Case 1
International Marketing
Q1. Is it ethical to sell a product that is at best, mildly effective? Discuss?
We are all created differently, and we all think, act, and process things differently. The same can be said for our bodies. Various parts of our body react differently to external conditions. So what works for one cannot be guaranteed to work for everyone. Ethics is a way of studying morality which allows decisions to be made when individuals or organizations faces specific cases of moral dilemma (What are ethics? 2010). Yes, It is ethical to sell a product that is at best mildly effective unless it is a lifesaving product.
Q2. Is it ethical to exploit cultural norms and values to promote a product? Discuss.
To determine whether a product exploits cultural norms and values for promotion is ethical or not is guided by three core principles of ethics which provide the groundwork to help businesses distinguish between right and wrong. The three principles are Utilitarian ethics, Rights of the parties and Justice or fairness.
In this case study, Hindustan Lever launched an ad campaign that portrayed that “women with fairer skin gets the man” theme in a Country where gender bias and racism are to date the most significant issues in the society. The second advertisement revolved around the theme that “fairer skin girls gets a job while the one with darker skin thinks If had fair skin I would get a job or I should be born as a man to take care of my family” is outright illegal in a country where hundreds of thousands of girls are killed in their mothers womb thinking girls are a burden to a family and portraying success is only achievable if you have a fair skin in a nation where hundreds of thousands of women’s are killed every year due to dowry and women’s are thought only as the servant whose job is to take care of the kids, clean the house and keep the husbands happy. In India and in many countries its illegal to portray demeaning character of person due to its race, colour, and creed. So I think it’s illegal for any company to exploit cultural norms and values to promote a product.
Q3. Is the advertising of Fair & Lovely demeaning to women, or is it promoting the fairness cream in a way not too dissimilar from how most cosmetics are promoted?
It is quite clear that the advertisement of Fair & Lovely demeaned women. Hindustan Lever Ltd failed to understand the dynamics of cultural cruciality. Hindustan Lever should have reassessed the cultural effectiveness and acceptance of its advertisements when it received an initial complaint from AIWDA to find ways it can tinker its promotional strategy to either avoid or to adapt its advertisement to a more culturally acceptable promotion strategy. The underlying reason is that HLL did not have any cultural rights, not to consider the underlying business customs in its environment. So, to promote fairness cream (Fair &Lovely) with such culturally unfit advertisement is not only unethical but also socially irresponsible. However, the ads portrayed the son’s preference, racism, and insult to working women. These tend to demean all Indian women who have dark skin. So the implication is that if a woman has dark skin and does not use Fair & Lovely that such a woman is not beautiful, confident, and will not have a good career. That is demeaning and unethical because scientific evidence also proves that the product is incapable of changing a person’s racial background or significantly enhances physical appearance. I would also like to point out that in this specific case HLL advertisements were not only unethical but illegal because it violates the provisions of the Indian Cable and Network Acts of 1995 which prohibits adverts that deride any race, colour, caste, creed, and nationality and emphasize women as passive, submissive qualities and encourage them to play subordinate secondary roles in family and society.
Q4. Will HUL’s Fair & Lovely Foundation be enough to counter charges made by AIDWA? Discuss.
The establishment of the Fair & Lovely foundation was the right step in the right direction, but only that as an action to correct the damage to HLL corporate image and the negative impact on the women segment of Indian society is not enough. However, pulling off those unethical advertisements off-air, sponsoring career fairs in over 20 cities, offering to counsel in over 110 career areas, and supporting 100 rural scholarships for women on vocational programs helped in repositioning Hindustan Lever Ltd as a socially responsible corporate organization. The establishment of the foundation and withdrawal of the unethical adverts pushed up Fair &Lovely annual sales growth between 15% to 20% while expanding the market share of the skincare product market by 42.7%. I believe in countering the charges of unethical advertisement imposed by AIDWA, Hindustan Lever Ltd needs to sustain the foundation to continue to discharge the corporate social responsibilities that informed its establishment. Behaving in an ethically and socially responsible way should be the hallmark of every business entity’s behaviour, domestic or international. However, HLL should innovate new promotional strategies that will align positively with Indian culture.
Q5. In light of AIDWA’s charges, how would you suggest Fair & Lovely promote its product? Discuss. Would your response be different if Fairever continued to use “fairness” as a theme of its promotion? Discuss.
The most important thing is for HLL to re-evaluate the cultural impact of its advertisement theme as regards to the complaint and charges level against it by AIDWA. Basically, HLL needs to answer three critical questions concerning the issues raised byAIDWA. These questions include the following:
1. Does the Fair & Lovely advertisement portray racism?
2. Does the ad promote son preference?
3. Does the ad insult the working women?
The answers to these questions will go a long way to helping the management of HLL to formulate an ad campaign that will adapt to the cultural norms of the Indian society and reflect the Fair & Lovely sub brand in a more positive manner that will be more acceptable to all the segments of the society. HLL management should go back to the drawing board and map out a new promotional strategy that is ethical and acceptable by Indian society, taking into consideration the cultural imperatives and adapt them positively to the Indian culture. The new promotional strategy should not denigrate women but should show positive virtues of womanhood. I believe this strategy will not only be ethical but will increase Fair & Lovely sales. The bottom-line is that something that reflects good living; for example, confidence should be promoted.
Q6. Propose a promotion/marketing program that will counter all the arguments and charges against Fair & Lovely and be an effective program.
I will start by sustaining the activities of the Fair & Lovely Foundation and possibly expand the Foundations activities to incorporate enlightenment that will educate women on the right approach and positive methods of enhancing their looks and beauty by using Fair & Lovely.
The theme of the promotional campaign should be changed from fairness to confidence, which I believe will be more cultural appealing and ethical.
I would also like HLL to formulate promotional strategies that will project Fair & Lovely as a product that can give a woman confidence to aspire to greatness and good living, promoting possibly smooth skin instead of skin colour.
Q7. Now that a male market for fairness cream exists, is the strength of AIDWA’s argument weakened?
The existence of the male market for fairness has not diminished the strength of AIDWA’s argument because the primary aim of AIDWA is to ensure that HLL applies ethical principles and generally growing cultural trends to promote its products responsibly. Like Fair & Lovely, HLL should remove fairness as the theme to help improve its Fair & Handsome ad campaign. The the company should even repackage and rebrand these products as Smooth & Lovely for women and Fresh & Handsome for men.
Q8. Comment on using “Shakti Ammas” to introduce “fairness cream for the masses” in light of AIDWA’s charges.
Personally, Shakti Ammas in itself is not ethical because it is an insult to some of the Indian gods like Krishna and other dark Hindu gods. In the past, the preference for lighter skin has been significant in Indian women’s culture, but the shift in cultural trends has changed that perception. This has led to the shrinking number of men and women in India who think lighter skin is beautiful. Factual knowledge is more prominent and can be learned while interpretive is about acknowledging and accepting different cultural traits and patterns. HLL should research the current cultural trend and the new role of women instead of exploiting out of date and controversial cultural norms that are misfit to the present cultural environment. I believe HLL should not have used Shakti Ammas in the first place but would have conducted research that would have revealed the current cultural trend, which are in line with AIDWA views.
2019-11-14-1573767733