Search results

It is undoubtedly the case that advertising plays a significant part in modern economic life in most societies and many view it as an essential part of the operation of a free market system. Yet it is also the case that our knowledge of how exactly it works and whether the vast amounts spent on it are justified is still uncertain. Lord Leverhulme, the founder of Lever Brothers, is credited with the famous aphorism — ‘one half of advertising does not work but nobody knows which half’ and that perhaps sums up the situation very well. One thing that is generally accepted is that some protection must be provided both to consumers and trade competitors from false or misleading advertising which can lead to market distortions and economic loss to purchasers. Increasingly controversial, however, is the scope and extent of legal and voluntary controls on advertising. In the advertising industry fears are rising about the volume of both national and EEC proposals to restrict or limit advertising and as we move from the '80s, a decade of conspicuous consumption in which advertising flourished, to the caring '90s where environmental issues are to the fore, the advertising industry faces major challenges. Advertising as a whole is facing severe economic and legal challenges after the massive expansion of the 1980's — it is estimated that there was a 4% fall in real terms in UK advertising expenditure in the first quarter of 1990 and an estimated 5% fall in the second quarter. Clients are becoming more demanding and the cosy cartel arrangement whereby advertising agencies made a 15% standard commission on a client's expenditure has gone — commissions are down to 12%‐13% or being replaced by fixed fees. It has been estimated by the Advertising Association that proposed legal restrictions could lead to a loss of £1 bn in revenue for the industry. Multi‐farious pressure groups are campaigning against drink advertising, cigarette advertising and sexism in adverts. The advertising industry's concerns are reflected in a recent report by the Advertising Association — ‘A Freedom Under Threat — Advertising in the EC’. The report indicates a number of areas where legislative controls have been introduced or are proposed to be introduced over the next few years and expresses the fear that controls may be going too far in limiting freedom of ‘commercial speech’. Martin Boase, chairman of the Advertising Association writes in his introduction to the report:

The purpose of this article is to examine the US history of advertising regulation, both formal and informal and public and private – particularly focused on advertising that is likely to mislead consumers about attributes, characteristics or performance of advertised products.

This research examines both primary sources such as legal challenges and contemporary writings as well as secondary sources.

Although early court decisions were reluctant to find advertising to be dishonest, the Post Office was the first government agency to challenge blatantly false advertisements through criminal prosecution. At the end of the 1800s, the nascent advertising industry developed an interest in regulating truthfulness to enhance advertising credibility. It proposed a model state criminal code and advertising clubs, followed by local Better Business Bureaus, began to informally resolve advertising dispute. In 1914, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was established with authority to prevent unfair methods of competition which it used to challenge advertising that was likely to injure competitors. This authority was later expanded to cover advertising that was likely to mislead consumers regardless of competitive injury. The FTC experimented with trade association advertising provisions and expanding its concepts and tools overtime until a period of retrenchment in the 1980s that set the foundations of modern advertising regulation.

This is the first treatment of advertising regulatory history that simultaneously covers and compares various sources of advertising regulation to develop a comprehensive exposition of advertising regulation history.

Until the late 19th century, the controls on advertising in Britain and the US depended on complying with laws relating to defamation and on the ethical values of advertisers and media proprietors. During the 20th century, concerns about public safety from dangerous products or services, recognition of the need to safeguard people from misleading or untrue claims, and attempts to strike a balance in the interests of fair trading have led to movements for both self‐regulation, as well as some legal restrictions on marketing and advertising practices. Differences in British and American practices have arisen from the nature of the legal systems and the cultural mores of the respective societies.

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired not to compete on the basis of health claims or the introduction of potentially safer cigarettes since the 1950s, and (2) engaged in fraudulent advertising by making implied health claims in advertisements selling ‘low tar’/‘light’ cigarettes. In this type of litigation, defendants’ actions could be due to alleged illegal behaviour as asserted by plaintiffs, or be the result of market forces that may have nothing to do with allegedly inappropriate acts. We examine the economic evidence relating to these allegations, taking into account some of the major influences on cigarette company behaviour. In particular, our analyses show that much of the cigarette manufactures’ behaviour can be explained by Federal Trade Commission and related government actions, rather than conspiracy or fraudulent acts. We find the economic evidence is inconsistent with an effective conspiracy to suppress information on either smoking and health or the development and marketing of potentially safer cigarettes. Regarding ‘lower tar’ and ‘light’ cigarettes, the economic evidence indicates that the cigarette manufacturers responded to government and public health initiatives, and that disclosing more information on smoking compensation earlier than the cigarette companies did would not have had any significant impact on smoking behaviour.

