DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

BA344 Advertising Management

Dr. Geoffrey Lantos Spring 2008

CLASSROOM DEBATES

Overview

Advertising is fraught with many controversial issues at the macromarketing level. These issues are not only fundamental to the discipline but also germane to your lives as consumers, concerned citizens, and future practitioners. In fact, a dominant share of society’s controversial business issues involves marketing because marketing is the business function that is most visible to the public, and a major portion of marketing’s controversial issues lie within the advertising realm because advertising is the most publicly evident aspect of marketing.

Therefore, during the course of the semester, in lieu of the written exercise, you may choose to participate in a group debate on one of these issues. Debate consists of reasoned arguments for or against a given proposition. Each debate will involve four discussants, will include audience participation, and will last about 34 minutes.

In the standard grading plan, you may count this debate as 15 to 25% of your course grade, depending on

your individualized weights (instead of 5 to 15%, as with the written assignment). In computing your

final course grade, this allows you to subtract ten percentage points from the graded requirement in the

course on which you score poorest.

Objectives

Debate is an important skill to develop. In the widest sense, debate takes place in various settings in life, including the business world. Analyzing and presenting a compelling, persuasive case is much like selling a product, and a crucial component of marketing management involves analysis, persuasion, and the selling of ideas. Debate also sharpens one’s abilities for decision-making under pressure, listening attentively, and thinking quickly on one’s feet.

Specifically, by participating in a classroom debate, you will:

· Improve your ability to effectively orally communicate.

· Learn to find and use rational and sound arguments for or against controversial issues.

· Gain experience supporting your arguments with carefully documented evidence.

· Learn the fundamentals of research and how to use the results of this research to support your conclusions.

· Develop skill in reflective thinking and reasoning, and sharpen your ability to perceive the fallacious and shallow reasoning of others.

· Become able to organize your thoughts logically and present your ideas clearly and concisely.

· Learn how to defend your ideas from the attack of others.

· Acquire attitudes of open-mindedness, fairness, and tolerance for the viewpoints of others.

· Develop your ability to work cooperatively with other persons (teamwork).

· Improve your professional presentation skills.

· Learn that not all opinions are equally valid and how to search for the truth.

Format of Debates

Each debate will involve a proposition, which formally states a judgment or opinion on a controversial nature. The proposition is worded in a declarative sentence, e.g., "Resolved: Beer and wine advertising should not be permitted in the broadcast media." The affirmative team supports the debate proposition during the entire debate, and the negative team opposes it. Each team will consist of two persons. I will act as moderator.

We will use the Michigan Plan for cross-examination debates. Cross-examination (or cross-questioning) debate involves two teams, affirmative and negative, that support and oppose a debate proposition. It also includes questioning periods. During these periods the opposing debaters cross-question each other for several purposes: to clarify obscure points in the opposition's case, to expose errors in facts or opinions, and to obtain damaging admissions.

The Michigan Plan allows for audience (class members and the instructor) participation and will follow this format:

1. The first affirmative speaker presents the affirmative case. 6 min.

2. The first affirmative speaker is cross-examined by the second negative speaker. 4 min.

3. Questions from the audience are put to the members of the affirmative team. 5 min.

4. The first negative speaker presents the negative case. 6 min.

5. The second affirmative speaker cross-examines the first negative speaker. 4 min.

6. Questions from the audience are put to the members of the negative team. 5 min.

7. The second negative speaker summarizes the negative case. 2 min.

8. The second affirmative speaker summarizes the affirmative case. 2 min.

34 min.

Audience participation offers the debaters on both sides considerable challenge of their knowledge of the proposition and ability to answer unanticipated questions. It assures lively audience interest and enlivened and intensified debate.

Preparation for Debate

Both team members should work together in researching the subject, in writing up the opening six-minute case and the closing two-minute case, in assembling a list of potential cross-examination questions to ask the opposition, and in gathering a list of responses to potential cross-examination questions asked by the opposition. You may not collaborate with the opposing team members in this preparatory work—this would constitute cheating! Your opening and closing cases should discuss the cluster of issues arising from the proposition being debated, giving support in evidence of your own position. Arguments should be both factual and logical, but may also be emotionally persuasive.

