Ethical Dilemma of a 2016 TV Commercial for Milk by Juhayna

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Background
Ethical Dilemma
Stakeholders
The TARES Test
Moral Principles Schools
Opinion
References

Background

Ramadan in Egypt is the period when companies release their most elaborate advertising campaigns, which attracts increased customer attention. One such ad was a 2016 TV commercial for milk by Juhayna, which raised widespread public discussion (KTP Channel, 2016). In this ad, two young children make fun of a third child for still being breastfed. They call the boy an idiot and also ask how he is going to grow if he is still consuming breast milk. At the end of the ad, the creators claim that Juhayna’s milk is the best in Egypt after Dondou (presumably, this term refers to women’s breasts in the context of this ad). Thus, the advertisement promotes Juhayna’s milk as an alternative to breastfeeding. Moreover, episodes of ridicule over a child who is breastfed imply the inappropriateness of this practice and urge women to abandon it.

Ethical Dilemma

The presented advertising touches the most vulnerable groups of society: women and children. Moreover, the advertisements appeal specifically to women, and mothers of young children, whom themselves cannot make a choice regarding their food options. The message presented in the advertisement can influence the decision of mothers to stop breastfeeding, which can potentially harm the health of children. Additionally, children who can also perceive the information presented in TV advertisements may be influenced by them to refuse breastfeeding, which is also a potential problem. The appeal used in advertising can have the greatest impact on young children, who have poorly developed critical thinking and cannot make informed decisions. The verbal and visual message contains children mocking another child, which is likely to affect the emotions of children watching ads significantly. Thus, the ethical dilemma is whether the promotion of Juhayna’s product is justified in the context of advocating (though not direct) for non-breastfeeding.

In this section, it is also important to note another controversy presented in this advertisement. The ad uses the term Dondou, which is not directly defined, and viewers have to figure out its intended meaning. From the verbal context of the advertisement, it can be understood that Dondou refers to a woman’s breasts. There are several potential ethical issues associated with this term in the ad. First, referring to women’s breasts in TV commercials using a made-up word can lead to episodes of sexual harassment. The word can be used as a more veiled name for a woman’s breasts, suggesting a possible sexual connotation. Secondly, at the end of the ad, the creators claim that their milk is the best after Dondou. In this situation, they do not directly state that their milk is the best after breast milk but use their own term. Thus, not all viewers can clearly understand what is being said and perceive the message correctly.

Stakeholders

The stakeholders of this advertisement are primarily vulnerable groups of viewers, such as women and children. In a broader context, the stakeholder is society as a whole, which can be influenced by the information presented in this advertisement. The company and advertisers must also be considered stakeholders as they seek to sell their products to consumers. Other milk-producing companies can also be noted as stakeholders, as they are also involved in the competition in the market.

The TARES Test

TARES test offers a set of questions that allow you to identify the ethical issues that an advertising message may contain. TARES is an acronym for the core ethical principles covered in the test: truthfulness, authenticity, respect, equity, and social responsibility. This test is used with persuasive messages to evaluate and identify potential ethical issues that may arise in both public relations messages and advertising.

Juhayna’s ad TARES test:

Are the ad claims truthful? The truthfulness of Juhayna’s ad is controversial as the company does not use a direct deceptive message but misleads viewers. In particular, it can be inferred from the advertisement that Juhayna claims that its product is better for babies than breast milk. At the same time, the company does not directly state that drinking its milk is a healthier choice for children’s development. At the same time, the visual and verbal message suggests that the breastfeeding baby is being ridiculed by the baby, who consumes Juhayna’s milk. In this situation, it cannot be said that the advertisement is deceptive, but it suggests false information, which may lead to a false perception among viewers. The ad is not truthful since the visual and verbal messages based on discrediting breast milk are not true and have no basis.
Is the claim authentic? The advertisement promotes the replacement of breast milk with Juhayna’s product, but the company makes no argument for the need for such a move. There is no sincere need to purchase their product as it does not offer benefits that cannot be achieved with other products or breast milk. The claim presented in the advertisement is not authentic since the creators did not provide any evidence of the advantage of their product over breast milk, which cannot motivate them to buy it.
Does the ad treat the receiver with respect? The stakeholders of this advertisement are children and women who are persuaded to purchase the company’s product as a substitute for breastfeeding. For some viewers, this message may be persuasive and encourage them to stop breastfeeding. In terms of the effect on society, this can lead to a deterioration in the health of children in the long term (for example, allergic reactions or lack of necessary elements). Thus, advertising does not comply with the principle of respect, as it knowingly offers a potentially harmful product for such vulnerable groups.
Is there equity between the sender and receiver? Many resources are now available to women to review the evidence regarding baby feeding options. In particular, they can consult medical specialists on the subject. However, many women may not be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of certain options, so their choice can be easily influenced by uninformed advertising. Advertising violates the principle of equity as it does not offer viewers information about the benefits or downsides of the product in comparison with breastfeeding, nor does it calls to consult specialists. Many women with young children may not have enough time to research the materials to make decisions on such important issues.
Is the ad socially responsible? Advertising has the potential to harm the most vulnerable groups in society, including children and women. An uninformed belief not to breastfeed can lead to undesirable negative health outcomes for these groups, making advertising socially irresponsible.

Moral Principles Schools

From a utilitarian perspective, morally correct decisions should bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people. Thus, according to Mill and Bentham, the public interest is always paramount. In relation to this advertisement, it serves the interests of the company and the advertisers exclusively, ignoring the needs and well-being of society and vulnerable groups. The message presented in the advertisement has the potential to harm the health of the population and individuals, which undermines the principles of utilitarianism.

From Kant’s point of view, the individual must act in such a way that this behavior can become a universal law. Thus, the categorical imperative prescribes making ethical decisions regardless of the situation, which is a duty. The presented advertising can mislead viewers, which, having become a universal law, implies the constant publication of TV advertisements that are potentially harmful to the health of society. Applying the categorical imperative, advertisers had to consider what social consequences their advertising would lead to and whether they would be negative.

Opinion

In view of the ethical issue presented, advertising that potentially leads to negative health outcomes for society should not be used. The described ethical dilemma emphasizes that the promotion of a product for profit is not justified using such materials, as it can harm society, which is described by the utilitarian moral principle school. The interests of the company and the creators of advertising cannot be higher than the welfare and health of society. Appealing to children and women as vulnerable groups of the population is the main ethical issue in this situation. Naderer (2021), in recent research, found that “children are affected by food promotions in their preference for unhealthy food and beverages in selection tasks shortly conducted after exposure” (p. 12). Thus, this advertisement can negatively influence both the mother’s decision about feeding options and the child, as it uses both social and emotional appeal, to which young children are extremely susceptible. Additionally, referring to a woman’s breasts may contain unwanted sexual connotations that are also perceived by children.

References

KTP Channel. (2016). Juhayna Ramadan Campaign with subtitle, جميع اعلانات جهينة مترجمة [Video]. YouTube. Web.

Naderer, B. (2021). Advertising unhealthy food to children: On the importance of regulations, parenting styles, and media literacy.Current Addiction Reports, 8, 12-18. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!