Article: How far do you go in persuasion? Where do you draw the line?

How far do you go in persuasion? Where do you draw the line?

This article was also published on Adformatie / Marketingonline.

When it comes to unconscious influence?

Marketing is a field of people who live on the successful side of society.

Fluent professionals who convincingly share their ideas, present clever strategies, embrace experiments with new techniques and are generally well aware of what's going on in the world. Including knowledge of how to influence people unconsciously — even when that goes against the customer's interests.

But how far do you go before coming into conflict with your conscience?

I have now worked in marketing for nearly 30 years and, if I'm honest, I was not at all aware in earlier years of the many ethical dimensions of our profession.

For years I dedicated myself to the international marketing of petfood and later even cigarette brands, so I don't think I was some great moral crusader. Back then, everything was permissible as long as we stayed on the right side of the law and self-regulation.

The intention is reprehensible, not the techniques

Lately I increasingly see practices where marketers and communication professionals execute strategies that raise ethical questions. Perhaps they are not aware of this — or perhaps they are. Or maybe they grew up with different values than I did.

I'm referring to practices like framing, spin, native advertising, influencer marketing, supraliminal signals, ego depletion and a range of other unconscious influence techniques.

Techniques that are not in themselves reprehensible — as long as they are used to achieve something positive for the consumer and for society.

Voodoo marketing

Fortunately, there are also people who are aware of the commercial practices that deserve scrutiny. Recently, scientist Ronald Voorn and journalist Jan Dijkgraaf announced they are writing a book with the ominous title Voodoo Marketing.

An apt metaphor, comparing the marketer to a malevolent voodoo priest. Voodoo marketing exposes the (sometimes controversial) ways in which companies and governments engage in manipulation.

I hope their book will help raise awareness of the moral dimension of our work — and hopefully become required reading on marketing and communications courses.

People first

Back to a basic principle. The marketer should represent and champion the customer's interests within their organisation, and place those interests at the centre of everything they do. The marketing function, more than any other, should understand what is happening in society and what people's needs and interests are.

Of all the roles and functions in a business, it is surely the marketer who you would most expect to be a genuine advocate for the customer's happiness.

You would perhaps expect slightly less of the accountant, the HR manager or the production director.

How is it, then, that so many marketers pursue financial interests rather than their customers' interests? Is it the pressure of annual bonuses and the next career step pushing them towards short-term financial return? Or are they isolated, unheard and without enough weight within the organisation to make a difference?

Marketing unconsciously influences behaviour

If the customer's interest truly comes first, this inevitably clashes with any restriction of personal autonomy. Because that is what marketing so often does: use (largely unconscious) influence techniques that undermine people's capacity for self-determination.

Precisely because people are often unaware of this influence, the marketer carries an enormous responsibility.

Let me illustrate what I mean with a few examples I've come across recently.

People assume there is a free press and journalism — they don't know that editorial teams, journalists and bloggers are often paid by marketers to write positively about their products and services.

Where it used to be clear whether something was a commercial message (advertising or advertorial), today that is far less obvious, given the many 'native advertising' practices.

Comparison sites, where products and services are rated by users with stars, are also known to be frequently unreliable — the ratings have been bought or otherwise manipulated.

Fake ratings

Last month the BBC even exposed a global trade in fake ratings. They claim to have evidence that at least 20% of ratings on comparison sites are fabricated.

Evidence has also been found that companies are systematically paying content marketing agencies on a large scale, who in turn reward their writers for posting positive comments about clients. This case is now being investigated by the UK Competition and Markets Authority.

So next time, think twice before blindly trusting a hotel, restaurant or electric toothbrush rating.

Ethical? I think not.

Last week I received a call from a woman at DTG — formerly De Telefoongids & Gouden Gids. She offered to guarantee that my company's website would appear at the top of the major search engines, if I signed a contract with her for just over 300 euros a year.

Not as an advertisement, but simply at the top of the organic search results. She told me they could offer this because they are a network partner of Google.

DTG would arrange a large number of quality backlinks, with guaranteed positive effects on the findability of my site.

I had to smile when I realised that we already naturally appear near the top of the first search page when you search for, for example, 'brand strategy' or 'brand portfolio'.

Ethical? I think not

Fortunately, we don't need that service at all.

But from now on I have to start distrusting every company that appears at the top of search lists, because they may well have bought their position.

Ethical? I think not.

When we enter a supermarket, our decision-making capacity is also put to the test — in a practice that stays entirely within the law and initially seems completely innocent.

Most marketers know that products with the highest profit margin are displayed prominently, neatly facing forward with the label out, at eye level on the shelves.

So we think we are choosing a brand freely, while the product's placement in the store is unconsciously playing a large role.

In the supermarket I always tell my children: 'Always look down — that's where the house brands are. They're just as good and save a lot of money.'

Ethical? On reflection, perhaps not.

Marketing for something positive

None of this would be quite so bad if these techniques were deployed for the promotion of 'good' things that the world genuinely benefits from.

The negative side of marketing is that it drives consumerism and the waste of products and services that are unnecessary and even harmful. Think of the damage to public health: the rapid rise of obesity and diabetes, lung cancer from smoking — just a few examples.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if more professionals in our field started using their knowledge for positive, happy behaviour?

Couldn't you generate far more sympathy for your brand by openly committing to causes that truly benefit society?

Adidas

There are many good examples. I think of Adidas, making sports shoes from entirely recovered plastic fibres from the ocean.

Or Tenzing Travel (in the interest of transparency: this is our client, formerly Kuoni) and telecoms provider Simyo, both of which place the 'happiness' of customers and staff at the centre of their organisational and brand policy.

Or Natuurmonumenten (also a client) which encourages people to come and plant a tree on National Tree Planting Day and together create a forest. That strikes me as a better approach than buying likes and positive reviews.

Amsterdam, 13 July 2015

Alexander Koene, BR-ND