| Introduction :
The definition of marketing according to the Wikipedia website states that; " Marketing is a societal process which discerns consumers' wants, focusing on a product or service to fulfill those wants, and attempting to move the consumers toward the products or services offered ". And according to this definition, the whole process seems to revolve around a powerful entity, which marketers try their best to attract and keep satisfied, "the customer".
"The customer is always right" as the saying goes. But, although the definition and thus the idea of marketing seem quite idealistic and totally good in its abstract sense and intentions, it becomes doubtful though, whether it remains good while it is being implemented… Does the end justify the means? And likewise, does the intention to satisfy the customer involve at some point manipulating him. Is it even about satisfying the customer, or does it also involve totally materialistic objectives?
In the following case study, those questions will be attempted to be answered, and we say attempted because up till now, a judgment about the whole aspect of marketing can not be pinned down for sure, and thus clarifying the picture for the reader is the main concern, whether the picture turns out all black, all white or something in between, it is better to be left for the individual perspective.
The Guarding Angel or The Worst Offender?
To be customer focused in marketing, is the essence that brings an organization to success, it's the underlying culture that enables a company to grow, simply because marketing is the glue that sticks the consumer to the company or the product it sells. Making the consumer want the product and then influencing him to stay loyal to it is definitely not an easy job to do, but it's the main reason why companies exist (to deliver products to the end consumer); and thus a lot tend to take the view that marketing is simply the guarding angel of the organization, without that angel, the whole body of the organization will collapse. Without knowing what the consumer wants and delivering that to him or her, the company can kiss its future goodbye. Knowing what the consumer needs, and through the 4Ps - product, price, place and promotion - develop a strategy to satisfy the consumer is what marketing is all about. It is in this organizational function, where all the efforts need to be made most efficient, and it is in this function, where the essence of the organization and its existence lies.
But, is marketing really an angel? Or is it a devil disguised in one? Is it the worst offender of business functions as Dunfee et al. (1999) states? Some argue that promotional advertising, which is a main player in the marketing function, tends to manipulate consumers all the time. " That marketing techniques have been used to achieve morally dubious ends by businesses" according to Wikipedia, is also quite a widespread criticism of how marketing works inside today's organizations. Making a consumer need a product the he or she might not have thought about without being exposed to promotion just to make profits is widely considered as unethical.
How Marketing Decisions May Become Evil:
Inside the organization, the story is pretty different, how decisions are made inside the marketing kitchen and how they are implemented and thought of is something that needs to be investigated before a decision about whether marketing is really evil or not.
An important question to be answered is to what extent do situational and organizational variables influence marketing practitioners in interacting with consuming publics? Some people believe that they make decisions in an organizational environment that is less ethical than their own values and beliefs. Therefore, marketing practitioners may be faced with conflict in structuring how to think and act ethically toward consuming publics.
The Melody Case:
The famous Egyptian music channel "Melody" is one of the famous cases of how marketing can be viewed as evil. Their unethical conduct of the infamous "melody tata7ada el malal" ad campaign is considered by many as simply completely unethical. Melody has succeeded in marketing for its music channels by not only using fanatically unethical messages (e.g. the teacher ad) to the society, but also through disrespecting the society's values and norms. Through its cheap attempt to market for its channel, melody has crossed the line of using bad words, viewing adult content and further more manipulating the viewers' mind through concealed unethical messages.
Melody, there main message is that they'll offer the viewer entertainment; they are extraordinary and extremely fun that you'll never be bored. Such message would normally reflect how they are looking for the viewer's satisfaction and keep them in a good mood, which is all what marketing is all about (satisfying the customer) However melody is widely viewed as being only concerned about gaining more and more profit and becoming more popular regardless of the means through which they do that.
Melody has clearly chosen the unethical path to reach their target; they have abused the fact that they can be overrated just by focusing on the poorly educated segment of the society which is more than 50% and present them with what they think would be fun to watch. The smaller segment of the society who is well educated however would refer to the campaigns as provocative and unethical. Melody could have targeted there objective through ethical ways, and spared itself to be seen as the main contributor to the idea that marketing is evil.
Conclusion :
Because the importance of ethical decision making in marketing is becoming more evident, Laczniak and Murphy (1985) recommend organizational and strategic mechanisms for improving marketing ethics, including codes of marketing ethics, marketing ethics committees, and ethics education modules for marketing managers. By communicating the beliefs and behavior of top management, the ethical frame of reference could be improved especially since respondents identify their ethical beliefs as closer to top management's than to their peers'.
Those who criticize marketing believe that a social contract does not exist between marketers and consumers, customer's acceptance to be presented with promotion or efforts from the side of the organization to manipulate their decisions to buy and keep buying a certain product does not exist and companies thus keep abusing their authority to influence the customer unwillingly just to make profits and not to provide the customer with what he or she needs like many companies claim (e.g. Melody). And this is considered evil for many. And thus the question remains, is marketing evil? It is left for the individual judgment. |
