Blog Post 3

In chapter three of our text, there is a case study* presented about product placement in television shows on American and European television. 

Here’s a quick recap of the case study:

US Network television allows for product placement without any imposed restrictions currently. While many European countries, like Britain, who has government sanctioned television that bans product placement. In the US we call it advertising, but some people want restrictions put in place surrounding product placement, and many TV writers think pay increases are just for the additional work they must do to write in the placements to their scripts. 

In this blog post I'm asked to review the case study by using ethical models we've since learned in class, as well as the code of ethics used by my current employer.  My current employer Pepperidge Farm, (and hopefully for years to come!), follows the code of ethics laid out by our parent company, Campbell Soup Company (CSC). 

Here is the code of ethics for CSC as taken from their website:

CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY
CODE OF BUSINESS CONDUCT AND ETHICS
 September 2011

From the Chief Executive Officer

Our core Campbell values are character, competence and teamwork. Character means we must inspire trust, take responsibility for our actions and most importantly, act with integrity. Our ability to Win with Integrity is a critical component of our Success Model and defines how we will Win in the Workplace with our colleagues, Win in the Marketplace with our customers and consumers and Win in the Community by helping our neighbors. We need to comply with the law and conduct our business with the highest ethical standards. We will compete vigorously, but we will be honest, lawful and fair in our dealings with those whose lives we touch. At Campbell, this is a foundational element of our culture and drives how we make decisions and illuminates all that we aspire to achieve.

Together, by following the letter and spirit of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, we will continue to make the Campbell name one of which we can be proud.  

Denise M. Morrison - 
President and Chief Executive Officer 

To look at this case from an ethical point of view, keeping the Campbell Soup Company (CSC) ethics in mind, one would determine that CSC is okay with product placement. The US allows for product placement, so that keeps with the CSCs need to, “be honest, lawful and fair in our dealings...” Some would argue that it’s not fair that writers don’t see a share in the profits that come from product placement advertising, (this was mentioned in the case study). However, the CSC ethics clearly states that, “We will compete vigorously…” and to do so, they must take part in the mainstream advertising of today. 

Now lets add to this some of the ethical theories we've learned in class. Philosopher William David Ross developed the Pluralistic Theory of Value, which puts equal weight on seven specific duties one should evaluate when reviewing issues from an ethical standpoint. Here are the seven duties Ross decreed:

Fidelity > Reparation > Gratitude > Justice > Beneficence > Self-improvement > Not Injuring Others

When I apply such thinking to the ethical questions raised behind the use of product placement on television in tandem with the ethics code the CSC uses, it helps me see a larger picture. Lets breakdown the seven. 1 - Fidelity would imply a promise, for the CSC that would be a promise to grow the brand legally and ethically in a competitive market. 2 - Reparation doesn’t really come into play here, unless your looking for the hours of your life you’ve lost to due to commercial breaks in the past, in which case you should be happy for a slight shift in advertising with subtle product placement. 3- Gratitude – see previous sentence. 4- Justice would want to see an equal share of fairness for everyone, here the ethical question is are the TV writers getting compensated for having to write in the product placements, or are product placements themselves intrusive to the scene setting – I would say that’s not up to CSC, but instead the networks. 5- Beneficence is helping others, which CSC does with a percentage of revenue every year through charitable donations and acts in its local community of Cherry Hill, NJ. 6- Self-improvement would be growth for the company again within the legally and ethical business boundaries. 7- Not injuring others, no one is being harmed in this case, so that’s not up for debate.

Lets use one more POV, Stuart Mills Utilitarianism comes to mind. This theory focuses on the final outcome of actions in the face of a dilemma. A moral end with this theory is the greatest good for the greatest number.When applied to our case study this would give us a moral end, because it’s a small number of people that are troubled by acts of product placement. 

Our text includes questions to ponder at the end of the case study, the following are a few from case 3d: 

• Does the authenticity that real products such as name brand computers bring to a television show outweigh the intrusiveness of inserting a product into the plot of a show?
• Are products placed into television shows the “price” you pay for free television, just as watching 30-second commercials were the “price” your parents and grandparents paid?
• If consumers are “zapping” and “TiVo-ing” through commercials in free television, what will happen to the medium if product placement fails to deliver the needed revenue to keep the programming free? What will happen to the United States if free television is eliminated? (Patterson, Philip (2010-07-21). Media Ethics: Issues and Cases (Page 78). Kindle Edition).

I would be hard-pressed to answer those questions just utilizing the code of ethics of the CSC. But in conjuncture with the theories we've learned in class, I'm confident I could step back and apply different thought processes to determine where I stand ethical on these points.

* [Chap 3, Case 3D - 
Was That an Apple Computer I Just Saw? A Comparison of Product Placement in U.S. Network Television and Abroad. Patterson, Philip (2010-07-21). Media Ethics: Issues and Cases (Page 76). Kindle Edition].