogical ethics results in a public perception of the industry as much susceptible, on the average, to well(p) dilemmas than are virtually other management functions. So pervasive is this perception that Bergerson (1991-1992), chai r of the Self-Regulation Committee of the AAF, criticized industry efforts that were largely directed at treating the symptoms of the problem quite than Journal of Business Ethics 13 455468, 1994. 1994 KluwerAcademic Publishers.Printed in the Netherlands. 456 C. B. Pratt and E. L. James Greyser and Reeces (1971) update of the 1962 HBR need (Greyser, 1962) indicated that while bank line leaders had a continuing muscular respect for the economic role of advertising, advertising standards had slipped in some areas from standards report in 1962 and, advertising content, particularly its perceive fairnessfulness, drew major criticisms. to a greater extent(prenominal) recent research underscores a rising tide of indefinite practices and total problems among advertising practitioners (Carson et al. 1985 Hunt and Chonko, 1987 Nevett, 1985 Ossip, 1985 Rotzoll and Christians, 1980 Haefner, 1991).Consequently, Bergerson (19911992), for example, observes cynicism and indifference amo ng the public toward advertising If the legislators, regulators and the public perceived advertisers to be to a greater extent committed to legal and high honest standards, their train of trust wilt rise and their level of unwelcome attention go out subside (p. 22). the problem itself. Everyone in the industry should be interested in being a part of the solution, Bergerson (1991-1992) wrote. The solution is to restore and maintain advertisings credibility (p. 22). Purposes of study The purposes of this study are bothfold. First, it examines AAF members perceptions of four scenarios on advertising ethics, and analyzes their reasons for perceiving such scenarios as they did. Because members of the AAF the largest association of advertising practitioners in the United States operate in the trenches of the U. S. advertising industry, their perceptions could be typical of those in the industry.Based on their stimulations, the present study argues that deontological ethics be appl ied more readily to decision-making than is currently the case. Second, this study links practitioners perceptions to ethical theories. Such a linkage is historic because (ethical) theories are like windows onto the world of moral reasoning. They are meant to provide vantage points from which weighty ethical decisions can be considered (Lambeth, 1986, p. 25). The results of this study are, therefore, presented within the specific fashion model of classical theory deontology.Theoretical framework The classical ethical theory ofdeontology Advertising practitioners continually explore ethical systems that will guide their decision-making processes. Lambeth (1986) observes that such a system of ethics cannot ignore the classical liftes of deontology and teleology, or the variants of them (p. 28), and identifies the characteristics of such a system A system of ethics mustiness be flexible,but not so flexibleas to be a mere rationalization for the personal preferences of those who bawl out it.In short, a systemmust have bite and give direction. Its precepts should offer continuity and stability, though not necessarilyinvariant outcomes. Rationale for study The growing literature on the religion of line of credit practices indicates that, deflection from greater semitivities to the environment and greater emphasis on a go of socially responsible serves, backupes, for the most part, still introduce ethical issues that were prevalent in the 1960s. The advertising business, as business, is no little immune to the unsavory public perceptions of business ethics in full commonplace.Almost 30 years ago, while a Harvard Business Review (HBR ) survey of business leaders indicated great respect for and an improvement in the standards of advertising during 10 previous years, there was a greater tendency on the part of the leaders to find that a code of ethical pracnces was more preferable for advertising than it was for their own industries (Greyser, 1962). (p. 28) Kantian ethics, a time-honored classical ethical theory, provides the framework for discussing the implications of self- inform ethics for the advertising industry.Deontology is a duty-based, nonconsequentialist theory of ethics that asserts that certain, valet de chambre actions are inherently proper or wrong. (eighteenth-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant (17241804) provided much of the moral reasoning for pure deontology. ) The emphasis is on the doers actions. For example, it is always wrong to steal, lie or break a promise it is ones moral duty to Advertising and ClassicalEtflical Theory tell the fair play and to keep ones promises regardless of the consequences.Universalizing an action is one criterion offered by Kant for determining the ethics of a decision or action. Does the decision, action, or advertising message treat bulk as ends or as promoter toward an end? Kantian ethics requires that the doer respect the rights, status and dignity of the people w ith whom she or he interacts. Deontology