Search results

The authors examine how political players attempt to rationalise arguments for and against the expansion of auditing into governmental affairs, and how state audit authorities respond to politically motivated boundary work. This study is motivated by growing evidence of political involvement in attempts to both expand and undermine state audit oversight of government affairs.

The authors present an interpreted history (covering relevant events from 1995 to 2016) of political rationales and associated boundary work that led to the expansion of the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario's (OAGO) mandate to audit government advertising campaigns for partisanship as well as attempts to modify this new audit remit over time.

The authors reveal substantive, formal and practical ways in which political players sought to rationalise/counter-rationalise expanding the OAGO's authority to the unfamiliar territory of advertising probity. The authors show how such justification claims ebb and flow in accordance with changeable political interests, and how state auditors react to the fraught nature of politically motivated boundary work.

The authors conceptualise important forms of rationalising rhetoric (which cannot be reduced to expressions of neoliberal government) that can be mobilised to deem state auditor authority legitimate in overseeing otherwise novel, unfamiliar and controversial government affairs. The authors also reveal a hitherto unrecognised resolve in state auditor responses to political intervention and shed further light on generalised forms of rationale that can underpin boundary work at the margins of accounting.

A meta-evaluation is an assessment of evaluation practices. Meta-evaluations include assessments of validity and usefulness of two or more studies that focus on the same issues. Every performance audit is grounded explicitly or implicitly in one or more theories of program evaluation. A deep understanding of alternative theories of program evaluation is helpful to gain clarity about sound auditing practices. We present a review of several theories of program evaluation.

This study includes a meta-evaluation of seven government audits on the efficiency and effectiveness of tourism departments and programs. The seven tourism-marketing performance audits are program evaluations for: Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Minnesota, Australia, and two for Hawaii. The majority of these audits are negative performance assessments. Similarly, although these audits are more useful than none at all, the central conclusion of the meta-evaluation is that most of these audit reports are inadequate assessments. These audits are too limited in the issues examined; not sufficiently grounded in relevant evaluation theory and practice; and fail to include recommendations, that if implemented, would result in substantial increases in performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the regulation of advertising by considering market‐driven firms (those seeking to keep within the boundaries set by social and industry norms) and market drivers (those seeking to stretch boundaries to gain a competitive advantage). Thought is also given to the costs of regulation and tolerance to the social purse, and the benefits gained by compliance and violation.

The authors develop a conceptual argument for boundary stretching where market drivers are present in a marketplace dominated by market‐driven firms. The authors then apply a game theory model to examine the conditions, the firm responses, and Government responses. In doing so the authors investigate incentives for non‐compliant behavior in a self‐regulated market and show that a firm can achieve a market advantage by stretching advertising boundaries.

Results suggest that when government takes a “wait‐and‐see” approach of partial tolerance, then the market driver can become the focal point for the market‐driven, and a shift will take place in the regulatory boundary. If the government is the boundary shifter then social engineers are taking advantage of artificial boundaries they know will not be enforced, with implications for campaigns such as drink‐driving, smoking, and domestic violence. Also, the market driver will gain a competitive advantage by entering a market‐driven marketplace through boundary shifts, even after incurring an initial penalty.

The research demonstrates a need for research into marketing regulation to consider firm types, violation types, and tolerance levels. The study contributes to our understanding of marketer activity with two implications; first the firm is shifting the boundaries and redefining the market focal point as themselves, rather than violating the boundaries and setting themselves outside the rules. Second, depending on the level of tolerance that government has with the regulation of advertising, there is a cost to both the social purse and to market‐driven firms associated with boundary shifters.

A market driver, looking for growth opportunities, should try to enter markets dominated by market‐driven firms, and which have self‐regulation, while market driven firms should either look for regulatory protection or act collectively to wield power over third parties – for example forcing media outlets not to carry market driver advertising.

By introducing the concept of boundary stretching and allowing for market drivers and market driven firms, the authors show the effects of regulation (or tolerance) in a realistic setting and allow for the real‐world dynamics of a marketplace where new ideas create new focal points for social acceptance. This study also provides a clear illustration of the usefulness of game theory in marketing studies.

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.