Important: On the day prior to your debate (or any time before that) each team is to submit to me a list of references consulted in the form of a bibliography. References should look at both sides of the issue.

Your debate should be done in professional dressy attire (i.e., men – suits or jackets, and ties or other appropriate professional dress); women – dresses, suits, dress slacks and blouse, or other appropriate professional dress).

Evaluation of Discussants

Each individual on each team will be evaluated separately, with the assumption that each member participated equally in background research work.

I will grade each team on the following criteria:

Relative

Criterion Importance

1. Preparation/Content

*Attention-getting opening

*Clear central idea and purpose

*Identification of key points/issues

*Validity of argument - logical, persuasive, effective reasoning and conclusions drawn from

evidence presented

*Evidence - honest use of sufficient, specific, accurate, relevant and interesting evidence,

and reference to sources where appropriate

*Audience appeal

*Clear conclusion

*Easy handles defense of cross-examination arguments

*Clear and penetrating cross-examination of opponents

*Ability to respond to audience questions concisely and accurately

*List of references (submitted in advance of the debate) 70%

2. Organization

*Logically organized and clear presentations (introduction, body, and conclusion); smooth flow of

discussion

*Teamwork - cooperation of team members in presenting a unified constructive case and

assistance of each other in handling audience questions 15%

3. Delivery, Oral Skills, and Style

*Poise and body action, animated, projection, eye contact, relaxed, confident

*Voice audible, expressive, forceful, and pleasant

*Articulation and pronunciation

*Language - clear, varied, economical

*Extempore abilities - able to adapt in manner and content to opponents and audience

*Interesting - conversational, variety, humor, genuine, sincere

*Pacing - not too slow, not too fast

*Attitude - courteous to opponents, moderator and audience; willing to yield

*Persuasiveness

*Enthusiasm

*Ability to stimulate and answer questions

*Use of visual aids, graphics, handouts, etc. 15%

100%

Potential Propositions to be Debated:

1. Advertising does not simply reflect and appeal to our society, as it currently exists; it actively shapes, molds, and changes our society.

2. Advertising costs too much—it drives up the prices of goods and services.

3. a. Beer and wine advertising should be banned (or severely regulated) in the broadcast media (TV and radio, and/or

b. Hard liquor advertising should be banned (or severely regulated) in the broadcast media.

4. Tobacco advertising should be banned in all media.

5. Advertising of unsafe or unhealthful products should be banned (or severely regulated).

6. Advertising junk food to children contributes to obesity and bad health habits, is unethical, and should be banned (or severely regulated).

7. Advertising (commercial speech) should be entitled to the same First Amendment protection as noncommercial speech, such as news reporting and political commentary.

8. The broadcast media should be required to air counteradvertising—opposing points of view for harmful or controversial products that are advertised in the media vehicle.

9. Creativity is not something that exists at birth; you can teach your "creative" people (writers, artists, producers, and directors) to be creative.

10. It is not what you say that is important in your advertising copy (message theme)—it is how you say it (style and execution).

11. Advertising should not be allowed to imply that products are different when no physical or functional differences exist, i.e., psychological differentiation is wrong.

12. Advertising copy should be restricted to the facts and should not use emotional appeals.

13. Advertising should not employ sexual themes for products unrelated to sex.

14. Comparison advertising (mentioning the competitor by name) is hitting below the belt and should be disallowed.

15. Celebrities are an ineffective tool for advertisers and are a waste of the advertiser’s money.

16. Copy testing is a waste of time and money—instead, advertisers should just rely on their creative peoples' abilities and their own management judgment as to whether an ad campaign will work.

17. A client should not advertise in newspapers—rather he should use radio (media debate).

18. A client should not advertise in magazines—rather she should use TV (media debate).

19. Outdoor advertising is a blight on the environment and should be outlawed.

20. Sweepstakes and contests encourage gambling and should be prohibited.

21. Public relations is an insidious tool used to sway public opinion.

22. Lawyers, doctors, and other professionals should not be allowed to advertise (or else should be strictly regulated).

23. Political advertising should be more strictly regulated.

24. Broadcasters should be required to accept advocacy advertising for controversial public issues (e.g., gun control, abortion services, and embryonic stem cell research).

25. The television networks should allow ads that promote condoms as a means of reducing the risk of contracting AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases, even if their use as a contraceptive (birth control) isn't mentioned.

26. In order for states to raise revenues to curb their deficits, advertising media time and space sold and advertising services should be taxed and/or limits should be placed on the deduction of advertising expenses (via amortization of a portion of spending).

27. Some children's cartoon shows (e.g., “Teenage Mutant Ninja turtles,” “Pokeman”, "Digiman" ") are simply program-length commercials for the toys in them, and they should be stopped.

28. The media should be responsible for monitoring the content of the advertising that they contain (issues of decency and taste, not just of fraud and deception).

29. Unsolicited outbound telemarketing is an invasion of privacy and should be prohibited.

30. Corrective advertising is an effective government tool for dealing with deceptive advertising.

31. The fee system and/or the incentive-based system is a better method of advertising agency compensation than is the commission system.

32. A large multi-product corporation should use an in-house advertising agency rather than an outside full-service agency.

33. Continuous sales promotions destroy brand franchises.

34. Religious leaders (such as Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association and The Catholic League) should not organize boycotts of sponsors of TV shows they find offensive. It is censorship and paternalistic.

35. We need laws against the violation of privacy that occurs when direct marketers sell or rent their customer lists to other organizations. For example, companies should be required to gain permission from consumers prior to selling their private information (household demographics, purchase behavior, etc.) to other firms.

36. Paid product placements (product integration)—conspicuously integrating brands into movies (e.g., James Bond driving a BMW Roadster), TV programs (e.g., Coke on “American Idol”), video games, novels, and other entertainment media—are inherently deceiving to audience members (especially children) by obscuring the lines between ads and content, and they should either be disallowed or clearly labeled with disclaimers warning the public.

37. Infomercials are deceptive and should be severely regulated.

38. Targeting ethnic segments by marketers of unhealthy products such as cigarettes and liquor is wrong and should be disallowed.

39. Visuals in ads should be required to accurately depict the product.

40. Magazine advertorials are deceptive and should be disallowed.

41. Public schools should be forbidden by law from accepting anything of value (e.g., television equipment) in exchange for bringing ads into the classroom or on school buses.

42. Ad agencies should not handle competing accounts.

43. Marketers should not target the gay and lesbian market because this is controversial, immoral, and/or will alienate some consumers.

44. Annoying, irritating, and offensive advertising should be severely regulated.

45. On-line advertising should not be used or else should be used sparingly because its effectiveness is still unknown.

46. Retail stores should curtail the amount of in-store advertising and merchandising because it annoys their patrons.

47. Product endorsements by charitable organizations put the public confidence at risk and can erode the integrity of the cause.

48. Advertisers should not pay search engines to list their firm near the top of search results—this is deceptive.

49. Incorporating advertising messages into children’s games on an advertiser’s website is insidious and should be curtailed.

50. We need federal legislation to ensure online privacy by protecting Web surfers’ personal data from Internet “cookies” and online profiling techniques (which uses technology that secretly collects data on online consumers and logs it into a database, enabling surfing and buying habits to be linked with identifying information).

51. Unsolicited commercial e-mail, i.e., “junk” e-mail (spam), should be abolished by federal law.

52. Advertising during colossal programs like The Super Bowl, the Academy Awards, and the Olympics is a colossal waste of money.

53. It is wrong for advertisers to institute “ad-pull” policies whereby they demand that publications

inform them in advance of any issues running negative coverage of them or any editorial matter on

their competitors or industry.

54. Direct-to-consumer prescription drug ads should either be banned from or curtailed in all (or at least some. E.g., TV) media.

55. Buzz marketing—hiring people who will spread the word about a marketer’s product with evangelical zeal—is deceptive because consumers believe ordinary people, not corporate shills, are discussing the product.

56. Spring break tour promoters encourage underage drinking and other risky behaviors and so should be more strictly regulated.

Financial services advertising (e.g., for subprime mortgages) needs stricter regulation.

If you have a controversial advertising issue other than one of those above you'd like to debate, let me know. If you are interested in participating in a debate, let me know by Feb. 12 the issue or issues and the position(s) you'd like to take: pro (agree with the above proposition), con, or no preference, and any other class member who is willing to work with you. Debate dates will be arranged between students and me, but debates will be held fairly late in the semester to allow you adequate time to prepare.