View Single Post
Old 02-07-2004, 10:18 PM   #5 (permalink)
tritium
Professor of Drinkology
 
Quote:
Originally posted by phredgreen
the questions that needs to be answered is this: regardless of who paid the bill, was the test performed as a fair and impartial comparison? if so, then good for mitsu, their product came out on top. if the study was perfomred witha bias toward a particular product, then it becomes false advertising, and that is an issue worth pursuing.
Precisely.

And, my concern was that since AMCI already had their hand in the cookie jar, so to speak, could or *would* they have conducted an objective test? This is scarey territory to get into.

Should drug companies be allowed to present results from the advertising company's product tests? Its a bit extreme, but we'd have NyQuil for balding, Prozac for yeast infections, Nexium for depression, etc. Its a question that cuts to the core of advertising ethics. To what degree can you present results that you, as the advertiser, have generated?

I can setup an experiment in my own backyard that could prove (apparently enough to have an automotive commercial) that Toyota Tacoma trucks are better at cornering than Nissan Stanza's (not a truck, I know). The question isn't, "could I" but rather, "should I"? I'm definitely not qualified. I definitely don't know statistics, but I know who is paying me, hypothetically, to produce an ad. Its a matter of willingful deception...

How far should advertisers be allowed to push this envelope?
__________________
Blah.

Last edited by tritium; 02-07-2004 at 10:26 PM..
tritium is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73