Kantian Ethics In The Reebok Case

In the modern economy, businesses are encouraged to compete in pursuit of profit. They would be providing goods and services that a society demands, and then they get compensated for their efforts, therefore there is nothing evil or shameful in pursuing profit, as long as it is within the boundaries of the law. Advertising is tool that is required for the business process to carry on, by communicating the right products to the right customers. Since the marketplace is only getting fiercer every year and products are getting commoditized, marketers are finding it difficult to compete, so sometimes they resort to using deceptive methods to market their offerings.

Kantian Ethics:

From a Kantian perspective, businesses have the duty to provide

Since they were outright lying about the benefits of the product. In the Reebok case, the product supposedly had extra benefits that other shoes did not have. They claimed that these shoes actually make your muscles toner and stronger than other shoes. They even put statistics to make the claim look more credible than it really is. Reebok lost millions as a result of these advertisement, as customers noticed that the extra benefits just did not exist, also the statistics were never really proven. In the case of the skin care products. They clearly exaggerated the product benefits. Also, this raises another question. What 's wrong with older or darker skin? Is it somehow that white and young skin is the "ideal" state that women should pursue? This would play at the insecurity of the customer to purchase the

It is also permitted by the law. This type of exaggeration can take the form of using puffery words. Puffing is the use of opinions and exaggerated statements, like the words "better" or "greatest" as an example. Marketers never intend to treat these type of statements as a fact. They believe that puffing is justified since they assume that "reasonable consumers" will see through it.

But as shown by these ads, it is no longer really about the little exaggeration. As seen in both skin care products.. It is actually somehow disrespectful. Making people who have dark or old skin feel bad about themselves. Also, children are vulnerable to these puffery statements. As they still did not evolve into a "reasonable consumer" yet.

What a business should do is

If I was asked to push this advertisement then I would recommend against it. Since such ads will usually backfire. It might give the company the attention that it needs, but usually a quick fame ends up in a quick fall. Also, in today’s business environment where ethics is now the new latest hot topic that is being considered by all. Anyone who commits unethical actions will attract an instant spotlight, so it is in the best interest of anyone to play nice. The last thing a company should want is to become a case study for unethical behavior in business ethics