In What Way Should the UK Committee for Advertising Practice Codes Be Reformed - Essay Example

In what way should the UK CAP s (CAP/BCAP s) be reformed? Introduction Advertising is a powerful tool that can be applied to shape the attitudes and behavior of people towards the purchase and consumption of various brands and products from businesses (Fletcher, 2008 p22). Therefore, owing to the power to influence and shape the attitude of the people held by advertising, there is a need to practice ethical and responsible advertising, that ensures that brands and products are promoted in such a way as to guarantee that people are not mislead or influenced to engage in a purchase behavior that might eventually be harmful to them (Moore & Murray 2011 p295). This concept defines the existence of the UK CAP Codes (CAP/BCAP Codes), which are applied towards ensuring that the promotion of brands through the mass media, as well as through different other channels such as the internet remains ethical, responsible and most importantly legal (CAP, 2013 n.p.). The Committee for Advertising Practice (CAP) is the body tasked with the responsibility of formulating, writing and maintaining the UK advertising codes, while also providing authoritative advice regarding these codes, which consists of well laid-down rules for the media, agencies and advertisers regarding how they should conduct their promotional activities of brands and products, as well as solicit for any form of support from the wider public (CAP, 2013 n.p.). Nevertheless, considering that the advertising and promotional needs for the parties involved keeps changing with every passing day, this discussion seeks to offer a macro-level analysis of the ethics of advertising regulation, with a view to assessing how the UK CAP Codes (CAP/BCAP Codes) adheres to the ethics of advertising regulation, while also determining what changes might be deemed necessary. Discussion According to the Persuasive Advertising Theory, there are three major and primary responses that an advert can trigger. First, any advertisement that is directed to the public can trigger people to feel, or experience some emotions (McNamara, 2013 n.p.). This being the case, an advert can influence the emotional state of individuals who are targeted, and thus any form of advertisement made, should always be sensitive to the emotional aspect of the target group, to ensure that the advert does not trigger an emotional feeling that would affect the target audience in a negative way (Lasagna, 1978 p3). In realization of the fact that advertisement triggers emotional feelings in the audience targeted by the advertisement, the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.18.2 which covers advertisements made for smoking deterrents, provides that such advertisements must not make claims which serve to indicate that smoking is safer, while the smoker is in the process of reducing the habit (CAP, 2013 n.p.). This rule is enacted to ensure that advertisements do not motivate smokers to continue smoking even at reduced levels, whenever they are in the process of stopping the smoking habit, with an additional rule that; advertisements in relation to smoking deterrents should only impose will power as the only requisite for stopping the habits (CAP, 2013 n.p.). However, while these rules, as established by the UK BCAP Codes are meant to protect the emotional influence of the target groups, to avert any advertisement effect that may appeal to the emotions of the smokers by creating a notion that reduced smoking is good; the rules nevertheless need to be changed. This is because, considering that there are various scientifically proven smoking therapies that have been developed, which can be applied to help smokers reduce their smoking habits gradually and eventually stop it completely, the rules needs to be reformed, to permit harm reduction claims associated with such scientifically proven therapies, such as the nicotine replacement therapy to be advertised (Johnson, 2013 n.p.). The essence of the introduction of such a reform is to create an avenue through which the groups targeted by such smoking deterrent advertisement will be informed of further benefits of the use of therapies known and proven to assist the smokers reduce and eventually stop the smoking habits, as opposed to the rigid application of the rule that it is only willpower that is applicable in stopping the smoking habit, as advocated for by the UK BCAP Codes (CAP, 2013 n.p.). The introduction of such a reform is not meant to create avenues through which the advertisers, agencies and the media will encourage smokers to continue with the smoking habit, but rather meant to provide an alternative channel through which the smokers can stop their smoking habit, even where the willpower, which is the only alternative provided for by the UK BCAP Codes, may not be present (Johnson, 2013 n.p.). This is because, it is essential to provide the smokers with another option that can help them eventually stop the smoking habit, through appealing to their emotions, as provided for under the Persuasive Advertising Theory, so they can be encouraged to make use of the available scientifically proven methods of smoking deterrents, such as the nicotine reduction therapy (Cooper, 2011 p13). Secondly, the Persuasive Advertising Theory provides that an advertisement has a primary trigger function that influences the target audience to understand, to think and to remember (McNamara, 2013 n.p.). In this respect, the theory postulates that an advertisement should be informative, so that it can give the target audience some information which they may not have, or at least make them understand whatever may be confusing to them (Preston, 2010 p259). In realization of need to ensure that the advertisement that are made by advertisers, agencies and the media in UK remains informative and enhances understanding, the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.13.1 prohibits the advertisers from making health advertisements that make offers of prescribing or treating remotely (CAP, 2013 n.p.). This is because, such advertisements tend to influence an audience to think and remember such offers at a later date, and influence them to opt for such health offers, as opposed to seeking professional health assistance (Pfeiffer et al., 2011 p767). While this move is noble and serves to protect the consumers from the adverse health effects that might arise as a result of the consumers opting to enlist the health offers made remotely, there is a need to reform the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.13.1, so that it can be more flexible and accommodative of the positive health effects that might arise from the allowance of advertisement that make offers for prescribing or treating remotely (Johnson, 2013 n.p.). Considering that the Persuasive Advertising Theory espouses that an advertisement can influence the target audience through making them understand, think and remember, it would be essential to reform the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.13.1 that prohibits the advertisement of offers to treat and prescribe remotely, so that such offers can be allowed, due the potential of triggering understanding of various health treatment options available the target audience (White, 1978 p1667). While prohibiting such advertisements is meant to protect the consumers against the harmful effects that might arise through opting for the remotely offered prescription and treatment at the expense of the professional health assistance, there are also some limitations associated with this rule. First, the rule prohibits the advertisement of all remotely offered prescriptions and treatments, thus offering a blanket cover that prevents the advertisement of even genuine and proven remote treatments and prescriptions (Vassis, Belsis, Skourlas & Pantziou, 2010 p572). Secondly, such a limitation works towards putting some consumers at a disadvantaged position, considering that there are some category of consumers who could easily access or opt for the remote prescriptions, owing to their status, backgrounds, cultures and belief systems (Shandley et al, 2011 p121). Thus, there is a need to reform this rule and make it more flexible, such that it can allow the genuine and scientifically proven treatments and prescriptions to be offered remotely, for the sake of catering for the target groups that has remote prescriptions as their major or even last alternative (Yuen, Goetter, Herbert & Forman, 2012 p7). The Financial rules as provided by UK CAP/BAP codes, have some aspects that need reform. According to the Consumer Involvement Theory, different consumers apply different approaches whenever purchasing commodities, based on the differences in time, thought and energy that such consumers commit to the purchase-decision process (Hackley, 2010 p219). The major factors that influences the consumer approach to the purchase decision are, the emotional and the rational/logical factors, which are always in constant conflict, considering that the emotional factors are enticed by a captivating and interesting advert, while the rational/logical factors are aroused by the real need that must be fulfilled by a consumer (Carroll & Buchholtz, 2010 p418). For the same reasons, the provision of the UK BCAP Codes under section 14.5 provides that the advertisers, agencies and the media, while making any advertisement, must ensure and should make it clear to the target audience that past experiences or performances does not automatically give a guidance for the future (CAP, 2013 n.p.). This is a noble provision that is meant to protect the consumers whose purchase-decision process is informed by the emotional factors, which are simply attracted by the manner in which an advertisement is appealing and captivating (Graduates on advertising, 2013. n.p.). Therefore, through the application of this rule, the CAP ensures that despite the fact that the advertisers, the agencies and the media may necessarily have to apply captivating advertisements to ensure that they arouse the interest of the targeted group towards purchasing the brand or product advertised, there is some limitation that ensures that the emotions of the customer will not be blown out of proportion, by the past experiences or performances regarding the product