Why do advertising practitioners rank so low on the measure of honesty and ethics?
Well, they always have, relatively speaking. It’s not new this year. The key I think is to remember the question we’re asking. We’re asking about the perceived honesty and ethics of these professions. By definition advertisers are looking to sway people’s minds, so it’s not totally surprising Americans would rank them lower. Their profession is not to come out and say exactly what is right or wrong with this product, so it doesn’t surprise me. Another way to put it is they have an ulterior motive, much like car salesmen or telemarketers. With that in mind, I‘m not totally surprised. Is it more that respondents see them as unethical or simply dishonest? Or is there really a difference there? We didn’t ask if they were unethical or dishonest, we said rate their honesty and ethics. There might be a difference. If we asked if people if they thought these professions were totally dishonest, we may have got a different response. Have you conducted this study before? Did ad people rank so low
Related Questions
- To measure EHR adoption, must it be practitioners that have "adopted" EHR, as defined in the FOA, at the time of submission of the proposal (e.g. Feb 1, 2010), or receipt of the grant award?
- What is the difference between professional Website designers and the low budget Website designers advertising on the Internet?
- How does G&R measure emotional response to advertising?
