Citations of work:

Daniel Attas (1999). What’s Wrong with "Deceptive" Advertising?

5 found
Order:
Are we missing citations?

PhilPapers citations & references are currently in beta testing. We expect to add many more in the future.

Meanwhile, you can use our bibliography tool to import references for this or another work.

Or you can directly add citations for the above work:

Search for work by author name and title
Add directly by record ID

  1.  21
    Against the Autonomy Argument for Mandatory GMO Labeling.Jonathan Herington - 2018 - Public Affairs Quarterly 32 (2):85-117.
    Many argue that consumers possess a “right to know” when products contain ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms, on the grounds that it would protect consumer autonomy. In this paper, I critically evaluate that claim. I begin by providing a version of the “consumer autonomy” argument, showing that its success relies on ambiguities in the notion of autonomy. I then distinguish four approaches to autonomy and articulate the circumstances under which they would support active disclosure of a product property. I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  37
    Disentangling the Effects of Perceived Deception and Anticipated Harm on Consumer Responses to Deceptive Advertising.David Boush, Robert Madrigal & Guang-Xin Xie - 2015 - Journal of Business Ethics 129 (2):281-293.
    Previous behavioral research on advertising deception has focused on the extent to which consumers would be misled by claims and implications of advertisements. The present research examines the effect of an important, but largely neglected, dimension: the severity of anticipated harm as a result of being deceived. Two experiments disentangle the effect of anticipated harm on consumer brand attitudes and purchase intentions from that of perceived deception. Interestingly, greater harmfulness increases diagnosticity of perceived deception, which partially accounts for consumers’ negative (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  34
    The Media and Their Advertisers: Exploring Ethical Dilemmas in Product Coverage Decisions. [REVIEW]Diego Rinallo, Suman Basuroy, Ruhai Wu & Hyo Jin Jeon - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 114 (3):425-441.
    Marketers are increasingly relying on promotional practices (variously labeled as stealth marketing, hybrid messages, covert advertising) based on the diffusion of product information by third parties that appear to be independent of advertisers. In this paper, we examine to what extent the media treat their advertisers favorably, providing these advertisers’ products extra visibility in supposedly neutral editorial content. Empirically, we model the determinant of media coverage of Italian fashion products in an extended dataset of consumer magazines in Italy, France, Germany, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4.  15
    Ethical Issues Related to the Mass Marketing of Securities.Michael P. Coyne & Janice M. Traflet - 2008 - Journal of Business Ethics 78 (1-2):193-198.
    This paper examines ethical issues involved in the mass marketing of securities to individuals. The marketing of products deemed “socially questionable” or “sinful” (like tobacco and alcohol) has long been recognized as posing special ethical challenges (Kotler, P. and S. Levy: 1971, Harvard Business Review 49, 74–80; Davidson, D. K: 1996, Selling Sin: The Marketing of Socially Unacceptable Products (Quorum Press, Westport). We contend that marketers should consider securities (i.e. common stock, options) in a similar vein, as a potentially dangerous (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  5.  25
    Misleading Disclosure of Pro Forma Earnings: An Empirical Examination.Gary Entwistle, Glenn Feltham & Chima Mbagwu - 2006 - Journal of Business Ethics 69 (4):355-372.
    The Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act was passed in 2002 in response to various instances of corporate malfeasance. The Act, designed to protect investors, led to wide-ranging regulation over various actions of managers, auditors and investment analysts. Part of SOX, and the focus of this study, targeted the disclosure by firms of “pro forma” earnings, an alternate (from GAAP earnings), flexible and unaudited measure of firm performance. Specifically, SOX directed the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to craft regulation which would reduce – (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation