Ethics of Neuro-Marketing - Essay Example

Ethics of Neuro-Marketing Introduction Neuro-marketing is the application of cognitive neurosciences in the area of marketing as well as in marketing research (Pranay, 1). According to Christophe (1), Neuro-marketing is described as an emerging field asserting to offer advertisers with improved methods to comprehend what sets off buy buttons inside the brains of the consumers. Through adopting methods utilized by neuroscientists to look into the neural signature of numerous consumption behaviors, neuro-marketers are guaranteeing unparalleled levels of success in explaining as well as forecasting the success of movies, TV commercials, print ads, billboards, packaging and more (Christophe, 1). Neuro-marketing is the similar to doing traditional marketing with deeper insights together with the use of recent medical equipment. It applies cognitive neuroscience which handles human beings capabilities such as awareness, memory, attention, action decision making and many more (Pranay, 1). Due to the historical challenges the advertising industry has experienced in trying to prove the return on adverting spending, neuro-marketing has been given somewhat fast adoption in the previous five years (Micu &Plummer, 1). Despite the fact that the prospect of enhanced advertising has created excitement within the business community in general, serious ethical matters have been raised as well by scientists, scholars, and consumer groups (Murphy, Illes, & Reiner, 1). However, the industry pays no attention to these concerns (Christophe, 1). The State of Advertising Ethics According to Bishop (2), the subject of ethical advertising is regarded as an old matter. Ethical advertising could be described as the production and broadcasting of commercial messages which promote goods or services without lying to the public (Bishop, 2). Shockingly, both the advertising and the marketing industries have a not so good reputation concerning the application of ethical standards. A survey carried out by Gallup in 2011 positioned the advertising occupation at the bottom of the honesty scale with no more than eleven percent partakers ranking advertising practitioners with high or very high scores, placing them just four points above lobbyists and car salespeople (Christophe, 2). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), formed during 1914, is in charge of keeping consumers protected from advertisers who are unethical or unscrupulous. In the long run, the Federal Trade Commission has identified universal conditions upon which a message is considered to breach the standard of “truth-in-advertising” (FTC, 2011). In reference to the Federal Trade Commission Deception Policy Statement, advertising must always be: non-deceptive, fair, and backed by evidence to support implied or expressed claims (Christophe, 2). Another policy statement describes unfairness as causing material or physical prejudice to customers. Taking into account that the physical as well as material parameters differ broadly based on the nature of the goods or services advertised, the government has come up with specific laws regulating advertising for pharmaceuticals, credits cards, tobacco, loans, and alcohol products, thus, making the legal control of advertising an intricate web of exceptions and definitions. Furthermore, numerous states as well as local organizations for example, the Better Business Bureau (BBB) are also concerned with settling consumer complaints as a result of corrupt advertisers. Even though a legal framework to regulate advertisers along with advertising agencies exist, it seems that the advertising industry can work without regarding what makes up ethical advertising, mainly due to the somewhat subjective nature of the what describes fairness or deception (Drumright & Murphy, 3). Little by little, a complex set of laws merged in the midst of a general industry idea that ethics do not matter in advertising have promoted the notion that advertising practice ought to be free to advance without the government intervening and that advertisers are able to simply regulate themselves through adopting best practices. In addition, when the government does get involved, it normally encounters fierce legal opposition from lobbying groups protecting the combined interests of advertisers along with the advertising industry as well. Most of the time, the defense tactic employed by lobbying group has been to over and over again cite the constitutional right of free speech (Christophe, 3). Commercial speech is without a doubt protected under the First Amendment on condition that it does not falsify or distort advertising claims ("Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council," 1976). The practice of producing deceptive messaging appears more than ever to have flourished over the last ten years. These practices naturally fall into two categories of messages: subliminal and mind controlling. A mind controlling message tries to take control of the ability of the consumers to think, successfully blocking their independence. According to Kathleen Taylor, a research scientist in the Department of Physiology, Anatomy, and Genetics at the University of Oxford, advertising can engross a deliberate intention to brainwash or have power over the mind of the consumers since it seeks to take precedence over the victim’s ability to rationalize regarding his or her situation as well as beliefs (Taylor, 3). The word “subliminal” expresses the idea that a stimulus is having an impact below our level of conscious awareness (Merriam-Websters, 4). In 1957, a private market researcher named James Vicary alleged that he had successfully utilized subliminal messages to boost sales of popcorn and Coca Cola in Movie Theater (Karremans, Stroebe, & Claus, 4). But, Vicary’s research was never repeated and in the end, he admitted he had made-up the story for promotional reasons. Although the proof supporting the results produced by subliminal techniques is inadequate, it is promising and needed. To this point researchers have depended on self-reports or post experimental behavioral measurements, which are not actually sufficient to study subconscious responses. Though an increasing variety of tools allege to assess brain responses with no affective or cognitive participation from test subjects, just a few are known to deliver reliable and credible measurements of neuronal activity: MRI and EEG (Pranay, 4). The Privacy of Thoughts Many scholars are concerned over the chance that the privacy of thoughts can be breached by neuro-marketing practitioners. Marketing researchers, in the last decades, have radically improved their ability to gather consumer information from credit cards, loyalty cards, or online browsing records (Wilson, Gaines, & Hill, 4). However, nothing measures up to the ability to prod directly the mind of the consumer. Without a doubt, being able to examine subconscious cognitive as well as affective processes signifies a huge step in breaking the code of possible “buy buttons” in the brain. However many people think that inner thoughts are sanctified and are protected by the constitution (Tovino, 4). While the apprehensions about the violation of privacy seem legal, published studies demonstrate that scientists have an extremely restricted ability to decipher our private thoughts. Moreover, provided that participants provide approval and researchers pledge privacy, no laws are successfully broken. Nonetheless, the present ethical framework in which neuro-marketing companies are permitted to operate does not appear to tackle the issue satisfactorily. The Implications of Neuro-Marketing Findings There are two types of neuro-marketing findings that can harm participants and probably the general public, they include: manipulative insights and incidental findings. Incidental findings come about when brain abnormalities are detected because of carrying out a brain scan during a research practice. The seriousness and frequency of such discoveries have been broadly documented while using fMRI. For example, Nelson approximates that more than five percent of brain scans generate incidental findings (Nelson, 5). Nearly all neuro-marketing companies are normally unprepared to tackle incidental findings since they are not obliged to adopt a specific protocol for managing incidental findings and usually they do not make use of a board-certified neuro-radiologist. Manipulative insights can be utilized to amplify the number of deceptive messages to the public. Given that the bulk of neuro-marketing research is private, not much is known with reference to the number of deceptive messages that are devised with manipulative insights. Reports from neuro-marketing studies which are printed or distributed to the public on different blogs would propose that neuro-marketing research is utilized mainly to get rid of the bad adverts from the best instead of building complex blueprints of the ideal persuasive message. Ariely and Berns (5) published the only one scholarly paper addressing the extent to which neuro-marketing can harm customers and it strongly proposes that there is no proof advertisers are attaining more power to control customers via carrying out neuro-marketing studies. However, not all scholars concur. Wilson, Gaines & Hill think that the near future will witness more commercial amalgamation of neuro-marketing findings to control (Wilson,et al., 5). They envisage a not far-away future in which the brains of the consumers’ will be scanned then and there so that advertisers are able to convey instant customized messages. Examples of Actual Advertisements That Were Used In Reference To the Neuro-Marketing Mercedes-Benz Daimler utilized neuro-marketing for a campaign where the fronts of cars were replicating human faces, connecting directly to the brain’s pleasure center. The sales increased by twelve percent in the first quarter. Yahoo tested its advertisements using neurometrics so as to capitalize on the return on investment. They had a television commercial featuring cheerful, dancing people around the globe that lasted for sixty seconds. Yahoo ran the ad by EEG-cap-wearing consumers prior to spending money airing the ad on prime-time as well as cable television, and online. The brain waves demonstrated stimulation within the limbic system as well as in the frontal cortices of their brains, where emotional thought and memory take place. The ad is part of Yahoo’s new a hundred million dollars branding campaign. The ad rolled out in September 2012 to attract more customers to the search engine (Wordpress, 6). Conclusion The ethical framework in which advertising agencies function within the United States is weak as well as fragile. Furthermore, the development of new digital platforms has offered advertisers with more alternatives to test as well as deploy more deceptive messages, particularly to endorse goods that are very much regulated for instance tobacco and alcohol. A greatly self-regulated environment easily permits those advertisers making use of neuro-marketing insights to heighten their ability to manipulate customers. Nevertheless, there is still limited proof that advertising agencies have attained more manipulative power using neuro-marketing findings. This is because the complexity of the tools utilized to examine brain responses in front of advertising is unsuccessfully comprehended by agencies, and also, there is a great unity among the scientific community that construing the information produced by neuroimaging continues to be in its early years. Nevertheless, it remains possible that neuro-marketing insights can be utilized to amplify the quantity of deceptive messages in the coming future. That is why it is sensible and important that scholars as well as researchers keep on deliberating on ethical. Works Cited Ariely, D., & Berns, S. (2010). Neuro-marketing: the hope and hype of neuroimaging. In business Nature reviews Neuroscience (March). Bishop, P. (1949).The ethics of advertising. Bedford Square, UK: Robert Hale. Christophe Morin. (2011). Neuromarketing and ethics: a call for more attention and action to Raise standards. Neuromarketing.ning.com, 11 September 2011. Web 27 April 2014. FTC. 2011). Advertising FAQ guide for small business. Business.ftc.gov. Web 27 April 2014. Karremans, C., Stroebe, W., & Claus, J. (2006). Beyond Vicary's fantasies: The impact of subliminal priming and brand choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42,792- 798. Merriam-Webster. (Ed.) (2011). Encyclopaedia Britannica. Micu, C., & Plummer, T. (2010). Measurable emotions: how television ads really work. Journal of Advertising Research, 50(2). Murphy, R., Illes, J., & Reiner, B. (2008). Neuroethics of neuromarketing. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 7, 293-302. Pranay, T. (2014). Neuromarketing - Can We Play With Your Mind? mbaskool.com. Web 27 April 2014. Taylor, K., Brain washing: The science of thought control. 2004, New York: Oxford University Press. Tovino, A. (2006). The visible brain: privacy issues. Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Texas, Galveston. (UNI 3218005). Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1976). Wilson, M., Gaines, J. & Hill, P. (2008). Neuro-marketing and consumer free will. The Journal of Consumer Affairs. 42(3): p. 389-410. Wordpress. (2012). Companies That Publicly Turned To Neuro-marketing Research. Neurorelay.com, 27 December 2012. Web 1 May 2014. Read More