Marketing and Advertising

Companies Deliberately Alienating “Undesirable” Consumers: What’s Going On Here?”

/ Jack Marshall / 21 Comments

I don’t think we’ve ever seen this before the 21st Century emergence of The Great supid, with those entrusted with the management of for-profit companies deliberately choosing virtue -signaling over profitability. What does it all mean?

Today’s example is Sports Illustrated, which, I must confess, I thought was defunct. The once indispensable sports photography and commentary magazine almost went under last year and was apparently bought by a last-minute rescuer.  So how does the magazine launch its comeback? Why, by prominently including the above model in its annual swimsuit issue due out this month, displaying other comely and not so comely models in gowns rather than bikinis (Who, other than Oprah, wants to see Gail King in the S.I. swimsuit issue?) and highlighting Angry Lesbian Megan Rapinoe to promote the issue. That should really draw the guys!

Continue reading →

So It’s Come To This, Has It? “Media Watchdogs” Now Watch Out For Political Correctness Non-Conformity…

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

Can you spot what’s troubling, alarming, ominous, about the photo above?

Feathers!

That’s Washington Commanders (Shhhhh: they used to be called “the Redskins”) coach Dan Quinn above wearing a T-shirt depicting two feathers hanging off the Commanders’ “W” logo. The New York Times instantly did its best Donald Sutherland (in the “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” finale, when the protagonist of the movie has been revealed as completely pod-ified) imitation….

…with a story headlined, “Dan Quinn dons unsanctioned Commanders shirt as future of team’s stadium discussed on Capitol Hill.” Playing the part of co-opted Donald was Times sportswriter Ben Standig, who blew the metaphorical whistle on Twtter/”X” writing, “So, the shirt. This is not a team-sanctioned item. Not sure if Quinn got this at an Etsy shop or elsewhere. Do your thing, Twitter.”

You know: cancel him, shun him, brand him a racist, get him fired.

Oooh, “unsanctioned”! How long before all of us will need permission from our enlightened, woke and empowered censors before our shirts can be safely purchased and worn without dire social consequences?

Standig got right on the scandal of the Commanders’s coach daring to wear a shirt that evoked his team’s previous nickname, which was finally changed when—you should be able to recite this by now—-“a lifetime black petty criminal overdosing on fentanyl and resisting a lawful arrest died under the knee of a bad white cop in Minnesota.” This incident obviously mandated that an NFL team in Washington D.C. capitulate to long-standing contrived protests over a team name (that was never intended as a slur nor taken as one by the vast majority of Native Americans) and a now-banned team logo designed by a prominent leader of Montana’s Blackfeet tribe.

I live in the Washington, D.C. area. Literally nobody likes the politically correct, “inoffensive” name “Commanders” except the non-football fan activists who demonstrated their power by forcing the team to change it. It’s like a scalp hanging from their belts.

In related news, Rhode Island has announced that it will join 11 other states and require all lawyers must submit to DEI indoctrination—sorry, training—in order to maintain their law licenses.

Resistance is futile.

And, may I note with pride, where else on the World Wide Web will an NFL coach’s choice of attire evoke pop culture references to “Apocalypse Now,” “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” and “Star Trek: The Next Generation”?

Ethics Dunce: Ohio State 2024 Commencement Speaker Chris Pan

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Usually the many Ethics Alarms train wreck graphics are reserved for official Ethics Train Wrecks, but not this time. The episode under consideration didn’t involve an actual train, but Ohio State alum Chris Pan‘s commencement address to about 12,000 2024 graduates was somewhat more literally akin to train disasters, at least ones involving trains leaping the tracks.

Outkick has tagged the speech the “Worst Commencement Speech Ever.” I doubt that it is that, but Pan’s self-indulgent blather might be the most unethical one ever—if there have been more unethical addresses, I’m not sure I would want to hear them even as an analytical exercise.

Let’s start with the fact that Pan conceived the speech while he was high on the psychedelic drug Ayahuasca. He admitted this later, and appears to be proud of it, or think its funny, or something. This makes him an Ethics Alarms certified asshole as well as an Ethics Dunce. When people are trusting you to perform at your best in support of an important task, project or event, you don’t impair yourself with foreign substances—not alcohol, not uppers or downers, and definitely not mind altering drugs. Doing so is deliberately defying common sense, personal responsibility, and well-established societal standards.

Moreover, you risk a debacle like the speech you will see in this video. If you like, you can skip the glowing introduction by OSU President Ted Carter, though it provides useful context as Pan was to humiliate Carter as well as himself. It’s a bit like knowing that they called The Titanic “unsinkable” before it sank on its maiden voyage. Pan starts speaking at the 1:47 mark.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: That Apple IPad Pro Ad

/ Jack Marshall / 22 Comments

Filmmakers, musicians, writers and other artists began whining about that ad above for the Apple iPad Pro from almost the second it was released. As Sonny and Cher warble one of their lesser efforts, “All I Ever Need is You,” a hydraulic press crushes musical instruments, cameras, a framed picture, paint cans, record albums and other stuff in a colorful explosion of chaos.

“The destruction of the human experience. Courtesy of Silicon Valley,” tweeted actor Hugh Grant. “Who needs human life and everything that makes it worth living? Dive into this digital simulacrum and give us your soul. Sincerely, Apple,” added “Men in Black” screenwriter Ed Solomon. There were lots more metaphorical squeals of indignation and alarm on social media, as
“creative people” accused Apple of gloating over how Big Tech is co-opting the traditional tools of art and on the verge of eliminating the human creativity with artificial intelligence.

So, naturally, as is the norm these days, Apple “assumed the position” and groveled an apology. Pledging that Apple would never run the ad on TV again, Tor Myhren, the company’s vice president of marketing communications, said, “Creativity is in our DNA at Apple, and it’s incredibly important to us to design products that empower creatives all over the world.” The statement continued, “Our goal is to always celebrate the myriad of ways users express themselves and bring their ideas to life through iPad. We missed the mark with this video, and we’re sorry.”

Seriously?

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Oh, lots of things: Is there anything unethical about that ad? Do its critics have a legitimate point? Should Apple have caved to their complaints? Was that apology sincere?

Continue reading →

RFK Jr. Supporters Are Going To Sue Meta (Facebook, Instagram). Good!

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

Oopsie! Meta, the monster (in many senses of the word) parent company of social media giants Facebook and Instagram, blocked the link to a new, 30-minute infomercial supporting the candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the rebel independent Presidential candidate whom Democrats wish they could vaporize with their bad thoughts. Meta says it was a “mistake.”

Maybe it was. The embargo didn’t last long: the ad was only unavailable from late afternoon last Friday to the middle of last Saturday. A spokesman for Meta said the link had been incorrectly flagged as spam. For some reason, RFK Jr.’s campaign and supporters don’t trust Meta. Tony Lyons, a founder the super PAC that paid for the ad, says his group plans to sue Meta in federal court for censorship and First Amendment violations.

“When social media companies censor a presidential candidate, the public can’t learn what that candidate actually believes and what policies they would pursue if elected,” Mr. Lyons said. “We are left with the propaganda and lies from the most powerful and most corrupt groups and individuals.”

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: The Tanked Free Throw

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

Unlike most ethics quizzes, I’ve made up my mind about this incident, but I acknowledge that others may feel differently and have good reasons—maybe—to do so. I hate it, however.

The NBA’s LA. Clippers and Chick-fil-A collaborated on a promotion that if a player on an opposing team misses two consecutive free-throw attempts, fans will win a free Chick-fil-A chicken sandwich. And thus it was that when Houston Rockets’ Boban Marjanovic went to the free-throw with 4:44 to play in the fourth and final quarter of the Rockets’ game against the Clippers with his team leading 105-97 (not an insuperable margin), he had a twinkle in his eye. He missed his first shot, and the Clipper fans stared cheering—for chicken. Marjanovic looked around, pointed at himself, and bounced his shot off the basket rim. The fans went wild, and Marjanovic seemed to revel in his failure.

Yecchh.

…not that I want to influence you, now.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz on this Patriots Day (in Boston) is…

“Was it ethical or unethical for Marjanovic to tank his free throw so the fans could get a free sandwich?”

Just listen to those idiots in the broadcast booth…

I absolutely think it was unethical; in fact, the NBA and his team should fine and suspend Marjanovic. But this is emblematic of why I detest pro basketball only slightly less passionately than I do the NFL. The sport has no integrity. Regular season games are virtually meaningless. Players literally play about 60% harder during the play-offs: you can see it.

This episode was disgusting, and unethical in more ways than one:

Continue reading →

Life Imitates “Seinfeld”: For Fake Fat-Free Yogurt, Substitute Fake Gluten-Free Doughnuts

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

The Savory Fig, founded by Michelle Siriana, is a self-proclaimed vegan bakery in Patchogue, New York. Siriana makes and sells vegan scones, cinnamon rolls, cookies, and brownies, but also, amazingly enough, yummy gluten-free, vegan doughnuts. Vegan and gluten-freed doughnuts tend not to taste so good, for reasons you can guess if you’re familiar with how the fatty, buttery morsels are usually made; they also tend not to have the pleasant texture of the Krispy Kreme variety. Siriani’s doughnuts, however, are miraculous, fluffy and light with delectable icing.

Cindy Snacks, a vegan food market in Long Island, sold The savory Fig’s pastries and sometimes posted photos of the doughnuts on social media as part of its marketing strategy. In an Instagram post on March 3, the store’s proprietor revealed a scandal: an order they received from The Savory Fig contained the this doughnut …

…with pink and orange, D-shaped sprinkles—D, as in “Dunkin’ Donuts.”  Pink and orange, as in Dunkin Donuts. Concerned that the doughnuts she had been buying and selling as vegan and gluten-free were neither, the alarmed owner texted Siriana, “If these are Dunkin’ Donuts the ingredients could kill somebody as we have so many people with severe dairy allergies that shop here. I’m concerned with the donuts this week and am very nervous to put them out.”

Continue reading →

In Memory of Grace: “The Amazing Mouthwash Deception: Helping Alcoholics Relapse For Profit”

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

When I last re-posted this early Ethics Alarms entry from 2010, I called it, “Since Ethics Alarms Appears To Be The Only Source Trying To Publicize This Problem, Here, For The Third Time.” Not much has changed since then, except that my wife is dead. Listerine played a major role in killing her: Grace’s last major relapse—she battled alcoholism her entire adult life—occurred right before the pandemic when she impulsively drank down an entire jumbo bottle of the vile stuff and shortly thereafter took a nearly fatal fall off a curb outside our home. She never fully recovered from the effects of that fall, though other, less catastrophic relapses involving the mouthwash occurred at regular intervals.

As I explained in an earlier introduction, the original post “raised an important and shamefully under-reported topic, one that despite my exhortations then has yet to be adequately examined in the media.” In 2016, when I googled various combinations of “mouthwash,” “Listerine,”‘alcoholism,” and “alcoholic,” the first result was still my post. [UPDATE: The Ethics Alarms post is now about 100 deep, behind such links as “Should I switch to alcohol-free mouthwash?” Note that since 2016, Google’s algorithm buries EA in its searches because it is insufficiently in tune with the Axis.]

“Most people who are not afflicted with the disease of alcoholism have no idea that mouthwash is a popular stand-in for liquor, or that is used to deceive family members who think an addict is no longer using or intoxicated,” I wrote in the 2016 intro. First I was prompted to re-post the essay after I had been shocked to hear a physician friend who treated alcoholics plead complete ignorance of the links between mouthwash and alcoholism. The last time, it was the surprising reaction of my own physician, who is usually up-to-date on all medical research, and had treated alcoholism sufferers at the VA. He had never heard anything about the problem.

I’m re-posting this time because of Grace. The quote from my 2016 intro is still valid:

“Despite my frustration that what I regard as a true exposé that should have sparked an equivalent article in a more widely read forum has remained relatively unknown, I am encouraged by the effect it has had. Most Ethics Alarms posts have their greatest traffic around the time they are posted, but since 2010, the page views of this article have increased steadily…More importantly, it has drawn comments like this one:

‘Am looking after my twin sister who is a chronic alcoholic. She has been three days sober and then she just walked in and I couldn’t work out what the hell happened. She was in a stupor , but there was no alcohol and I am dispensing the Valium for detox period and she smelt like mint!! Found three bottles of it !!! This is my last big push to help her and she pleaded innocent and no idea it had alcohol in it! Hasn’t had a shower for two days but keeps her mouth fresh and sweet !! Thanks for the information. Much appreciated XXX’

“Most of all, I am revolted that what I increasingly have come to believe is an intentional, profit-motivated deception by manufacturers continues, despite their knowledge that their product is killing alcoholics and destroying families. I know proof would be difficult, but there have been successful class action lawsuits with millions in punitive damage settlements for less despicable conduct. Somewhere, there must be an employee or executive who acknowledges that the makers of mouthwash with alcohol know their product is being swallowed rather than swished, and are happy to profit from it….People are killing themselves right under our noses, and we are being thrown of by the minty smell of their breath.”

