Facilitating Trust: The Benefits and Challenges of Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility Online

Background

Many of the issues faced by those charged with communicating corporate social responsibility initiatives are the same as those faced by individuals advertising goods and services more generally. When it comes to advertising, there are already a number of ethics codes in place. The Better Business Bureau Code of Advertising, the Australian Advertiser Code of Ethics, the British Codes of Advertising Sales Promotion, and the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards share the following key principles. First, it is essential to recognize that advertisers must meet responsibilities to consumers, local communities, and society at large. Second, advertising should adhere to standards of decency, honesty, and truth. This, of course, entails that advertisers ought to avoid misrepresentation and outright deception in ads. Advertisers also ought to respect a sense of fair play with other market competitors. Finally, advertisers must consider how their behavior affects the advertising industry as a whole (Spence and van Heekeren, 2005).

Despite these codes advertising practice clearly often diverges from the requirements of honesty and avoidance of misrepresentation. Consumers facing the glut of beer and automobile ads promising a hot date know that beer and nice cars won’t actually guarantee delivery of the blond bombshells in the advertisements. Puffery is common practice in advertising. Puffery refers to “exaggerated claims, comments, commendations, or hyperbole, and in its most common usage, puffery is based on subjective views and opinions” (Spence and Van Hekeren, 2005, p. 46). The public is fully aware that puffery is common. According to a survey by online marketing research company Yougov only 3% of Americans fully trust advertisements and 44% believe ads are fairly dishonest (37%) or very dishonest (7%) (Marketing Charts, 2014). So long as the positions endorsed in ads are presented as subjective rather than as objective rationally defensible claims, even the Federal Trade Commission tends to let this sort of misrepresentation slide.