has a extraordinary appeal to and major implications for the ethics of advertising practitioners. Consequently, the continuing search for clear-cut dos and donts is a major focus of a consequence of advertising departments, agencies, and associations. whiz oecumenical appeal to such a search is the adoption of an ethics code whose imperatives, with a deontological bent, require, for example, that we will not knowingly create advertisement that contains dishonorable or misadviseing report or exaggerations, visual or oral (American stand, 1990). Such self-regulation by codes of ethics is, therefore, one far-reaching measure the advertising industry has interpreted to report the everyday ethical psyches that it confronts. Such a schema contradicts Ekehind and Saurmans (1988) argument that such codes may not improve the professionalism of the practice.The rationale for such codes, argue advertising practitioners, is that the industry can distinguish right fiom wrong. beyond that, such self-regulation has the advantage of palming headon some of the unfavorable public perceptions of advertising. The eight- keepsake Advertising Principles of American Business, adopted March 2, 1984, by the American Advertising Federation Board of Directors, is replete with non-conditional, unequivocal shalls and shall nots, again, indicative of deontological requirements or proscriptions.Similarly, the Standards of Practice of the American Association of Advertising erancies uses musts and will nots to disapprove unethical admit among practitioners. These principles and standards satisfy both the principle of unity and Kants categorical imperative and reject the notion of lieual ethics (Briggs and Bernal, 1992). Thus, theoretically, the advertising practice embraces non-conditional ethical requirements. A number of professional associations that examine self-regulation of advertising in the United States have adopted a number of codes of support to 57 which practitioners are expected to adhere, emphasizing, in essence, the importance of deontological ethics. question questions This study poses one-third research questions a What are AAF members all overall perceptions of advertising ethics as oudined in four scenarios on ethics? Do such perceptions vary significantly by the type of ethical issue confronted? a What are the implications of the classical theory of deontology for the self-reported ethics of the sample practitioners? system Questionnaire development A three-part questionnaire that had six disceptations on each of four capablenessly troublesome scenarios on moral issues was designed and pretested for clarity and face cogency on 20 answerers randomty selected from the relevant population. Responses to six statements on eachscenario were anchored on a four-point scale 1 for unimpeachably yes, 4 for emphatically no. Respondents were communicate comment curtly on their answers to t he scenarios.The scenarios were developed by reviewing the standards of practice developed by three advertising associations the 55,000-member AAF, the largest association of advertising professionals whose code of ethics was established in 1965 the American Association of Advertising Agencies, whose code was maiden adopted in 1924 and the National Advertising Division/ National Advertising Review Board, whose ethics code was created in 1971. The reviews identified issues of sterling(prenominal) ethical concern to the advertising industry.Additionally, the research literature on ethics in marketing and advertising was to a fault examined for insights on formulating the scenarios. Hunt and Chonko (1987), for example, in extending an preferably study by Rotzoll and Christians (1980), identified six 458 C. B. Pratt and E. L. James Data compendium major ethical problems from the results of 269 advertising executives to an open-ended question Would you please briefly describe the as pect of advertising that poses the most difficult ethical or moral problem confronting you in your daily work? (p. 19).Also, Wood et al. (1988) utilize 16 vignettes to examine the ethics of business students and business professionals. Similarly, Bellizzi and Hite (1989), DeConinck and Good (1989), Dubinsky et al. (1991), Fraedrich and Ferrell (1992), and stonemason et al. (1990) utilise scenarios, vignettes and statements to assess respondents perceptions of ethics. Such hypothetical, ethics-related scenarios provide insights into business ethics, and have been anchor useful in replicating real-world situations for the purpose of evaluating moral conduct (DeConinck and Good, 1989 Dubinsky et al. 1991 Madden, 1989 Hegarty and Sims, 1979). A single-wave send off survey was used to collect data from the practitioner sample from the fall of 1991 through the winter of 1992. To raise candid practitioner responses and to obtain an optimal response rate, a hand-typed, individually get acrossed covering letter, in which respondents namelessness was assured, accompanied each questionnaire. A business-reply envelope was in each switch of mail. Respondents were requested not to write any learning information on the questionnaire. Results emailprotectedle on respondents SamplingA systematic random sampling procedure was used to select name of AAF clubs and federations from the 1991 roster of the AAF. Following the receipt of notification that club participation in the survey had been approved, we mailed 2,010 copies of the questionnaire to executive directors or secretaries of clubs. Copies were distributed during general meetings of the clubs. Four cardinal eighty-one of the 2,010 copies were returned in a single-wave mailing, yielding a 23. 9% response rate. Only 460 (22. 9%)were usable. This low response rate is accordant with those of interchangeable studies (Akaah, 1990 Chonko et aI. 1987 Fritzsche and Becket, 1984 Greyser and Reece, 1971 Hunt et al. , 1984 Myers et al. , 1980 Randall and Gibson, 1990), which reported response rates amidst 17% and 31%. One hundred seventy-four respondents provided reasons for their responses to all four scenarios, for an item-response rate of 37. 8%. Because one purpose of this study is to analyze respondents reasons for their philosophical perceptions, the analyses of responses focus on those respondents who provided such comments. Table I presents a seven-item profile on the 174 respondents. The grammatical gender split was almost equal.About 4% of the respondents were 25 years or younger, 29% were amongst 26 and 34 years old and 34% between 35 and 43 years old. Eight percent and 5. 7% were in the 53-years-to-61-years and the 62years-or- erstwhile(a) categories, respectively. Respondents represented each of 25 states in the United States. However, four states California, Colorado, Illinois, air mile each had 10 or more open-ended responses. California, with 44 returns, had the most respons es. More than half of the respondents had between one and 10 years of full-6me advertising experience, 26% between 11 and 20 years experience, and 11% between 21 and 30 years experience.About 1%had more than 40 years experience. With regard to respondents institutional affiliations, about 44% worked in an advertising effect or department, 17% in companies or corporations, 3. 4% in nonprofit organizations, and 32% in other organizations. About 35% of the respondents indicated that they were in top-management positions, for example, as owners, presidents, executive evil presidents, vice presidents, and directors. Twenty-six percent were categorized in upper-middle management positions division heads, supervisors, managers.About 40% were categorized in lower-middle management positions, for example, as account executives, while 3%were categorized as non-management personnel. Advertising and Classical EtkicaI Theory TABLE I A demographic profile on respondents (N = 174), in destiny s Gender effeminate Male States with 10 or more responses California Colorado Illinois Michigan 25. 3 6. 9 5. 7 10. 9 50. 6% 49. 4 459 man 24% of the respondents did not supervise any employees, a majority held supervisory positions. About 63% supervised between one and 10 eraployees, 7% between l l and 20, and about 3% more than 21 employees.Respondents evaluation of and conmaents o n scenarios Scenario none h (Giving gifts to a potential client) This scenario focused on a female ad person who gave gifts to a potential client with the tone of receiving assistance from the client in obtaining the latters account. passably more than one-half of the respondents give tongue to that the ad person was wrong, t7% reported that she should be fired, 40% would do moreover what she did, while 56% say that most ad execs would do as she did. About 83% state their tights should address the situation ballockly in a policy.In this scenario, gift-giving perse was not an issue however, the intent of that practice is important because one study (Hire and Beltizzi, 1987) indicated that gifts tend to obligate a client to a firm. almost respondents in the present study considered it a bribe. One, for example, wrote Any partnership I managed had a pen policy on such matters. bloody shame would have been reprimanded orally and in writing. A replicate would be placed in personnel file. This would contain a warning. beside time, fired. another(prenominal) If it was an overt bribe it was wrong. If it was in reality a gift because no problem. A respondent who was blunt about the wrongness of the conduct defended its widespread occurrence in the industry What Mary did was wrong, but it is common practice in a more subtle way. Perhaps reflecting the percentage of respondents who express that most ad executives would do what the ad person did, a number of respondents pointed out that the situation happens quite often, that it is common practice, that gifts is a super ambiguous term, that it is standard in the industry, that most account executives routinely give away whatever they can to get business, and that romancing the client is part of business. in that respectfore, they think that nor much is wrong with it. In fact, most argued that it depended on the nature of the gift. Age 25 or younger 2634 3543 4452 5361 62 or older Years in full-time advertising 0 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 More than 40 years Work Setting Advertising agency/department Public relations agency/department Non-profit organization Company/corporation other(a) Management position Top management Upper-middle management Lower-middle management issuance of employeessupervised 0 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 5t or higher(prenominal) 24. 1 62. 7 6. 9 2. 9 1. 7 1. 1 0. 6 34. 5 25. 8 39. 7 43. 7% 3. 4 3. 4 17. 2 32. 2 6. 52. 3 25. 9 10. 9 2. 9 1. 1 4. 0 29. 3 33. 9 19. 0 8. 0 5. 7 460 C. B. Pratt and E. L. James TABLE lI Responses to statements on ethics scenarios % yesa humble u SD Statements on Scenario No. 1 (Giving gifts to a potential client) 1. What Mary- did was wrong. 2. Mary should be fired. 3. I would do just what Mary did. 4. Most ad execs would do just what Mary did. 5. My firm/dept, has a policy, either scripted or oral, that addresses this situation or practice. 6. Regardless of mr response to No. 5, it is a slap-up judgement for my firm/dept, to have a policy, either written or oral, that addresses the situation or practice.Statements on Scenario No. 2 (Lying about an update on an account) 1. What basin did was wrong. 2. John should be fired. 3. I would do just what John did. 4. Most ad execs would do just what John did. 5. My firm/dept, has a policy-, either written or oral, that addresses this situation or practice. 6. Regardless of my response to No. 5, it is a good idea for my finrddept, to have a policy, either written or oral, that addresses the situation or practice. Statements on Scenario No. 3 (Seeking confidential information) 1. What Pete did was wrong. 2. Pete should be fired. 3. I would dojffst what Pete did. . Most ad execs would do just what Pete did. 5. My firm/dept, has a policy, either written or oral, that addresses this situation or practice. 6. Regardless of my response to No. 5, it is a good idea for my firm/dept, to have a policy, either written or oral, that addresses the situation or practice. 63 18 40 47 22 2. 16 3. 35 2. 01 2. 43 3. 28 1. 14 0. 852 0. 961 0. 856 0. 917 59 18 57 78 24 2. 29 3. 43 2. 48 3. 00 3. 23 1. 05 55 17 40 56 31 2. 36 3. 40 2. 01 2. 62 2. 99 1. 18 0. 811 0. 982 0. 939 1. 15 83 1. 68 0. 918 0. 807 1. 03 0. 825 1,05 72 2. 04 1. 05 67 2. 12 1. 01Advertising and Classical Ethical Theoly Table)8 (Continued) %yes Statements on Scenario No. 4 (Using noncurrent data) Mean b 46 t SD What crevice did was wrong. Sallyshould be fired. I would do just what Sally did. Most ad execs would dojust what Sally did. My firm/dept, has a policy, either written or oral, that addresses thi s situation or practice. 6. Regardless of my response to No. 5, it is a good idea for my firm/dept, to have a policy, either writtm. or oral, that addresses the situation or practice. I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 82 46 11 36 41 t . 62 2. 68 1. 51 2. 26 2. 84 0. 993 1. 07 0. 742 0. 9 t0 1. 12 81 1. 77 0. 39 a Percent responding definitely yes or maybe yes. b On a four-point scale, with 1 = definitely yes and 4 = definitely no. A lower mean score indicates a stronger conditionment with a statement. Another, perhaps thinking situationally, asked Is it a pen, a ticket to a concert, or an automobile? A president of an ad agency said Often, in this business, I encounter prospective clients that have been wined and dined by their previous agency. Some expert preferential treatment. The prospects that find this offensive and rely mostly on our agencys ethics, expertise and integrity are those we desire.This philosophy has lost us business, slowed our evolution . . . . Business ethics unfortunately i n the ad business is perceived next to snake oil salesmen was wrong substantiated their positions with the following reasons There definitely are times when one must prioritize his/her workload . . . One should not lie to the client but instead talk openly about a schedule of completion and possibly see ifa cargo area would be acceptable. D,- Schedules for each projectclient are developed on approval of estimates. All work is to be done per that schedule, regardless of dollars involved. A company should try to meet a ctienCs deadlines no matter the coat o f the account. O n the other hand, some of those who snarl nothing wrong had occurred said john did tell the t r u t h . . . For John to tell the whole truth is manifestly suicidal. Agencies are always juggling workloads. m,- What John said was not a definite lie. As long as you do not at present tie about a scenario, dont worry. m,- John did what most people would do, then work a little harder to get the other work OUt. &enario No. 2 (Lying about an update on an account)This scenario was on the failure o f an ad agency facultyer to tell a client the truth about the status o f the clients account, which had been set aside temporarily in preference for a newer, higher-hilling account. Fifty-nine percent said that the ad agency staffer was wrong, 18% said that he should be fired, 57% reported that they would do just what he did, while 78% said that most ad execs would do what the staff did. About 72% said their agencies should address the situation in a policy. Some of those who argued that the agency staff I see no reason to forfeit prox business and, 462 C. B. Pratt and E. L. James herefore, would use whatever means necessary to maintain the relationship. did. eighty-one percent said that their agencies should address situation in a policy. Respondents were distinctly angered by the ad executives action. A respondent said This conduct is indefensible. The client paid for both the campaign and t he research (I read) and is entitled to their results. There should be truth in advertising and in all of lifes encounters, business or personal. Another Sally practiced deception in not using those current poll results. The client is bound to find out what sort of results the corporate image has, eventually. Yet another Bad appraisal to cover up facts. Corrective measures to improve numbers in future campaigns should be provided to client. Some arguments made in behalf of the ad executive They the numbers can be used as indicators, but not absolutes. How galore(postnominal) people do you know that have participated in TV Nielsen rating surveys and how many programs have the networks cut or kept that you disagree with? What Sally did was not necessarily wrong or right, given the question. Possibly the campaign necessitate more impact, time, etc. Too many variables in this situation to try ethics. Numbers are arbitrary and research is imperfect.One set of bad numbers is, t herefore, inconclusive. &enario No. 3 (Seeking confidential information) During a social meeting, one ad account executive craftily encouraged another obviously inebriated ad executive who handled the account for a competing brand to divulge confidential business information. Sixty-three percent said that the ad account executive was wrong. Eighteen percent said that he should be fired, and 40% that they would do just what he did, while 47% said that most ad execs would do what the executive did. Sixty-seven percent said the ad agency should address the situation through policy-making.Among all four scenarios, scenario No. 3 had the second-highest reproval rate among respondents. One respondent made a blunt, succinct comment A definite breach of professional ethics. Another This is unacceptable as well as unethical behavior. Once the account exec had identified himself, Pete should have identified himself as well. Pete should be reprimanded for his actions, maybe even fired if it appears as if this same scenario would continue in the future. Another It was wrong not to identify himself. Yet another Petes taking advantage of his counterpart was opportunistic and immoral. A respondent who saw nothing devious here argued It is a very competitive market. Taking advantage of the competitions weakness or stupidity is a must. Another argument Corporate espionage is no more or less right or wrong than is political espionage. Comparison of means Scenario No. 4 (Using outdated data) In an agencys report to a client, a female ad executive used outdated data that were favorable to both her ad agency and client, while ignoring new, unfavorable information. Eighty-two percent the highest among all scenarios for statement No. said that the female ad executive was wrong, 46% said that she should be fired, 11% that they would do just what she did, while 36% said that most ad execs would do what she Two analytical procedures were used to direct and compare responses to all four scenarios. First, the percentage response to each statement was computed for comparison of the directions of response patterns. Second, item-by-item statistical differences between 36 potential pairs of responses across all four scenarios were determined. Scheffts (1953) multiplecomparisons were used to determine such differences (Table III).Twenty-five of those 36 pairs and four of the six variable pairs of grand means were significantly distinguishable (p lt 0. 05, at least) from each other, indicating respondents differentiation of their evaluation of the scenarios. Thus, this result indicates Advertising and Classical Ethical Theory TABLE III Comparison of means, grand means (and standard deviations) for four scenarios on advertising ethics Scenario One 2. 3 (1. 18) 3. emailprotected (0. 811) 2. 0P (0. 982) 2. 62 (0. 939) 2. 99 Scenario Two 2. 29 (1. 05) 3. 4Y (0. 807) 2. 48b (1. 03) 3. 00b (0. 825) 3. 23b Scenario Three 2. 1 (1. 14) 3. 35 (0. 852) 2. 0P (0. 61) 2. 43 (0. 856) 3. 28b 463 Statement 1. What X did was wrong. 2. X should be fired. 3. I would do just what X did. 4. Most ad execs would do just what X did. 5. My firm/dept, has a policy, either written or oral, on situation or practice. 6. Regardless of my response to No. 5, it is a good idea for my firm/dept, to have a policy, either written or oral, on situation or practice. Grand Mean Scenario Four 1. 62b (0. 993) 2. 68b (1. 07) 1. 5V (0. 742) 2. 26d (0. 910) 2. 84 (t. I 5) (1. 05) (0. 9 7) (1. 12) 1. 68 (0. 918) 2,63 (0. 406) 2. 04b (1. 05) 2. 58,b (0. 362) 2. 12b (1. 01) 2. 74c (0. 378) 1. 77 (0. 39) 2. 52b (0. 