or brand, which is being advertised (Kaufman, 2003 n.p.). However, the preceding rule, UK BCAP Codes under section 14.3, has introduced a blanket rule for all financial institutions, requiring that the basis used to calculate any interest rate, to forecast or to project such rates must be made apparent to the consumer immediately (CAP, 2013 n.p.). Such a provision is noble, since it is a rule that has been entrenched to ensure the fairness and transparency of the advertisements made by financial institutions, are strictly meant to put the customer in a position of complete knowhow regarding how the financial institutions operates (Kirkpatrick, 2007 p7). However, it is a rule that needs to be reformed, considering that it has applied a blanket rule to all the financial institutions, while the reality demands that certain projections and predictions made by financial institutions are not made public, to avoid creating prospective that may work towards destabilizing the financial markets (Phillips, 1997 p186). Any advertisement that is made to the effect that the future projection and predictions favors a brand, may in turn influence the operations of the stock and financial markets, which causes customers to sell or buy a certain brand’s shares in extremely large quantities, eventually destabilizing the operations of the stock and the financial markets (Turow, 2012 n.p.). Therefore, while there is a need to ensure that the necessary and essential financial market operation facts are disclosed, it is also important to change the UK BCAP Codes under section 14.3, so that the mandatory requirement for projections and predictions does not affect all financial operators, especially those in the stock market category. Therefore, it is essential to reform this rule, to remove the blanket approach to all financial advertising (Duhigg, 2012 n.p.). Further, the Consumer involvement Theory provides that the low rational/emotional factors influence the choice of a brand more than the logic/rational factors, due to the fact that the emotional factors grant immediate gratification, although for a short period of time (Fletcher, 2008 p72). This being the case, consumers will tend to be more influenced by an advertisement that is of an emotional or sensual nature, which does not even take the consumer a lot of time to think about the product or even to evaluate it effectively, before engaging in the purchase (Hudson & Hudson, 2010 p489). In adhering to this provision, the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.1.2, provides that telephone premium rate services which are of a sexual explicit nature may not be advertised (CAP, 2013 n.p.). While the intentions of this rule are no doubt very noble, there are two major problems that are associated with the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.1.2, which needs to be reformed. First, the provisions of this rule do not apply a mandatory or prohibitory term, but applies a term that is open to various interpretations, which may create a loophole for advertisers, the media and agencies to exploit the loophole and engage in open advertisement of telephone premium services that are of an explicit sexual nature (Kellner & Harms, n.d.: n.p.). Considering that the rule applies the terms “may not advertise”, it creates a room which the advertising agencies might exploit, considering that the advertisement of such services has not been closed through the application of prohibitory or mandatory terms, and according to the provisions of the Consumer involvement Theory, any brand that is emotional or sensual has a higher chance of attracting the purchase-decision of a consumer, as opposed to the brands that require the application of logic and rational thinking (Yerger, Przewoznik & Malone, 2007 p12). This being the case, and considering that telephone premium services are of a sexual explicit nature, and are therefore emotional and sensual, they are capable of highly attracting the attention of the consumers. This will in turn increase the demand for such service, and the tendency for the advertisers to exploit the loophole that is left by the failure to make such advertisement prohibitory, is likely to be high (Fletcher, 2008 p44). Secondly, the rules stipulated in the UK BCAP Codes under section 11.1.2, in regard to the telephone premium services of a sexual explicit nature, need to be reformed. This is because, in addition to the loophole that is created through the use of the terms “may not advertise” in section 11.1.2, the subsequent statement in UK BCAP Codes rule under section 11.1.2, goes further to make an exception, to the rule that telephone premium services of an explicit nature may not be advertised, through stating that such advertisements can be made, for as long the advertisements of a sexual explicit nature are done through adult only entertainment channels, which have an encrypted elements (CAP, 2013 n.p.). The need to reform the rule arises because; despite the fact that the rule makes an exception based on the premise that the advertisement of the telephone premium services that is of explicit sexual nature should be done through encrypted adult only channels, the