Commercial and Corporate Speech

This week in Leadership and the Law, we talked about corporate and commercial speech. There are a few questions that I want to discuss relating to these topics.

Does advertising have any intrinsic value to individuals or society? If so, what? how?

I think that advertising does have intrinsic value. It is a way to promote products, companies, and ideas. One main purpose of an advertisement is to show the viewer why they need or how they can benefit from something. I think that in and of itself shows value. Not every advertisement shows a product, idea, or company that can benefit the viewer, but there are enough that do to make them all worth it. After being diagnosed with chronic migraine, advertisements for botox and ubrelvy gave me a sense of hope and were influential in what solutions I talked about with my neurologist.

Shouldn't the government be able to ban advertising for products that hurt people, like cigarettes or alcohol? guns or gambling?

I think they should be able to ban advertisements. There are evil people in this world. To many, money is the only thing that matters. I think it is important for the government to intervene when advertising can be dangerous for the community. I don’t think there is anything wrong with having an advertisement for alcohol or cigarettes or guns or gambling, but I think that the government should ensure that these advertisements are truthful. For alcohol and cigarettes, commercials should tell about the impacts on their health or where to get help for alcoholism. For guns, advertising should have to include the legal hoops that need to be jumped through in order to obtain one.

What responsibility do companies owe to the public or to individuals if their products can cause harm?

I think it is sad that we really have to ask this question in the first place. But at the same time, if you are aware of the risk beforehand then the company should not be at fault. I think that companies owe it to their consumers to disclose the risks of their products before the time of purchase. I think that if a company does not disclose the risks and then someone is hurt, there is a responsibility that the companies should have to make it up to the consumer.

If there are to be limits on advertising, who should set them, the federal government? state and local governments? the companies themselves?

I think that there should be limits set by all of these parties. Companies should be able to hold themselves to a high standard. They should be able to make sure that their own advertisements are not false or misleading. Since that is apparently harder than it seems, state governments should be making laws to ensure that their people are not being put in danger by any advertising. The federal government should be making laws to ensure that companies cannot deceive their audience or show them advertisements that could cause the public harm.