401) ,b. mode with different superscripts on the same row are significantly different, by ScheffSs repeated-measures design. Note Means are on a four-point scale, with 1 for definitely yes and 4 for definitely no. Statements 3 and 4 were reverse-coded as t for definitely no and 4 for definitely yes. A lower mean score, therefore, indicated higher self-reported ethical standards. that the sample practidoners perceptions of ethics vary significantly by the type o f ethical issue confronted, suggesting perceived differences in the intensity of the exercise of deontology to the scenarios.Fritzsche (1988) and Fritzsche and Becker (1984) reported similar differences across vignettes, and concluded that marketing managers practiced situational ethics. For three of the four scenarios, respondents tended to agree with the statement that the advertising staff involved in the conduct identified in each of the scenarios took the wrong action. However, they tended not to agree that the staff should be fired. It was only in scenario No. 4 (using outdated data) that members tended to perceive the conduct as wrong even so, the mean response to the statement that the staff should be fired was 2. 8, which was significantly different (p < 0. 001) from re- spondents positions on the firing of the three other practitioners in the other three scenarios. Contextual response An overall evaluation of the respondents evaluation of the wrongness or righteousness of a conduct the essence of Kantian ethics indicates that the sample AAF members take into account little doubt about their positions on the scenarios outlined in the questionnaire. However, when the evaluations of the statements, taken together, are considered within the context o f classical ethical theory, the members ethics leaves much to be desired.Four questionnaire statements (items 1, 2, 3 and 6 of Tables II and III) were used as direct measures of deontology was wrong, should be fired, I would 464 C. B. Pratt and E. L. James do, and regardless of my response. It must be noted here that, even though deontology does not address explicitly the severity of the punishment for an ethical infraction, the theory is not soggy on punishment. Justice is one of the moral values that deontology considers even though not always explicitly. In mixed-rule and mixed-act deontology, the con sequences of ones actions are considered.In essence, there is a entire role for consequences. This was why Kant, admittedly vague in some areas, invented moral rules in the starting signal place. Responses to the four deontology-related statements provide four marks of the extent of practitioners adherence to Kantian ethics. First, the respective percentages (28. 7%, 28%, 40% and 65%) of respondents who reported that the actions of the practitioners cited in the four scenarios were definitely wrong indicate that fewer than one-half applied deontological theory to three of the four scenarios.Second, that the practitioner should be fired, the eventual(prenominal) test of ethics (Singer, 1992), had much lower, definite approval rates 1. 7%, 1. 1%, 3. 4%, and 16. 1%. Third, the response percentages for item 3 (I would do just ) in scenarios one, two, and three indicate that a levelheaded number of respondents would engage in the questionable behavior outlined in the scenarios. For scenario four, however, 11% said that they would definitely or maybe engage in a behavior that 82% of them reported as wrong.Finally, on item 6, a clear majority indicated an interest in organizational response to the issue raised in each scenario. The response percentages for statements 1, 2, and 3, therefore, indicate that practitioners evaluations are distinctly at odds with tile tenets of deontology and are perhaps more in line with utilitarian and relativistic theories. A further indication of the sample practitioners adherence to deontology is provided by those who responded definitely yes or maybe yes to all four measures of deontology in all four scenarios.The results 10% 10%, 16%, 32% for scenarios 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Such low percentages suggest that a majority of members wavered in applying deontology to the ethical dilemmas with which they were confronted. Bishop (1949) argues that truthtelling (addressed in scenarios 2 and 4) in advertising is impossible and the try out to attain it would reduce advertising to complete ineffectiveness and prevent it from fulfilling its legitimise and necessary function (to. 88).Yet, the first of AAFs eight-principle code of ethics, albeit stated in general terms, focuses on truthtelting Advertising shall tell the truth, and shall reveal significant facts, the omission of which would mislead the public (American Advertising Federation, 1984). While AAF members report that their companies adhere to AAF principles, they report that other ad agencies tend to adhere less strictly to those principles (Chonko et al. , 1987). Adherence to the truth principle is not only evident among AAF members but it has the largest my versus other company difference (t 23. 2, p < 0. 