4.6 Article

A Longitudinal Assessment of Corrective Advertising Mandated in United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.

Journal

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS
Volume 171, Issue 4, Pages 757-770

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-020-04456-x

Keywords

United States v; Philip Morris USA; Inc; Tobacco company deception; Smoking beliefs; Corporate ethical values; Corrective advertising

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The U.S. Court ruled against major U.S. tobacco companies for ethical breaches over a 50-year period and mandated a corrective advertising campaign. However, the study found that the campaign did not effectively change smokers' or non-smokers' antismoking beliefs. Differences were observed between smokers and non-smokers, with non-smokers holding stronger beliefs about the harmful effects of smoking.
Due to the ethical breaches of tobacco companies over a 50-year period, a U.S. Court ruled in United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. that major U.S. tobacco companies had misled consumers and the government about tobacco's addictiveness, effects of environmental (secondhand) smoke, marketing targeted at adolescents, and deceptive practices related to harmfulness of smoking. We address the actions of the tobacco companies based on the consumer's right to be informed and values for ethical corporate behavior, and we draw from psychological theories and the smoking literature to develop our conceptual framework and test the effectiveness of the ensuing corrective advertising campaign mandated in the Court decision. We use a quota sample of 470 smokers and non-smoker participants in a longitudinal study to test the impact of the corrective advertising campaign on key antismoking beliefs from the campaign. Results reveal that the corrective ad campaign has not been successful in affecting smokers' or non-smokers' antismoking beliefs. However, differences are found between smokers' and non-smokers' beliefs about the adverse health effects of smoking, effects of secondhand smoke, and tobacco company deceptiveness, with these beliefs being stronger for non-smokers. Smokers' weaker beliefs about the effects of secondhand smoke are viewed as particularly problematic, given the established health risks. We address the implications of the ethical breaches and the corrective advertising attempt to address the deception identified by the Court.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available