The Manipulation of Consumers in Business
When analysing today’s leading corporations, we see that money is the elixir driving decisions they make and the tactics they practice. Often, these businesses throw simple ethical values and considerations out of the window in exchange for growth and success, and it works for them. Prime examples are Google, Netflix, and Amazon. However, while these businesses are thriving, small businesses and chains are bearing the brunt. Possibly their favourite ethical mishap is the manipulation of consumers. Let’s take a look at why this is happening, and what we can do to change it.
This brazen violation of ethics is by no means limited to the world of tech, nor is it a new phenomenon. Manipulation of consumers takes place in various industries such as tobacco, alcohol, fracking and oil drilling, and mining.
When the cigarette supplier Marlboro was first introduced back in 1924, their target audience were women, and that was what their advertisement was based around. After failing to progress and grow their business, in the 1950s they switched their target audience to men following the first piece of evidence published proving the dangers of smoking. Their adverts contained an extremely famous person dubbed the ‘Marlboro Man’. He was portrayed as a manly, hardworking person who puffed on cigarettes very often. This idea of manliness, freedom and a work ethic appealed to many, who put aside their concerns on the health risks of smoking and rushed to the stores straightaway to purchase a pack. Marlboro were aware of the risks of smoking at the time, and they had the audacity to glamorize it, putting lives in danger in exchange for money and power. It ended up working perfectly for them, and businesses around the world definitely learnt a thing or two from their communication. In alcohol manipulation of consumers happens to this day. They often associate drinking with happiness and a ‘good time’, but never specify the point at which it is no longer a good time. Being drunk and experiencing hangovers is, I am sure, the opposite of happiness and pleasure, not to mention the long association with liver diseases. The packaging, bottling and picture of alcohol in commercials portrays a very high-quality, inviting experience. However, the masses fall for their influence, and therefore their businesses boom. Regulations and laws specified by governments mean that alcohol companies can no longer advertise without disclaimers stating the dangers of their product (cigarette companies can’t even advertise anymore), however it definitely hasn’t stopped them from exploiting their audience, and this will continue for years to come.
Oil and natural gas companies use manipulation in their commercialisation of fracking and drilling which damages fragile ecosystems and the environment. In the 1940s, when Standard Oil released studies on fracking, they released commercials linking natural gas to happiness in its ability to keep households warm during winter. They explained their technique on the extraction of natural gas in fracking, but never revealed or considered the environmental threats it poses. Customers ultimately believe that natural gas is the only efficient way of heating your home and fracking is the only method of extraction. This also happens in oil rig and mining companies.
Fast food, sweets and fizzy drink commercials portray an inviting, tempting, meal which you can indulge in often and experience amusement. They glamorize these products in the adverts on everything from the way they look, the feeling it gives and the taste. They never warn you of the various dangers of these products, such as obesity or diabetes. They also attempt to depict an unhealthy burger or a fizzy drink as healthy, and introduce fake or unreliable evidence in their ads. This can be extremely harmful as these foods are obviously addictive, and people will overdose on these types of meals with no guilt in seek of happiness. We can see this happening in the US and UK, where obesity rates are rapidly rising as a result of more and more fast food chains opening and more accessibility to unhealthy food.
You will start to see a recurring theme here. Commercial advertising always links their product to one thing: happiness. Even if it does not cause you happiness in the long run, they will always find a way to connect their product with consumer satisfaction. When advertising a product that poses a threat to health, environment etc., this connection in advertising is ethically wrong. And this is one thing that the following industry uses and abuses.
Technology. Amidst the technology world lies plenty of controversy, and technology corporations definitely use manipulation for growth. Everyday, we see social media adverts tying communication with happiness, mobile phone adverts linking accessibility to happiness (along with many other things) and artificial intelligence adverts connecting efficiency to happiness. Not enough awareness is spread on the perils of these devices and software. For example, social media is extremely addictive, mainly due to technology companies various instalments like notifications and the ‘typing…’ feature to increase user interactivity, and can cause mental health problems like depression and anxiety. Phones, laptops and TVs are detrimental towards your eyes and your mental health, however no warning is provided in commercials for these devices, only its linking to user satisfaction. The gradual advent of artificial intelligence around the world can cause large numbers of unemployment and loss of jobs, which is extremely unfair on the people who work in jobs that can be easily automated.
According to Business Insider, Sundar Pichai and Bill Gates implement household policies on their children, restricting their daily use of technology. These restrictions are put in place due to them believing that screens and tech is harmful for children. Both of these people were or are CEOs of leading technology corporations. My question is, if they themselves believe that technology can be damaging, why haven’t they raised more awareness or put more impositions in place on the limiting of technology, which they supply, for children. The obvious answer is money. If more awareness and implementations were to be raised, sales would ultimately decrease, and greed overcomes their ethical values here. By saying this, I am not trying to attack their personality or anything. They are great people, and I idolise them for many traits. I am just questioning their decision on this aspect, and why they should choose income over ethos.
Consumer behaviour is a real dilemma when it comes to the world of business. There are two main communities who hold responsibility for consumer manipulation. Regulatory systems and consumers. Firstly, consumers must be wiser with the decisions they make, and study products thoroughly before purchasing. They should gradually build will-power to defend themselves from this manipulation. Regulatory systems should also impose stricter laws and impositions on these products, such as tightening the sugar and tobacco taxes, enforcing much stricter codes on technology usage such as age-inappropriate content, dissemination of unreliable news sources or ‘fake news’, and illegal websites and software. They also must be more firm on their legislations on environmental damage. However, this will be a gruelling task during the population’s constant pursuit of wealth and money.
