Friday, July 29, 2011

Ethical — you heard it here first.



http://t.co/ScZfRjm
I was very pleased to see that the above survey confirms what I wrote all of five years ago.
I agree absolutely with all of Jane Asscher’s comments.
One worry though — although it’s always good to be good and do good, I wonder how much this simply reveals people’s rhetoric rather than what actually drives their buying behaviour.
Have Apple, Gap and Primark been seriously hit by past concerns about the ethics of their sourcing practices, or the practices of their manufacturers? News International may be hit short-term (James Harding told Steve Hewlett The Times has had some collateral damage from the NoTW phone-hacking coverage) but I wonder if the “fade factor” will apply here and with other ethical PR disasters. Look at Charles and Camilla. In 1997 there’s no way they could be married. A few years later…
Also, when recession comes, how ethically-driven are our purchases? That could depend on how secure we are on a Maslow basis — if your basic needs are secure, you’ll continue to let ethics lead actions. If you’re struggling financially, maybe you will buy from the cheaper store you don’t really approve of. Or maybe it’s just how strongly-held your beliefs are.
Whatever, it’s good for marketers to know that being ethically tip-top is something worth spending resources shouting about.

No comments: