|
|
NavigationTopicsUser login |
advertisingWeekly Radio Spin: Smokin' the CompetitionSubmitted by Judith Siers-Poisson on Fri, 05/16/2008 - 12:03.
Topics: activism | advertising | arts/culture | children | corporate social responsibility | corporations | crisis management | ethics | health | internet | lobbying | marketing | politics | public relations | race/ethnic issues | science | social justice | tobacco | U.S. government
Chart(er)ing a New Course for Invasion of PrivacyTopics: advertising | arts/culture | corporations | ethics | internet | marketing
Charter Communications, one of the largest Internet Service Providers (ISP) in the U.S., recently sent letters to some of its 2.7 million customers with details of a new initiative. "Charter is billing its new web tracking program as an 'enhancement' for customers' web surfing experience. ... The pilot program is set to begin next month. 'Browsing the web can become more like flipping through your favorite magazine, where you see ads that are appealing to you and enhance your enjoyment and the utility of the experience,' the company's letters read." Charter says that it is piloting the program in four of its markets: Ft. Worth, Texas; San Luis Obispo, California; Oxford, Massachusetts, and Newtown, Conneticut. The "enhancement" will be difficult to refuse. "Users can opt out of the system, but have to give their full name and address to get an opt-out cookie. The process would have to be repeated for every browser on every computer in a home to block the service, and would have to be reset if cookies are ever deleted." Wired's Ryan Singel says the plan "effectively turns the ISP into the ultimate third-party tracking network." Charter's plan is similar to one developed in the U.K. by Phorm, "a London company with alleged spyware roots." But consumer outrage in Britain has prevented any ISPs from putting it in place. Bigger Isn't Always BetterTopics: advertising | media | politics | propaganda | right wing | U.S. Congress | U.S. government | Election 2008
No Rush to Protect the PublicTopics: advertising | corporations | health | marketing | pharmaceuticals | politics | science | U.S. Congress | U.S. government
Some U.S. Congresspeople want to limit direct to consumer marketing of drugs. Rep. Bart Stupak is head of the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce investigative panel. At a hearing to discuss specific ads by Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Schering-Plough, Stupak said that "It appears that we need to enforce significant restrictions on DTC (direct–to–consumer) ads to protect American consumers from manipulative commercials designed to mislead and deceive for the profit of pharmaceutical companies." Referring to the fact that other than New Zealand, the U.S. is the only country to allow direct to consumer advertising of drugs he added, "Pharmaceutical companies should consider it a privilege to be allowed to air DTC ads in this country. We should make sure that pharmaceuticals companies conduct themselves responsibly." The ranking Republican on the committee, John Shimkus of Illinois, said that since the Food and Drug Administration was just recently given oversight of drug ads, it is too soon for congressional intervention. But as CMD has reported previously, there is significant concern as to whether the FDA and other government agencies are able and willing to stand up to industry and government pressure. Big Push for Big OilTopics: advertising | corporations | public relations
Faced with a national outcry over the high price of gasoline and soaring profits for energy companies, the American Petroleum Institute has launched a multimillion-dollar PR and advertising campaign to convince the public that "rising energy prices are not the producers' fault and that government efforts to punish the industry, especially with higher taxes, would only make pricing problems worse," reports Jeffrey H. Birnbaum. Consumer groups such as the Consumer Federation of America are complaining that the industry "is using its outlandish profits to make even more money, and that its advertisements use statistics selectively." Pill Shills and Marketing IllsTopics: advertising | corporations | front groups | health | media | pharmaceuticals | public relations | science | U.S. Congress
MoveOn and Fenton PR Launch Liberal Advertising ConsortiumTopics: advertising | left wing | marketing | media | politics | propaganda | women | Election 2008
AdAge reports that Fenton Communications and its client MoveOn.org have announced a politically liberal advertising consortium using corporate advertising executives and firms to "help change the playing field this year. ... At the moment it will go after presumptive Republican nominee Senator John McCain. ... [David Fenton] said the team would work for a variety of causes, not just MoveOn.org. Fenton also handles public relations for Global Green; Friends of the Earth; Bono's One Campaign; Refugees International; and Human Rights Watch, among others. 'Right now, the idea is to help win the election and talk about issues on [sic] global warming and women's rights,' he said." MoveOn's political strategist Tom Matzzie and its founder Wes Boyd also founded Campaign to Defend America, currently running advocacy TV ads against John McCain. Preying on Smokers Who Want to QuitThe U.S. Federal Trade Commission is suing NextClick Media, Inc., an Internet advertising company, over Web sites they operate that offered "free 10-day trials" of an herbal stop-smoking patch called "Nicocure," "Stop Smoking 180" and "Zero Nicotine." The sites claimed the product worked better than nicotine patches and had a "97% success rate." People who signed up for the "free trial" got a 30-day supply instead of a 10-day supply, then were told they had to pay for all 30 days if they chose to keep it. If they returned the product, they were assessed a $7.95 restocking fee. People who agreed to the "free trial" also found themselves enrolled in a "continuity program" that automatically billed their credit or debit card a monthly charge of up to $99.95 until they canceled. Customers found contacting the company to get out of the arrangement nearly impossible. None of the costly terms of the "free trial" were disclosed on the company's Web sites. After the FTC sued the company, NextClick agreed to halt its deceptive practices. Fighting Junk Mail via 'Do Not Mail' Lists: Devilish Details and Front GroupsSubmitted by Anne Landman on Mon, 05/05/2008 - 16:24.
Topics: advertising | corporate campaigns | corporations | education | environment | ethics | front groups | global warming | internet | marketing
Brits on the Lookout for GreenwashingTopics: advertising | corporate social responsibility | corporations | environment | global warming | international | marketing | public relations
|
Weekly SpinRecent blog posts
The Politics and PR of Cervical CancerA four-article series by CMD's Associate Director, Judith Siers-Poisson. Upcoming events |