Too many products and services these days that are promoted in TV commercials, posters and other types of ads are accused of taking their marketing tactics to and unethical extent, crossing the line by misleading consumers. These direct channels of marketing are often recognized for their exaggerated facts and deceptive information. However, what happens when networks of communication that consumers depend on for reports on such unethical advertising are instead also used as a form of persuasion? Utter confusion.
A recent case regarding an article published on The Atlantic news has sparked controversy over its clear advertising for Scientology. Disregarding any thought of an objective report, the editorial leads headstrong into a lengthy post that blatantly praises the religion. Although the article is printed under “Sponsor Content”, it is not in the traditional section of advertisements, hoping that readers will take the time to notice if presented differently. This new business approach has led to the Atlantic’s defined audience of “America’s most influential individuals who wish to be…informed” to protest in an outcry of rage. To further exacerbate this situation, the marketing team had been deleting any negative comments on the website regarding the article’s content. Talk about freedom of speech.
Thanks to this, readers who might have previously been interested in reading these advertorials are most likely not coming back again. The incident has not only negatively affected how the Atlantic’s readers view and trust this news site, but it has also not helped to improve anyone’s view on Scientology either. If this news company wishes to keep its intelligent readers from returning ever again, they must start to seriously consider the repercussions of their marketing news division. If the company is concerned about its lack of cash inflow, it should realize that behaving in an ethical manner might be the foundation to long-term profitability.