Supreme Court decisions that have established the consumer's right to receive commercial speech are reviewed, followed by survey results showing substantial discrepancies between the attorney selection criteria that consumers rate important and those actually used. The ability of professional advertising to reduce this information gap is then discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonRobert L., and Eugene KlippelR. (1977), “An Empirical Test of a Public Policy Decision Model: The Evaluation of Prescription Drug Price Advertising,” in Contemporary Marketing Thought, GreenbergBarnett A., and BellengerDanny N., eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, 280–284.
2.
ArmstrongScott J., and OvertonTerry S. (1977), “Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys,”Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (August), 396–402.
3.
ArnoldElizabeth E. (1979), “How a Lawyer Can Best Market His Services,”Bar Leader, 4 (January-February), 27.
4.
BairdCharles W. (1977), Advertising by Professionals, Ottawa, IL: Greenhill Publishers.
5.
Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 97 S.Ct. 2691,2699,2700 (1977).
6.
Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 808 (1975).
7.
BloomPaul N. (1977), “Advertising in the Professions: The Critical Issues,”Journal of Marketing, 41 (July), 103–110.
8.
BloomPaul N., and LoebStephen E. (1977), “If Public Accountants are Allowed to Advertise,”MSU Business Topics, 25 (Summer), 57–64.
9.
Breard v. Alexandria, 341 U.S. 622 (1951).
10.
CohenDorothy (1978), “Advertising the First Amendment,”Journal of Marketing, 42 (July), 59–68.
11.
CunninghamWilliam, and CunninghamIsabella C. M. (1976), “Consumer Protection: More Information or More Regulation,”Journal of Marketing, 40 (April), 64–72.
12.
CurranBarbara A., and SpaldingFrancis O. (1974), The Legal Needs of the Public, Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
13.
FeldmanSidney, and SpencerMerlin (1975), “The Effect of Personal Influence in the Selection of Consumer Services,” in 1975 Combined Proceedings, MazzeEdward M., ed., Chicago: American Marketing Association, 597–600.
14.
First National Bank of Boston et al. v. Bellotti et al., 98 S.Ct. 1407 (1978).
15.
HaefnerJames E. (1977), “Advertising Effectiveness Study Prepared for Illinois State Bar Association,” unpublished working paper, Urbana: University of Illinois.
16.
Kleindeinst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753 (1972).
17.
KotlerPhilip, and ConnorRichard A.Jr. (1977), “Marketing Professional Services,”Journal of Marketing, 41 (January), 71–76.
18.
KuehlPhilip G., and FordGary T. (1977), “The Promotion of Medical and Legal Services: An Experimental Study,” in Contemporary Marketing Thought, GreenbergBarnett A., and BellengerDanny N., eds., Chicago: American Marketing Association, 39–44.
19.
MeyerTiffany S., and SmithRobert E. (1978), “Attorney Advertising: Bates and A Beginning,”Arizona Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 2, 427–483.
20.
N.A.A.C.P. v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963).
21.
Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, 98 S.Ct. 1912, 1919 (1978).
22.
RatchfordBrian T., and AndreasenAlan R. (1972), “A Study of Consumer Perceptions of Decisions,” in Advances in Consumer Behavior, Vol. 1, WardScott, and WrightPeter L., eds., Boston: Association for Consumer Research, 283–286.
23.
SchuckPeter H. (1976), “Consumer Ignorance and Legal Advertising,”Insurance Counsel Journal, 43 (October), 568–573.
24.
SethiS. Prakash (1979), “Institutional/Image Advertising and Idea/Issue Advertising as Marketing Tools: Some Public Policy Issues,”Journal of Marketing, 43 (January), 68–78.
25.
SmithRobert E., and LuschRobert F. (1976), “How Advertising Can Position a Brand,”Journal of Advertising Research, 16 (February), 37–43.
26.
U.S. Department of Commerce (1978), “Survey of Current Business,”Washington, DC: Bureau of Economic Analysis.
27.
Valentine v. Chrestensen, 316 U.S. 52 (1942).
28.
Virginia State Board of Pharmacy et al. v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. et al., 425 U.S. 748 (1976).
29.
Wisconsin Bar Bulletin (1979), “Supreme Court Hearing April 9, 1979, In the Matter of Amendment to the Code of Professional Responsibility,”52 (February), 19–20.