This paper seeks to propose a framework for systematically investigating international advertising regulation; to provide an in‐depth understanding of the Chinese advertising regulation system; and to use China as a case study to examine how various global and local forces interact and negotiate the landscape of international advertising regulation.

The paper employs historical analysis; and textual analysis to achieve its purpose.

Chinese advertising regulation relies largely on government regulation, and self‐regulation plays a much subdued and marginal role. The Chinese regulator aims to control the negative effects of advertising through rigorous regulation as well as certification and censorship programs, but its various advertising laws and regulations are invariably phrased in vague and general terms, so that enforcement and compliance become a major issue. The lack of autonomous trade and consumer organizations combined with minimal public participation in the system further reduces its transparency and effectiveness.

The paper offers a detailed road‐map for advertising professionals to navigate the complex Chinese advertising regulation system.

The paper is the first English article to provide a systematic examination of Chinese advertising regulation.

Although companies are institutionalizing ethics, ethical infractions continue unceasingly, causing questions as to where ethical emphasis is going awry. Suggests that businesspeople need not only the intellect but also the will to do the right thing in the face of temptation. Proposes several reasons why businesspeople should want to take the moral high road, including the fact that usually ethical behavior proves to be profitable in the long run. However, such a pragmatic consideration is not sufficient to motivate a person of ethical character. The ethical person chooses the moral course of action regardless of personal sacrifice. It is such virtuous people that business leaders should be hiring and cultivating in ethical mentoring and training which instills an absolutist (not relativist) philosophy and reinforces the importance of willpower. Uses an advertising case study to illustrate how common ethical fallacies can be uncovered and dispelled among employees.

Marketing organizations are establishing Websites at an unprecedented rate. Despite this rapid growth, many firms are developing Websites with an inadequate understanding of the domestic and international legal issues associated with having a presence on the Internet. This lack of knowledge can result in firms facing expensive and time‐consuming litigation. We therefore present the major legal issues that may arise as a result of creating, maintaining, and protecting Websites. In particular, we discuss and provide managerial recommendations regarding consumer protection, defamation and disparagement, intellectual property violations, and jurisdictional issues for international Internet marketers.

The subject of food and drug legislation is again before Parliament. It is proposed, under MR. JOHN BURNS' Food and Drugs Bill (see this Journal, August, 1913), to empower the Local Government Board to make Regulations which shall define an article of food or a drug with regard to its nature, substance, and quality. The Board will only issue Regulations of this kind after making such enquiry as in its opinion may be necessary.

This paper aims to explore the consumer insights and ethical concerns surrounding the online payday loan services available in the Google Play Store. This research was conducted to compare whether the presence or absence of debt collection protection acts in a country creates differences in consumer experiences regarding the ethics of payday loan collection. Specifically, the study compares customers’ experiences in both the Indonesian and US markets.

Indonesia and the USA were chosen because they have very different regulatory structures for the payday loan industry. The data was scraped using Python from 27 payday loan apps on the Indonesian Play Store, resulting in a total of 244,697 reviews extracted from the Indonesian market. For the US market, 446,010 reviews were extracted from 14 payday loan apps. The data was further analyzed using NVIVO.

The results suggest that consumers of payday loans in Indonesia and the USA hold positive views about the benefits of payday loan apps, as revealed by the word frequency and word cloud analysis. Notably, customers in both countries did not express any negative sentiments regarding the unethical interest rate charged by the payday loan, contradicting what is commonly reported in academic literature. However, a distinct pattern of unethical conduct was observed in both countries concerning marketing communication and debt collection practices. In the Indonesian market, payday loan companies were found to engage in unethical debt collection activities. In the US market, payday lenders exhibited unethical behavior in their marketing communication, particularly through deceptive advertising that makes promises to consumers that are not delivered.

The study aims to provide evidence on the various experiences of customers in the presence and absence of debt collection regulations using a novel methodology and a large sample, which strengthens the results and conclusions of the study. The study also intends to inform policymakers, particularly the Indonesian government, about the need for specific laws to regulate the debt collection process and prevent unethical practices. Ultimately, the study is expected to protect the rights of consumers from a deceptive marketing communication or unethical debt collection practices in both the Indonesian and US markets.