Advertising of controversial products: a cross-cultural study
|dc.contributor.author||Waller, David S||en_NZ|
|dc.contributor.author||Erdogan, B Zafer||en_NZ|
|dc.identifier.citation||Waller, D. S., Fam, K.-S., & Erdogan, B. Z. (2005). Advertising of controversial products: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(1), 6–13. doi:10.1108/07363760510576509||en|
|dc.description||Full text of this item available only from related link.||en_NZ|
|dc.description.abstract||Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine attitudes towards the advertising of certain controversial products/services and reasons for being offensive across four different countries, Malaysia, New Zealand, Turkey and the UK. Design/methodology/approach – This was achieved by analyzing the responses to a questionnaire that was distributed to a convenience sample of university students in the four countries. A total of 954 were sampled for this study. The results indicated that geography is not a major determinant of attitudes, and that religious and historical factors play a very important role. Findings – Of the 17 products presented, 11 resulted in similar answers for New Zealand and the UK, and seven were similar for Malaysia and Turkey. However, it was apparent that the two countries mostly populated by Muslims had some differences as Malaysia has a multicultural society that must make some allowances for other ethnic groups. It also appears that racism and racist images are of concern to all those sampled. Originality/value – The opening up of regional markets and the development of regional and global media, such as satellite television and the internet, will mean that marketers will try to take advantage of the associated benefits of a standardized approach to advertising and promotional activities. For those involved in international marketing, it is important that they are aware of possible differences and cultural sensitivities when entering a new market or undertaking a standardized mass-media campaign across a region, whether it be Australasia or Europe.||en_NZ|
|dc.relation.ispartof||Journal of Consumer Marketing||en_NZ|
|dc.subject||classes of goods marketed||en_NZ|
|dc.subject.lcsh||H Social Sciences (General)||en_NZ|
|dc.title||Advertising of controversial products: a cross-cultural study||en_NZ|
|dc.description.references||Alter, J. (1982), “A delicate balance: not everything goes in the marketing of ‘unmentionables’”, Advertising Age, July 12, pp. M3-M8. Barnes, J.H. Jr and Dotson, M.J. (1990), “An exploratory investigation into the nature of offensive television advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 61-9. Calder, B.J., Phillips, L.W. and Tybout, A.M. (1981), “Designing research for applications”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8 September, pp. 197-207. Crosier, K. and Erdogan, B.Z. (2001), “Advertising complainants: who and where are they?”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 6 No. 2. Dant, R.P. and Barnes, J.H. (1988), “Methodological concerns in cross-cultural research: implications for economic development”, in Erdogan, K. and Firat, A.F. (Eds), Marketing and Development: Towards Broader Dimensions, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT. Deng, S., Jivan, S. and Hassan, M.-L. (1994), “Advertising in Malaysia: a cultural perspective”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 153-66. Fahy, J., Smart, D., Pride, W. and Ferrell, O.C. (1995), “Advertising sensitive products”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 231-43. Hume, S. (1988), “Most hated ads: feminine hygiene”, Advertising Age, 18 July, p. 1. Ministry of Information (1990), Advertising Code for Television and Radio, Ministry of Information, Kuala Lumpur. Rehman, S.N. and Brooks, J.R. (1987), “Attitudes towards television advertisements for controversial products”, Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 7 13, September, pp. 78-83. Rickard, L. (1994), “Consumers would rather skip feminine hygiene ads”, Advertising Age, Vol. 65 11, March 14, p. 29. Ricks, D.A. (1983), Big Business Blunders, Dow Jones-Irwin, Homewood IL. Shao, A.T. (1993), “Restrictions on advertising items that may not be considered ‘decent’: a European viewpoint”, Journal of Euromarketing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 23-43. Shao, A.T. and Hill, J.S. (1994a), “Global television advertising restrictions: the case of socially sensitive products”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 13, pp. 347-66. Shao, A.T. and Hill, J.S. (1994b), “Advertising sensitive products in magazines: legal and social restrictions”, Multinational Business Review, No. Fall, pp. 16-24. Tinkham, S.F. and Weaver-Lariscy, R.A. (1994), “Ethical judgements of political television commercials as predictors of attitude toward the ad”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23 No. 3, september, pp. 43-57. Triff, M., Benningfield, D. and Murphy, J.H. (1987), “Advertising ethics: a study of public attitudes and perceptions”, The Proceedings of the 1987 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Columbia, SC. Waller, D.S. (1999), “Attitudes towards offensive advertising: an Australian study”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 288-94. Waller, D.S. and Fam, K.S. (2000), “Cultural values and advertising in Malaysia: views from the industry”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 3-16. Wilson, A. and West, C. (1981), “The marketing of ‘unmentionables’”, Harvard Business Review, January/ February, pp. 91-102. Wilson, A. and West, C. (1995), “Commentary: permissive marketing – the effects of the AIDS crisis on marketing practices and messages”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 34-48.||en_NZ|
Files in this item
There are no files associated with this item.
This item is not available in full-text via OUR Archive.
If you are the author of this item, please contact us if you wish to discuss making the full text publicly available.