Here again is “The Amazing Mouthwash Deception: Helping Alcoholics Relapse For Profit.” Maybe this time it will help someone to avoid Grace’s pain and her ultimate fate.

I’m so, so sorry, my darling, that I couldn’t give you the peace you needed to fight this curse.

*** Continue reading →

How Greedy Parents Pimp Out Their Daughters on the Web

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Those are some of the comments that the New York Times found on Instagram in response to the photo of a pretty nine-year-old girl posing in a bikini. Her parents posted the photo to attract attention, and they are not as rare as you might think. In one of the investigative reporting projects that periodically justifies the Times’ existence, the paper found many juvenile “Instagram influencers” whose accounts are managed by their parents. “Although the site prohibits children under 13, parents can open so-called mom-run accounts for them, and they can live on even when the girls become teenagers,” the story reports. “But what often starts as a parent’s effort to jump-start a child’s modeling career, or win favors from clothing brands, can quickly descend into a dark underworld dominated by adult men, many of whom openly admit on other platforms to being sexually attracted to children.”

Ethics Alarms has long taken the position that parents posting revealing, embarrassing or provocative photos of their children on the web without a child’s informed consent (and children cannot give informed consent) is per se unethical, and that was before even considering this disgusting phenomenon.

The Times examined thousands of such accounts with parents operating the sale of their daughters’ photos, exclusive chat sessions and even offering their girls’ worn leotards and cheerleading outfits to followers. It’s profitable, for the parents, and the girls don’t understand the implications of what they have been thrust into. Some customers—pedophiles—- spend thousands of dollars nurturing the underage relationships. A demographics firm hired by the Times found 32 million connections to male followers on the 5,000 accounts examined by the paper.

This is all ethics rot, an unforeseen consequence of the World Wide Web colliding with the same unethical instincts that prompt parents to guide their young children into modeling, acting, gymnastics and other sports for their vicarious pleasure and profits. Here is the worst news in the piece:

“The troubling interactions on Instagram come as social media companies increasingly dominate the cultural landscape and the internet is seen as a career path of its own. Nearly one in three preteens lists influencing as a career goal, and 11 percent of those born in Generation Z, between 1997 and 2012, describe themselves as influencers. The so-called creator economy surpasses $250 billion worldwide, according to Goldman Sachs, with U.S. brands spending more than $5 billion a year on influencers.”

What the Times found is not an internet problem but an irresponsible, incompetent, greedy and abusive parent problem that has been around as long as there have been families. Social media only is giving it a new and revolting place to thrive. I was especially annoyed by the response of one of the mother/pimps whose daughter has been promoted on the web from a young age. “But she’s been doing this so long now,” the mother says. “Her numbers are so big. What do we do? Just stop it and walk away?”

Yes, you stupid, stupid woman. Just stop it.

Do read the whole piece. It is long and horrifying. This link lets you avoid the paywall.

More Evidence California Doesn’t Get That First Amendment Thingy…

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

It’s not the only one, but still…

Assembly Bill 1831, introduced by California Assemblyman Marc Berman (D–Palo Alto) this month, would expand the state’s definition of child pornography to include “representations of real or fictitious persons generated through use of artificially intelligent software or computer-generated means, who are, or who a reasonable person would regard as being, real persons under 18 years of age, engaging in or simulating sexual conduct.”

Does Berman comprehend why the possession of child pornography is a crime in the first place? Clearly not. Somebody please explain to him that the criminal element in child porn is the abuse of living children required to make it. The theory, which I have always considered something of a stretch but can accept the ethical argument it embodies from a utilitarian perspective, is that those who purchase or otherwise show a proactive fondness for such “art” in effect aid, abet, encourage and make possible the continuation of the criminal abuse and trafficking of minors. It is not that such photos, films and videos cause one to commit criminal acts on children. That presumption slides down a slippery slope that would justify banning everything from Mickey Spillane novels to “The Walking Dead.”

Continue reading →