ETHICAL DILEMMA
Let's read the following article on neopets.com. Upon completing the article, return to the blog and answer the following question. http://www.commercialalert.org/news/archive/2000/12/neopetscom-launches-dramatic-new-form-of-internet-advertising-results-far
QUESTION
What is "immersive advertising"?
when content and advertisements are blurred.
ReplyDeletefrom what i've gathered, it is a new type of advertising fusing brand names and images into an online networking community and making it connect and interactive
ReplyDelete"Immersive advertising" is when an advertisement integrates itself with its natural surroundings, making it difficult to determine where the advertisement ends and reality begins, i.e. content and advertising are "blurred".
ReplyDeleteWhat is the ethical concern with using immersive advertising techniques on children, such as in the neopets.com example?
ReplyDeleteThis type of advertising is already hard to decipher. For children it may be almost impossible for them to know that they are being advertised to.
ReplyDeletesending subliminal messages of products they related to online and making the online turn into the real world and affecting their buying or wanting decisions
ReplyDeleteYou both make good points. If you remember last week, we talked a lot about "consent" (i.e. giving your permission to be advertised to).
ReplyDeleteWhile children “consent” to enter certain sites, such as neopets.com, this consent is not voluntary since they are enticed with games and promises of rewards.
Would you say that offering games, prizes, etc. is a form of manipulation of the target audience?
absolutely, advertising to children as a whole in any form can be considered manipulation
ReplyDeleteit is manipulative, especially with such a young audience. they might not turn these online activities in the game world to the real world, but it does plant a seed of whatever was being "sold" and they do act upon it
ReplyDeleteSo then, what is the overall ethical issue with immersive advertising techniques?
ReplyDeletethe issue is blurring the lines of what is suppose to solely be just an interactive gaming experience to subliminal advertising techniques.
ReplyDeleteits one thing to put up a "soda" icon in the game, but once its name brand it becomes real and it becomes advertising, especially when the character has a person positive response to it.
ReplyDeleteNot being manipulated by advertising is the ability to decipher between what you need and what you are being sold. If you do not know you are being advertised to it may make this distinction a bit more difficult.
ReplyDeleteRight. "Immersive advertising" can be classified as "deceptive" if the line between content and advertising is intentionally blurred so that consumers cannot tell the difference between the two.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, immersive advertising blurs the line between communication that is persuasive (i.e. advertising) and communication that is informative.
Let’s begin with a review of material we discussed last week – advertising + ethics in our digital world.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the ethical issues regarding advertising and digital technology (this can be mobile messaging, interactive TV, social media sites, etc.)?
invasion of privacy
ReplyDeleteyes, invasion
ReplyDeleteYes, invasion of privacy is definitely one ethical grey area within the digital world.
ReplyDeleteOther ethical issues that we discussed last week include:
- Informed consent
- Privacy
- Manipulation of consent through inducement
- “Immersive Advertising” techniques
As review, what is “inducement”?
when you induce consent through manipulation
ReplyDeletea kind of motivation? persuasion?
ReplyDeleteYou got it, Frankie. "Inducement" means something that motivates or persuades; an incentive.
ReplyDeleteConsumers can be induced through variety of means: promise of a reward, participating in a contest, etc.
In many ways, the neopets.com article you read earlier was manipulating children's consent to be targeted with advertising by intencing them with games and prizes.
Last week, we discussed issues with privacy. We had a debate whether or not one-way communication and two-way communication was ethical or not. Do you remember the difference between one-way and two-way communication?
ReplyDeletenot so much
ReplyDeleteone way is where there is no consent, like commercials on a tv. two way is something we sign up for an agree upon. joining a social networking site and consenting to seeing the ads all over the place
ReplyDeleteTo have a relationship with consumers, it must be a two-way relationship with both parties providing consent.
ReplyDeleteOne-way communications from advertiser to consumer is not interactive and not a conversation, and are an invasion of privacy. For example, even though some people aren’t bothered by junk mail, banner ads, etc., the idea of sending unsolicited messages without consumer's consent can be considered ethically unjustified.
Does this ring a bell, Correne?
So, let’s talk about the articles that you read on various digital advertising ethical issues.
ReplyDeleteWhat is a “flog”?
a fake blog
ReplyDeletefake blogging in which a company is promoted by false means. sometimes with a companies own employees
ReplyDeleteA fake blog entry in which the writer poses as a consumer (someone not affiliated with a company).
ReplyDeleteIn the UK, there is a law in which fake bloggers will be “named and shamed” publically. This also covers authors who give their books/articles high praise and hoteliers who give themselves five stars. At the end of the day, anything that is not authentically from a consumer is considered unethical.
So when you go out in the advertising ‘real world’, and your client asks you to help them create a blog, what recommendations would you have for the client?
ReplyDeleteDont fake any comments because that would be faking consumer to consumer advertising. you actually need to regulate the content to make sure no one affiliated with you product responds.
ReplyDeleteRight, Correne. Some other recommendations include: engage in honest dialog with consumers; use your real name, company and title; address consumer concerns; be proactive about possible issues with a product.
ReplyDeleteI would recommend the blog be about the client and what they have to offer and how they feel personally what they have to offer is a good thing. I will advise to them that their personal employees or families of such should not be part of the review board in any way because they could be held liable
ReplyDeleteBlogging is commonly referred to as digital “word of mouth”.
ReplyDeleteYou have a handout from the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA).
Please pull out that handout and let’s look at Principle #4.
(Here’s the link to the article if you can’t find your handout: http://womma.org/ethicscode/code/)
Whenever using any form of social media as an advertising tool, let’s remember Principle #4.
ReplyDeleteLet’s look further down the page on the same handout to the WOMMA Code, specifically Code #2. Take a few moments for read Code #2.
What is your initial takeaway from reading Code #2?
ReplyDeleteDoes this ask too much of consumers associated with a company when they review products?
Why is word-of-mouth, when used in social media, referred to as “endorsements”?
this is in support of open and honest relationships between marketers and consumers. the regulations are fair to all and necessary to maintain honesty. Word -of -mouth is considered endorsements because it is another way to spread positive opinions about a product.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it asks to much of the conumers associations with the company when it comes to reviews. it covers multiple of grounds that need to be covered. everything from truth of the company to the ftc's regulations.
ReplyDeletewom is endorsements because it is people representing the produce in how they personally relate to it.
Good! And the one takeaway about endorsements + testimonials from previous lectures is that honesty leads to credibility. Credibility for the spokesperson, the brand and the company.
ReplyDeleteLet’s look at some other emerging issues relating to digital media + ethics.
ReplyDeleteYou have a handout from CIPR Social Media Guidelines.
Please pull out that handout and turn to page 9. (Here’s the link to the article if you can’t find your handout: http://www.cipr.co.uk/socialmedia/)
Let’s look at online tracking/targeted advertisements.
There is another name for this type of tracking that you researched for one of the blog articles. Do you remember this type of online tracking?
ReplyDeleteno particularly by name, but does it involve understanding how long the online user is on a page, which links they clicked on, if they checked out etc
ReplyDeleteRight, Frankie. The name is "behavioral tracking", which tracks users online activities, i.e. which pages within a web site that they visit, how much time they spend on that page, etc.
ReplyDeleteA great example of behavioral tracking is that of Facebook Beacon, which collects user information and sells it to advertisers who then contact the user based on the Facebook users’ online activities.
Would you classify Beacon as an invasion of privacy?
yes because it is tracking you based on personal information youve allotted to one source with no consent for use with other motives
ReplyDeletevery much so an invasion of privacy. it is selling YOUR information to an outside party that can then contact you.
ReplyDeleteSo, with the Beacon example, we have issues of lack of user consent and invasion of privacy.
ReplyDeleteAnother emerging trend is company’s contribution to wikis, such as Wikipedia. (Also in that same handout.)
ReplyDeleteThe issue with wikis, which we all know are user-generated content, is when companies include links to their own sites. This is considered spamming.
Are wikis then considered unethical if anyone can contribute content, esp. Wikipedia, which is used as an online encyclopedia?
even in the legal jargon when signing up for a social networking site or any site for that matter, who reads it.
ReplyDeletewell if it is an reliable source and they properly document where they got their information etc, then its not bad. but it is true anyone can post information on there and it can be truthful, false, or a combination of the two
ReplyDeleteNo because even though the link is provided the consumer must choose to click it and it is well known that the content is questionable on wikipedia
ReplyDeleteSo then you are implying that users must know what they are getting themselves into, such as citing information from Wikipedia? No ethical issues here?
ReplyDeleteAre y'all still with me?!
ReplyDeleteyes consumers do know what they are getting into thats why instructors dont allow you to site info from Wikipedia
ReplyDeletesince wikipedia is a source in which anything can be posted, even with reliable links, it can be unethical if it is made to boost the companies image
ReplyDeleteSo, then you agree that when companies put their own corporate or brand links within such wikis, they are crossing an ethical line?
ReplyDeleteShould wikis then be "banned"?
It's the last question, guys... Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteNo, no ethical line crossed, everyone knows that Wikipedia is a grab bag and not fully regulated or trusted
ReplyDeleteOkay, we'll end the discussion on that note.
ReplyDeleteETHICS HOMEWORK REMINDER
- Read Chapter 8 in textbook on Digital Marketing (+ handouts)
- Read and answer “Pro Wal-Mart Travel Blog Screeches to a Halt” case study and answer questions for hand-in on Thursday, April 23rd
- Article Journaling answers for Wednesday, April 22nd at 12pm
it shouldn't be banned. its about freedom to do what they want. as long as it doesn't cause harm it should be ok... consumers are smarter than the look so they ultimately have the final say in the matter
ReplyDelete