The Case of Phillip MorrisBecoming Respectable
Phillip Morris attempting to
leverage its non-tobacco
credentials to make itself
look socially responsible
Should Phillip Morris be banned from advertising its other products?
NO
Migration Path Encouraged By Taxation and Tobacco Regulation
1950s Now
Tobacco Socially Acceptable
Not acceptable
Phillip Morris
More to other products
Ban Will Thwart The Migration Path
No Ban
Utilitarianism result (greater good for all)
Facilitates Kantian approach (companies fullfilling their rational duties)
Marketing too sophisticated for complete regulatory control
Marketing techniques move faster than
Regulation – British American Racing (F1 Team)
E.G. Viral Marketing
Regulation is not the answer… government
and community must demand ethical companies
Marketing too sophisticated for complete regulatory control
Ethical Duties of the Marketer to the Phillip Morris Customer
• Tobacco is an adult product based on adult choice
• Duty to inform where it can reasonably expect the consumer would not know the consumption costs (cancer).
• Duty to market only to adults, not children
Code of Ethics?
• Arrow contends: : “Codes are not a universal substitute for… taxes regulations and legal remedies”.
• Game theory says the short-term opportunist may cheat
• We say: Codes of Ethics are too rigid to keep up with fluid and evolving community standards
Green Marketing
• Promotion of products / services on the basis that they do not harm, or are beneficial to the environment
• E.g. Dolphin friendly tuna, unbleached toilet paper, chemical free cleaners.
Green Marketing Can Work
• Where there is more than one players
• Where green credential is obvious and people choose on this basis
• Can help “raise the bar”
Green Marketing May Not Work
• Where comparisons are difficult as products are not co-located (e.g coffee shop)
• Where there is no-one to check the claims … who knows if Jo’s coffee bar is really rehabilitating the rainforest area where the coffee is grown?
?