01 Chonko et al. , 1987). A number of U. S. corporate executives now piddle that if ethical transgressions are not sanctioned by dismissals, they could encourage all kinds of shady dealings and foster the perception that the organization is not really committed to ethics (Singer, 1992). It is plausible that a mix of utilitarian, JudeoChristian, greater omentum-of-ignorance, and golden-mean ethics at the same time guided the sample practitioners evaluation of the ethical scenarios used in this stud),. However, the investigation of the application of various ethical theories to decision-making was not a purpose of this study.Empirical studies on ethics (e. g. , Ferrelt and Weaver, 1978 Fritzsche, 1988 Fritzsche and Becker, 1983 Krugman and Ferrell, 1981 Pratt, 1991 Pratt and McLaughlin, 1989) increasingly indicate that ethics among business people is frequently not perceived in absolutist terms, but in proportional shades of right and wrong. Fritzsche (1991, 1988) and Jones (1991), for example, report that situational ethics is the overwhelming preference of U. S. managers. Advertising codes of ethics are usually written in precise deontological terms, for example, must recognize, will not, shall tell the truth, shal l refrain from. Yet, AAF members do not seem to patronize by deontology even though an enforced, effective code should provide the profession with a degree of stability and consistency in the ethical decision-making of its members (Beets, 1991, p. 69). It is plausible that the patterns of responses in this present study suggest adherence to utilitarian ethics, which is favored by advertising agency personnel Advertising and Classical Ethical Theory (Rotzotl and Christians, 1980 Christians et al. , 199 I). On the other hand, utilitarian ethics seeks to maximize the good for all concerned.However, the limitation of this ethical theory is inherent in how the good is determined. Beyond that, the interests of the minority tend to be given short shrift. What, therefore, are the chances that advertising-agency actions will result in the greatest happiness for the greatest number? Also, Nevett (1985) disagrees with Bishops (1949) suggestion that the ethical standards of advertising be uti litarian because such an approach cannot provide advertising people today with guidance on suitable ethical standards for their profession (e. 04). Rawls (1971) criticizes utilitarianism, noting that it does not take seriously the differences among people rather, it views as morally just that which has the sum of satisfactions (or total utility) for the community. As an alternative to utilitarian thought, Rawls (1971) suggests a new moral theory that will give sufficient account to the primacy of justice, understood as the protection of the equal rights of all individuals, over the social good (Schaefer, 1979, p. 22).To accomplish equal justice in society, therefore, everyone should assume a hypothetical original position hindquarters a veil of ignorance which requires that, in evaluating situations, people step from their everyday, status-based traditional roles into an egalitarian position behind a veil. The goal is to develop a conception of justice or of the good from a disi nterested, equal perspective. Would a recommendation that practitioners who compromise the ethical standards identified in the scenarios be fired be an illustration of such justice?And would such firing be in an organizations or in a societys best interest? Finally, it is plausible that Judeo-Christian morality an altruistic, religion-based tradition is also reflected in respondents evaluations of the dilemmas in the ethical scenarios. 465 perceived as definitely having such policies for each of the four scenarios (and those who definitely think that having such policies is a good idea) are, respectively, 17. 8 (56. 3), 11. 5 (38. 5), 4. 6 (33. 3) and 15. s (50 0).The large differences between having such policies and thinking that having such policies is a good idea lends confidence to the continuing public and practitioner concern over advertising ethics. For advertising agencies, such policies could result in two possibilities (1) they may encourage agencies to also apply deon tology to ethical issues, and (2) they may help agencies initiate an eclectic approach to ethical decision-making that is, to apply ethical principles that may involve bringing all five commonly used classical theories to bear simultaneously on the decision-making process.These five theories, which are not mutually exclusive, fall into one of two broad categories deontology or teleology. They are (1) Aristotles golden mean (moral virtuousness is appropriate location between two extremes) (2) the theoretical framework for this present study, Kants categorical imperative (act on that maxim which you will to become a universal law) (3) Mills principle of utility (seek the greatest happiness for the greatest number) (4) Rawlss (1971) veil of ignorance (justice emerges when negotiating without social differentiations) and (5) Judeo-Christian persons as ends (love they neighbor as yourself).Aristotles theory of the golden mean, a virtuebased ethics, strikes a moral balance between two e xtremes, one indicating excess, the other deficiency. The mean, in this context, is not a statistical mean but a willingness on the part of the decision maker to exercise moderation or temperance a virtue. Such a mean rdates to the individuals particular situation, her or his stay. is, strengths and weaknesses (Chiistians et aI. , 1991). Utilitarian ethics, a form of teleological ethics, was enunciated by John cleverness Mill as that which seeks the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To assess the greatest good, a person or