Corporations have been increasingly resorting to institutional advertising campaigns to express managements’ viewpoints on controversial social issues where their vital economic interests are at stake. Such corporate communications blur the line between commercial speech and political speech which have varying degrees of protection from regulations and differing tax treatment. A new classificatory scheme is proposed to facilitate distinguishing between image/goodwill and idea/issue advertising. The objective is to demonstrate how idea/issue advertising can be made an effective corporate marketing tool, while at the same time improve corporate public credibility.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdkinsLynn (1978), “How Good are Advocacy Ads?”Dun's Review (June), 76–77.
2.
BarnetSylvan M. (1975), “A Global Look at Advocacy Advertising,”Public Relations Journal (November), 20–21.
3.
Business Week (1978), “Lawyers Retaliate Against Aetna's Ads,” (July 31), 39.
4.
Common Cause (1978), The Power Persuaders: A Common Cause Study of What the Federal Lobby Law Does Not Reveal About the Special Interest Lobbying in the Carter Energy Package (February), 26.
5.
EpsteinEdwin M. (1969), The Corporation in American Politics, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
6.
EpsteinEdwin M. (1979), “Business and Labor in the American Electoral Process: A Policy Analysis of Federal Regulation—The Rise of Political Action Committees,” to be published in Sage Electoral Studies Yearbook, AlexanderHerbert E., ed.
7.
SederbergKathryn (1978), “Top 100 Near $9 Billion in Ads,”Advertising Age, (August 28), 1.
8.
SethiS. Prakash (1977), Advocacy Advertising and Large Corporations, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.
9.
SethiS. Prakash (1978), “Advocacy Advertising: Corporate External Communications and Public Policy,” in Research in Marketing, Vol. 1, ShethJagdish N., ed., Greenwich, Conn: Jai Press.
