(Scenario 18-5) Scenario 18-5
An old adage states that all publicity is good publicity. However, Professors Jonah
Berger of the Wharton School, and Alan Sorensen and Scott Rasmussen of Stanford
found that there is such a thing as bad publicity. The colleagues studied the relationship
between bad publicity and its impact on music albums, books, and movies. In 2010,
they published their findings in an article in Marketing Science. After studying cases
involving the late Michael Jackson, Russell Crowe, and various authors, the colleagues
concluded that negative publicity can increase product sales. Michael Jackson sold
more albums after receiving negative media attention, and films starring Russell Crowe
received higher rankings following an incident in which he allegedly threw a cell phone
at a hotel employee. These high-profile stars actually thrived after receiving substantial
amounts of negative publicity. However, in many lower profile cases, negative publicity
hurt sales and product reception. The three colleagues conducted an analysis of The
New York Times’ reviews and book sales and found that negative reviews hurt sales of
books by well-established authors, but helped sales of books by relatively unknown
authors. After conducting their study, the authors found that conventional wisdom is
wrong: not all publicity is good publicity. But they did show that negative publicity can
sometimes be positive; it all depends on existing-product awareness.(Ned Smith, “Can
Bad Buzz Be Good?” Business News Daily, November 1, 2010)
When publicity is positive it tends to
a. carry heightened credibility.
b. create more skepticism.
c. create competition amongst brands.
d. polarize individuals within a company.
What is the most fundamental ethical issue in advertising?
a. exaggeration, which is a serious but increasingly common practice
b. taste, particularly regarding society’s exposure to offensive messages
c. materialism, which also is a key legal issue
d. deception, particularly false or misleading statements