organization performs a cost-benefit analysis of an action or decision. If the latter would result in the good of the majority, that is, if its benefits for the greatest number outweigh its costs, then the act is ethically right. Rawlss (197 t) veil of ignorance, a nonconsequen- refinement The results presented in this study indicate a strong (perceived) reluctance on the part of the ad agencies to institute policies, either written or oral, that woul d require unethical conduct. The percentages of respondents whose firms or departments are 466C. B. Pratt and E. L. James tialist theory of justice, governs the assignment of rights and duties and regulates the diffusion of social and economic advantages. People, Rawts (197I) argued, have an equal right to the most ample basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others (Rawls, 1971, p. 60). Finally, Judeo-Christian morality is an altruistic tradition that is being popularized in the West as the more dramauc term agape unselfish, otherregarding care and other-directed love, distinct from friendship, charity, benevolence, and other weaker notions (Christians et al. 1991, p. 20). The interpretation of the results of this present study within the context of Kantian ethics suggests that deontology is clearly not the preference of the sample practitioners. The de-emphasis of deontological ethics among practitioners is likely to engender a laissez faire approach to ethical i ssues. Dubinsky et al. (1991) suggest a reason for this phenomenon from an overall business perspective Many of the situations business people confront are in a gray area where the delineation between the right versus the wrong action is not clear (p. 52). On the other hand, strict deontologicaI ethics could encourage advertising practitioners to understand the precise boundaries of ethical and unethical conduct, as has been found among salespeople (Michaels et at. , 1988). It has been reported that managers who apply deontological ethics under uncertain conditions are least likely to change their decisions even when they perceive the risk of their decisions those who apply utilitarian ethics are more likely to change their decisions to satisfy fiscal and/or self-esteem goals (Fraedrich and Ferrell, 1992).And herein lies a crucial value of deontological ethics to advertising more likely, it will encourage advertisers to adhere to the precepts of ethics, setting aside personal financ ial and social rewards for the public good. At least 67% of the respondents in the present study suggested that their organizations establish policies on questionable conduct (item 6). Why did such a majority suggest such boundaries on behavior? Why would they prefer that formal company policies restrict questionable behaviors?It is plausible that the sample practitioners place much value on formal policies because of the perceived importance of affirmation on what they consider ethical or unethical. Further, such a formal process may indicate more than a perfunctory commitment of their organizations to ethics. This possibility suggests two key questions on the implications of the results of the present study for policy-making (1) Where lies the responsibility for shaping advertising agency ethics? (2) And what relevant does deontology have for the training of advertising staffs?In a speech given two dozen years ago by Bill Marsteller, founder of the advertising agency, Marsteller I nc. (a forerunner of Burson-Marsteller, the worlds third-largest public relations agency), he said It is not enough for the advertising student to simply attain general standards of morality and taste it is important to be nationaled to the deliberate considerations of advertising morality and taste (Marsteller, 1972, p. 241). Marsteller sees education in advertising ethics as important as that for the production of creative, charming advertising.Just as the effectiveness of training sessions has been called into question (Feldman and Thompson, 1990 Levin, 1989), their impact has also been demonstrated (e. g. , Feldman and Thompson, 1990 Hanson, 1987 Harris and Guffey, 1991). On balance, however, it behooves ad clubs and various advertising associations to establish programs that, at the minimum, sensitize practitioners to some of the social and professional sequelae of their ethics-related decisions. The results of this express study justify the adoption of such measures.Caveats Two limitations of this stud), should be outlined. The first is the old issue of self-reported ethics. Even though measures were taken to discourage the use of socially desirable responses, that possibility cannot be ignored because perceptual distoruon is higher when the dependent variable is as highly sensitive as the subject of ethics (Hunt et al. , 1989 Randall and Fernandes, 1991). The second is the representativeness of the sample, which was drawn from 25 states, for the 50,000member AAF.Because the sample was not promiscuously selected, it is important that this present study be replicated on a larger, more geographically diverse sample to determine the extent to which its results are consistent with those of such a nationwide study. Advertising and Classical Ethical Theory