This paper aims to outline the historic development of advertising regulation that governs food advertising to children in Australia. Through reviewing primary and secondary literature, such as government reports and research, this paper examines the influence of various regulatory policies that limit children’s exposure to food and beverage marketing on practices across television (TV), branded websites and Facebook pages.

This paper reviews studies performed by the food industry and public health researchers and reviews of the evidence by government and non-government agencies from the early 19th century until the present day. Also included are several other research studies that evaluate the effects of self-regulation on Australian TV food advertising.

The government, public health and the food industry have attempted to respond to the rapid changes within the advertising, marketing and media industries by developing and reviewing advertising codes. However, self-regulation is failing to protect Australian children from exposure to unhealthy food advertising.

The findings could aid the food and beverage industry, and the self-regulatory system, to promote comprehensive and achievable solutions to the growing obesity rates in Australia by introducing new standards that keep pace with expanded forms of marketing communication.

This study adds to the research on the history of regulation of food advertising to children in Australia by offering insights into the government, public health and food industry’s attempts to respond to the rapid changes within the advertising, marketing and media industries by developing and reviewing advertising codes.

The aim of this paper is to outline key social marketing issues apparent in deceptive weight‐loss advertising, from the perspective of government policy‐makers, manufacturers, the media, and consumers. The purpose is to examine the complexity of one aspect of the obesity battle and provide a framework for coordinated and integrated social marketing initiatives from a multiple stakeholder perspective.

The results of deceptive weight‐loss advertising are framed using the harm chain model, and the paper offers recommended solutions based on a framework of marketing, education and policy changes across the network of stakeholders.

This paper concludes that a resolution to the harm created by deceptive weight‐loss advertising can be achieved by the creation of a more holistic, system‐wide solution to this important health and policy issue. This networked approach must involve all aspects of harm in a multi‐stakeholder solution, including both upstream and downstream integration. Specific recommendations are made for policy‐makers, manufacturers, the media, and consumers to achieve this goal.

From a marketing perspective, analyzing the issue of deceptive weight‐loss advertising using the harm chain allows for the creation of a more holistic, system‐wide solution involving stakeholders in all aspects of harm for this important health and policy issue.

This research examines the problem of obesity and weight‐loss advertising from the unique perspective of the harm chain framework. The authors make unified recommendations for various stakeholders including industry, media, government and consumers, in order to direct integrated social marketing and consumer‐oriented strategies within this industry.

Considers the environmental differences that may need to be considered when marketers enter into a new country such as media restrictions. Cultural and legal factors. Observes a study of Malaysian media professionals’ perceptions towards various media and advertising restrictions in their country. Presents findings suggesting that advertising images, particularly nudity, indecent language, and sexist images were perceived as major reasons for advertising restrictions.

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.

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:

Although there is considerable scholarly research on advertising self‐regulation in the USA, there is no research at all on the unique problems that comparative advertising created for those involved in the industry's self‐regulation. This study aims to address this gap in the literature with an historical analysis of the industry's efforts to respond to the widespread adoption of comparative advertising during the twentieth century.

The study's primary and secondary sources consist of nearly 640 articles collected from historical and contemporary trade journals. The analysis focuses on two research questions: When did calls for the reform and regulation of comparative advertising appear, why did they appear, and who did advertisers believe should be responsible? and Why did advertisers and industry observers believe comparative advertising should be regulated, and what were the consequences of their self‐regulation efforts and initiatives?

The paper finds that industry calls for comparative advertising reform began to appear during the Depression and peaked during the most contentious period of self‐regulation, the 1970s. The findings show that during the 1930s, members of the industry mostly abandoned their efforts to manage what they considered unfair business practices, including explicit comparative advertising, by shaping government policy. The findings also reveal that the issues of disparagement of competitors and the misappropriation of their brand names and trademarks set the stage for an extraordinary conflict between the industry, its self‐regulators, and the Federal Trade Commission.

The findings offer some new and interesting insights into the consequences that can occur when advertisers choose to employ explicit comparative advertising, or what has been called “the hardest sell of all”; the history of advertising self‐regulation in the USA; and the complex relationships among consumerism, political and economic ideology, and industry self‐regulation.