Ethical Issues Related to the Mass Marketing of Securities

Coyne, Michael P.; Traflet, Janice

doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9319-7

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, analyses of the fourth P, pricing, as a source of confusion are less common not only in research on confusion but also in the contiguous intellectual field of marketing ethics. In the latter literature, for instance, unethical corporate practices such as deception are theorised mostly with respect to advertising, marketing communications and sales (Coyne and Traflet, 2008;Wible, 2011), while other ingredients of the marketing mix, such as pricing, and the role that they play as possible sources of practices which may be labelled unethical are less adequately explored. Though partly recognised by Aditya (2001) more than a decade ago, such an omission remains to be addressed.…”

Section: Confusion Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"Gray marketing" (Zhuang and Tsang, 2008), marketing anomie (Saini and Krush, 2008), self-interested marketing and associated moral dilemmas (Piercy and Lane, 2007) may promote a deepened understanding of confusion as well. Of specific interest, though, possibly due to our concern with the level of intentionality and deliberateness of confusion, would be frameworks of "sinful" and questionable products relating to "demarketing" (Coyne and Traflet, 2008), "manipulative" and "unholy" marketing practices (Sher, 2011;Galician, 2004) and the distinction that Aditya (2001) draws between deception by commission and deception by omission, both of which should be applicable to studies of confusion.…”

Section: What Moderates Confusion?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What we know, don’t know, and should know about confusion marketing

Kasabov

2015

European Journal of Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of the paper is to bring to the attention of academics the innovations which have rapidly been developed to sell goods and services across sectors using what the authors describe as "confusion marketing". Design/methodology/approach -This is a conceptual, integrative, critical assessment of a number of marketing disciplines addressing aspects of confusion marketing. Confusion practices are evolving rapidly, with little theoretical explanation of why many of them are successful. This paper seeks to answer such questions by examining a wide range of sectors and confusion practices. Findings -Patterns are identified across sectors, companies and business practices, providing the basis for this holistic assessment of marketing research on confusion since its inception and the design of a systemic framework of confusion.Research limitations/implications -The study attempts to bring all marketing schools and traditions of confusion together and presents a synthesis of scholarly accomplishments in the area by matching them, where possible, to current practices. It advances extant literature by designing a systemic framework which has, so far, been absent in marketing and by identifying avenues for future research maturation. Practical implications -This discussion challenges assumptions regarding the ethicality, sustainability and profitability of confusion practices. Businesses practicing confusion are successful, suggesting that such practices may be economically sustainable. Contrary to expectations in marketing, confusion seems to benefit some consumers; confusion practices are not necessarily unethical or detrimental. Originality/value -Confusion is a controversial area in marketing. Although the literature on confusion has grown, extant research continues to concentrate on consumers' perceptions of confusion and tends to assume that confusion practices are undesirable, unethical and unsustainable. This paper provides a first integrative critical analysis of marketing thinking and challenges the aforementioned literature assumptions, demonstrating that past research has not sufficiently explained the nature, consequences and success of confusion marketing.

show abstract

Section: Confusion Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Moderates Confusion?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What we know, don’t know, and should know about confusion marketing

Kasabov

2015

European Journal of Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Naughton and Naughton (2000) discuss short selling in the context of an Islamic Securities market and find that it ''would not be an acceptable practice in an Islamic stock market'' because of the speculation involved, among other things. Coyne and Traflet (2008) do not discuss short selling directly, while they argue that the marketing of risky financial products falls in the same category as the marketing of other ''socially questionable'' products such as alcohol and tobacco. Although much has been written on socially responsible investing, the literature has generally not addressed the ethical issues raised by trading strategies used by SRI investors, which could include short selling.…”

Section: The Ethical Criticisms Of Short Sellingmentioning

confidence: 99%