Advertising and Policy Insights for the Voter versus Customer Trade-Off

Abstract

The Supreme Court decision allowing corporations to promote candidates close to an election raises many relevant marketing questions: Will doing so antagonize customers? If a firm spends advertising dollars to influence elections rather than simply to promote goods and services, how can those dollars be spent effectively? Should a company advertise as part of a coalition? Will procandidate or antiopponent advertisements be the better choice, or are special events a wiser choice than any advertising? The authors explore these marketing questions, which have public policy implications, because proposed legislation to limit the effect of the Supreme Court decision is best evaluated according to understanding of corporate priorities. A key issue is transparency-that is, whether the audience for any promotion to support or oppose a candidate knows which corporations are the sponsors or whether their identity is hidden within a coalition.

A Social Identity Perspective on the Legalization of Marijuana in the United States

“…Previous research on voting behavior has investigated the influence of individual level and psychological factors, particularly as they relate to contentious issues. These include: (1) religious affiliation (Froese 2014; Tatalovich and Daynes 1984); (2) sex and sexuality (Brown, Knopp, and Morrill 2005); (3) race (Lay 2008; Lockerbie 2013); (4) the media (Alotaibi 2013; Gelb and Bush 2011; Laczniak and Caywood 1987; Singhapakdi and LaTour 1991); and even (5) physical attractiveness (Little et al 2007; Tigue et al 2012). However, larger sociological and macro level factors, influences, and contexts have largely been overlooked.…”

Politik Pazarlama Karmasına Kavramsal Ve Güncel Bir Bakış (An Updated and Conceptual Aspect to the Political Marketing Mix)

“…Ticari reklamlardan farklı olarak politik pazarlamada karşımıza negatif reklamlar çıkmaktadır. Negatif reklamlar politik pazarlamada diğer unsurlara göre ön plana çıkabilmekte ve daha fazla etkikleyici, düzenleyici role sahip olabilmektedir (Egan, 1999;Kaid, 2002;Gelb, Bush, 2011;Dermody, Scullion, 2000). Negatif reklamlar kitlesel ve bireysel halde gerçekleşebilmektedir.…”

“…Sosyal medya ve İnternet göreli olarak düşük maliyetli olmasıyla birlikte geniş kitlelere ulaşma imkanı vermektedir (Gelb, Bush, 2011). Sosyal medyayla birlikte politik pazarlama kapsamında tutundurma bünyesinde yer alan bir diğer unsurda mobil pazarlama kapsamındaki reklamlardır (Cwalina, Falkowski ve Newman, 2012).…”

“…The promotion mix consists of advertisement, panel discussions, direct mailing, public relations and publicity and negative campaigns (Egan, 1999;Kaid, 2002;Gelb, Bush, 2011;Dermody, Scullion, 2000;Widagdo et. al.…”

“…The communication activities in the scope of changing face of political marketing offers other communication toolseither synchronized or not -between the candidate and the voters, such as; e-mail, chat, newsletter groups and instant messaging (Coursaris, Papagiannidis,2009). Internet introduced other social media (Gelb, Bush, 2011) channels such as facebook, twitter, instagram, youtube, periscope, pinterest, linkedIn, google+, etc. (Ediraras et.al., 2013;Lees-Marshment, 2009: Okan, Topcu andAkyüz, 2014;Cwalina, Falkowski and Newman, 2012) to the actors in the political market.…”