Misleading Advertising Practices at Company X (Essay Sample)

Misleading Advertising Practices at Company X Name Course Professor Institution City Date A major issue facing many companies today is the use of misleading or false advertising to promote their products and services. One such company that has engaged in this unethical practice is Company X. This sizeable multinational consumer goods corporation produces a variety of food, beverage, cleaning, and personal care items. Company X recently launched a nationwide advertising campaign across print, digital, and television platforms to promote their new fruit juice product. The ads prominently claim the juice is "100% all-natural fruit juice" and emphasize it is a nutritious product "squeezed fresh" from ripe fruits. However, consumer advocacy groups have taken a closer look at the ingredients label of the juice, discovering the primary ingredient to be high fructose corn syrup, a highly processed artificial sweetener. Further down the ingredients list shows that the actual fruit juice content is estimated at just 5%. This is a misleading representation of their juice product's true nature and quality to consumers across the country who may be making purchasing decisions based on deceptive advertising by Company X. From a utilitarian ethical perspective, the consequences of Company X's misleading advertising determine its morality. The utilitarian approach is based on the principle of utility, or generating the greatest aggregate good for all those affected (www.sciencedirect.com, n.d.). In this case, the good Company X seeks is increased profits and greater market share for their new juice product in the short-term, which directly benefits the company financially. However, this temporary economic gain for Company X comes at the great expense of consumers being manipulated through explicit false advertising claims and essentially lied about the true nature and contents of the product they are purchasing. The widespread dissemination of egregiously misleading information through a nationwide ad campaign could erode consumer trust in the honesty and transparency of Company X's marketing practices. Once the deceptive advertising is exposed, it will likely cause significant backlash and public relations issues if customers feel tricked and deceived by the company's intentional manipulation using false marketing. The damage to Company X's brand reputation could be severe and long-lasting. While short-term spikes in profits may occur through duping customers into buying the juice product based on misleading claims, the long-term consequences for the business could be highly negative as consumers lose faith in the brand and stop purchasing its products. The loss of customer loyalty, future sales declines, and reputational harms generated by the destroyed trust could greatly outweigh any temporary increase in revenue resulting from the unethical advertising campaign. From a utilitarian calculus, the significant harms caused by diminished consumer trust, backlash, and ruined reputation fail to provide the greatest aggregate good when weighed against the short-term financial gains. Therefore, implementing this deliberately misleading advertising campaign is unethical as it violates the utilitarian principle of utility - creating the greatest benefit for all those impacted. Deceptive marketing produces substantial long-term negative consequences that outweigh the temporary profits. Analyzing this situation from a deontological ethics perspective leads to the same verdict - Company X's advertising is unethical. Deontology focuses on the action as the determinant of morality, not just the consequences. Actions are judged based on adherence to moral rules and duties (www.britannica.com, n.d.). In this case, Company X has violated its fundamental duty to represent its products honestly and not deceive consumers. The company has explicitly lied about its product's naturalness and fruit juice content, violating the moral duty and rule of truth-telling. The ads are unambiguously false and misleading rather than simply highlighting positive attributes of the product. Additionally, Company X's deception fails to show proper respect for customers or treat them as autonomous, rational decision-makers. Consumers have the right to accurate company information to make informed purchasing choices. Violating the duties of honesty, transparency, and respect for customers is inherently wrong from a deontological viewpoint, regardless of beneficial outcomes for the company, like profits. The act itself of intentional deception through advertising is unethical on moral grounds. While the misleading marketing may financially benefit Company X in the short term, it transgresses fundamental ethical obligations of truthfulne...