modern cultures have changed, so much so that it s no longer enough to apply encrypted elements to protect brands that are meant for adults only (Hudson & Hudson, 2010 p502). Therefore, even where such contents might be meant for access by the adults only, there will be no foolproof method that CAP as well as the other agencies that are tasked with the monitoring and enforcement of the advertisement rules established by the CAP, will be able to restrict the access of such content to adults only. This leaves a room for the exploitation by minors who would be interested in such contents that are of an explicit sexual nature, thus rendering the rule ineffective and less meaningful (Fletcher, 2008 n.p.). In the light of the existence of these weaknesses, it is therefore essential that such rule is reformed, to create a more perfect rule that will ensure that the existing loopholes are completely sealed, while providing measures that ensure that the advertisement of such content is minimized as possible, since it has more attractive, yet harmful effects on the society. The UK BCAP Codes under section 15 present another section of the advertisement code that requires to be reformed. First, the provisions of UK BCAP Codes under section 15.1 are noble, considering that they seek to protect the consumers from food and health information that might be misleading and inaccurate through providing that; only food and health claims that are provided in the updated Annex of the EU Regulation can be used in the marketing communication (CAP, 2013 n.p.). However, the gains made by this provision are immediately eroded by the provisions of the subsequent rule, where the provisions of the UK BCAP Codes under section 15.1.1 makes an exception to the previous requirements for all the marketing claims to adhere to the claims that are provided in the updated Annex of the EU Regulation, through adding that any other claim that has the same meaning as the claims that are provided in the EU Regulation can be applied (CAP, 2013 n.p.). This provision further provides a loophole through which the advertisers can indulge further health and food claims, through allowing the advertisers to use what could be deemed similar meaning. It is such window of opportunity that can be exploited by the advertisers, to offer marketing claims that are unsubstantiated or which could bear the same meaning as the EU regulations, but still have a different meaning or effect to the consumer (Pratt A, 2006 p1884). Further, the UK BCAP Codes rule, under section 15.6.1 and section 15.6.2, represents yet another set of advertising codes that need to be reformed. While the UK BCAP Codes rule under section 15.6.1 provides that any claim that state or imply that health could be affected by the failure to consume a food should not be advertised, section 15.6.2 goes further to prohibit any marketing communication that make a claim or imply that a food prevents, cures or treats a human disease (CAP, 2013 n.p.). Both rules are erratic in the sense that it could be beneficial to the consumer, in the spirit of providing informative content to the consumer as provided for under the Persuasive Advertising Theory, which requires that good advertisement should be able to give the consumers more information than they already have, regarding a brand (Hackley, 2000 p239). The prohibition of claims to the effect that failing to consume a food could be adversarial to health, as well as prohibiting inclusion of information regarding the curative and treatment abilities of a food, puts the consumer at a disadvantaged position regarding food choice in the purchase process. Therefore, such rules should be changed to allow the inclusion of meaningful information to that effect, provided that such information is scientifically proven, and that it is truthfully and factually represented. Conclusion Advertisement is an important tool for informing consumers and prospective customers regarding a brand, or a product offered in the market. However, while that could be the intention, there are many loopholes in the advertisement concept that can be exploited to promote a brand or a product, but leave the consumer in a disadvantaged position. Therefore, the UK CAP/BCAP Codes are formulated and written by the Committee of Advertising Practice, to regulate the manner in which the advertisers, agencies and media undertake their advertisement. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the CAP advertising rules means well for the consumers, there are several desirable changes that can make the codes more effective, which include the reform of the UK CAP/BCAP Codes and rules under section 11.1.2, section, section 11.13.1, section 11.18.2, section 15.1.1, 15.6.1 and section 15.6.2, and section 14.3. References CAP. (2013). BCAP Television Advertising Code: 11 Medicines, medical devices, treatments and health. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.cap.org.uk/Advertising-Codes/Broadcast/BCAP-Code/BCAP-TV-Code.aspx?q=BCAP%20Television%20Code_Section%2011%20-%20Other%20Categories CAP. (2013). Non-broadcast: UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP Code). Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.cap.org.uk/Advertising-Codes/Non-broadcast-HTML.aspx Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2010). Business & society: Ethics and stakeholder management. Mason, OH: CL-South-Western Cengage Learning. pp. 418-422. Cooper, D. B. (2011). Care in mental health-substance use. London: Radcliffe Publishing. pp13-21. Duhigg, H. (February 16, 2012). “How Companies Learn your Secrets.” The New York Times. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?pagewanted=1&_r=4&hp&pagewanted=all& Fletcher, W. (2008) Powers of Persuasion: The Inside Story of British Advertising, 1951-2000, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fletcher, W. (June 18, 2008). Art or puffery? A defence of advertising: An adman for almost 50 years Winston Fletcher explores the art, and ethics, of the sell. Rationalist Association. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://rationalist.org.uk/1804 Graduates on advertising: Campaign talks to graduates currently involved in graduate schemes, internships and trying to make it in the industry about how and why they decided to get into advertising and how it's going so far (October 17, 2013.). Campaignlive.co.uk. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/1216720/graduates-advertising/ Hackley, C. (September 2000). “Silent Running: Tacit, Discursive and Psychological Aspects of Management in a Top UK Advertising Agency”. British Journal of Management 11(3), 239-254. Hackley, C. E. (2010). Advertising and promotion: An integrated marketing communications approach. Los Angeles: SAGE. pp. 219-220. Hudson, S. & Hudson, D. (February 1, 2010). “Branded Entertainment: A New Advertising Technique or Product Placement in Disguise?” Journal of Marketing Management 22(5-6), 489-504. Johnson, N. (10 Sep 2013). “Advertising regulation: CAP & BCAP launch consultation on the medicines sections of the advertising codes.” Marketing Law. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.marketinglaw.co.uk/advertising-regulation/cap-bcap-launch-consultation-on-the-medicines-sections-of-the-advertising-codes Kaufman, G. (June 9, 2003). Push The Courvoisier: Are Rappers Paid For Product Placement?: Being mentioned in the right song can spell big profits for drinks, cars and sneakers. MTV News. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1472393/rappers-paid-product-placement.jhtml Kellner, D. & Harms, J. (n.d.).Toward A Critical Theory of Advertising. Illuminations. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.uta.edu/huma/illuminations/kell6.htm Kirkpatrick, J. (2007). In defense of advertising: Arguments from reason, ethical egoism, and laissez-faire capitalism. S.l.: TLJ Books. pp7-12. Lasagna, L. (1978). “Coddling the Consumer.” Sciences, 18(1), 3. McNamara, S. (2013). “Persuasive Advertising Theory.” AdCracker. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.adcracker.com/theory/Persuasive_Advertising_Theories.htm Moore, R. L. & Murray, M. D. (2011). Media Law and Ethics. Taylor & Francis. pp. 295-297. Pratt A, C. (2006). "Advertising and creativity, a governance approach: a case study of creative agencies in London" Environment and Planning A 38(10) 1883-1899. Pfeiffer, P. N., Glass, J., Austin, K., Valenstein, M., McCarthy, J. F., & Zivin, K. (2011). “Impact of Distance and Facility of Initial Diagnosis on Depression Treatment.” Health Services Research, 46(3), 768-786. Phillips, M. J. (1997). Ethics and manipulation in advertising: Answering a flawed indictment. Westport, Conn: Quorum. pp186-190. Preston, I. L. (2010). “Interaction of Law and Ethics in Matters of Advertisers' Responsibility for Protecting Consumers.” Journal Of Consumer Affairs, 44(1), 259-264. Shandley, K., Klein, B., Kyrios, M., Austin, D., Ciechomski, L., & Murray, G. (2011). “Training Postgraduate Psychology Students to Deliver Psychological Services Online.” Australian Psychologist, 46(2), 120-125. Shaver, M. & Soontae A. (2013).The Global Advertising Regulation Handbook. M.E. Sharpe. pp. 48-51. Schlegelmilch, B. B. (1998). Marketing ethics: An international perspective. London: International Thomson Business Press. pp106-109. Turow, J. (February 7, 2012). “A Guide to the Digital Advertising Industry That's Watching Your Every Click.” The Atlantic. Retrieved December2, 2013 from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/a-guide-to-the-digital-advertising-industry-thats-watching-your-every-click/252667/ Vassis, D., Belsis, P., Skourlas, C., & Pantziou, G. (2010). Providing advanced remote medical treatment services through pervasive environments. Personal & Ubiquitous Computing, 14(6), 563-573. White, H. (1978). “Why Did the Antitrust Division Dismiss the Case?”. American Bar Association Journal, 64(11), 1667. Yerger, V, J Przewoznik, J & Malone, R. (2007). “Racialized Geography, Corporate Activity, and Health Disparities: Tobacco Industry Targeting of Inner Cities.” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 18(4), 10-38. Yuen, E. K., Goetter, E. M., Herbert, J. D., & Forman, E. M. (2012). “Challenges and Opportunities in Internet-Mediated Telemental Health”. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 43(1), 1-8. Read More