Social Marketing − Ethical and Health Challenges

Abstract
Social marketing represents the key element that can be used in order to change and improve
behaviors. It links different groups of people, from consumers/patients to policy makers,
professionals from different areas of activity and whole communities.
The present paper presents the implications of social marketing in healthcare, addressing its impact
in various topics, from serious diseases (e.g.: cancer) to general issues (e.g.: smoking) and also the
ethical concerns that may arise due to the nature of this field. When linking these three key concepts
(healthcare, social marketing, ethics) research and evaluation become the cornerstone of the whole
process. Thus, this paper’s objective was to create an overview of the above mentioned connection.

JEL Classification
M14, M31

Key words
Social marketing, public health, ethical behavior

Content
Present research suggests that nowadays it is imperative for any business to create competitive
advantage by delivering products that meet both intra and inter-personal needs. In this sense, social
marketing is gaining more and more importance for future generations. The first definition for this
sub-branch of marketing was established in 1971 by Kotler and Zaltman and it mainly includes the
application of strategies that bring social change. These views have been supported by Kumar et al.
(2012). Furthermore, Laczniak and Murphy (2006) captured the connection between marketing
activities and their ethical impact on society, suggesting that companies should have a ‘people first’
mindset.
Social changes are closely related to health challenges and social marketing influences the behavior
change of focus groups. Social marketing in public health approaches differently the dynamics of the
marketing mix. Consequently, additional to health solutions, products must offer a valuable benefit
to consumers. While price is considered from the consumer’s point of view, place includes the
institutions and the people involved in offering support for the change process (Grier and Bryant,
2005). The last P, promotion, encompasses the aspects used to emphasize the product’s benefits,
price and cost (Nowak et al., 2015). In this sense, policy changes, communication and community
based activities are factors that further influence the process (Grier and Bryant, 2005). However, due
to its sensitive nature, social marketing in public health is more inclined to be the object of ethical
predicaments. Grier and Bryant (2005) capture this criticism extremely well in their analysis on
ethical implications regarding the moral vindication of social marketing purposes, conclusions and
practices (for instance, the amount of acknowledgement of contraceptives side effects in
commercials).
As it has been documented by Holcombe (2015), ethical issues can arise especially when dealing
with critical diseases such as cancer. Due to the vulnerable target population, practices of unethical
marketing may be effortless. Even though the marketing for cancer related products is highly
regulated, marketers should establish honesty, fairness, respect and transparency as core principles to
guide upon. Another criticism is related to the fact that cancer marketing is focused primarily on
emotional messages, highlighting more the improved outcome instead of emphasizing the data that
corroborates the information. Despite occasional criticism, Nowak et al. (2015) characterize social
marketing as a ‘pro-social one focused on improving the health and well-being on both individuals
and the community’. This sub-branch of marketing proves its utility especially in health themes that
affect large groups of people (communities or countries) such as vaccine hesitancy. The lack of trust
and thus the refusal of recommended vaccines for patients themselves or their children is rooted in
the general “distrust in health providers, the health system or the government’.
As documented by Marinova (2013), ethical concerns appear when the communication process
overlooks crucial details leading to what can be considered as misleading or even false information.
The example used that best portrays this situation is the change that took place in the attitude towards
smoking, both for society and for marketers. In addition, as Catanoiu, Geangu and Gardan (2013)
revealed, ethical considerations include healthcare professionals as a key point for marketing
regarding the medical activity and thus the ethics of the medical act gains increased importance.
Consequently, Bhattacharya and Sheth (1996) by their own admission support the idea that social
responsibility has to be ‘an integral part of the contract between business and society’. Thus, as has
been indicated by Gilin and Schwartzman (2011, p. 11), in order to create meaningful changes,
organizations have to embrace both negative and positive aspects of the concepts involved because
social marketing represents a key component that shows the importance companies give to
customers.

Conclusion
Given the complex challenges that the world faces nowadays, social marketing’s importance
increases exponentially. In this paper, there has been described the engagement of social marketing
in what is probably the most important area that affects people all over the world: healthcare.
Furthermore, there have been outlined the ethical implications that affect professionals from both
marketing and healthcare, thus creating the overall picture of the concepts discussed.

References
1. Bhattacharya, C. B. and Sheth, J. N. (1996) Instilling Social Responsibility through
Marketing Research Field Projects. Marketing Education Review [e-journal] 6(2): 23−31.
Available through Taylor and Francis (database)
<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10528008.1996.11488542> [Accessed 5
January 2018].
2. Catoiu, I., Geangu, I. P. and Gardan, D. A. (2013) Applying Marketing Principles in the Field
of Medical Services –an Ethical Challenge?. Procedia Economics and Finance [e-journal] 6:
449−456. Available through Science Direct (database) <https://ac.els-
cdn.com/S2212567113001627/1-s2.0-S2212567113001627-main.pdf?_tid=1619ed80-f3d0-
11e7-ae24-00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1515346251_5e204a5138a21f0d64b09110ed5c7fed>
[Accessed 5 January 2018].
3. Gilin, P. and Schwartzman, E. (2011) Social Marketing to the Business Customer. Hoboken,
NJ: John Willey & Sons.
4. Grier, S. and Bryant C. A. (2005) Social Marketing in Public Health. Annual Review of
Public Health [e-journal] 26(1): 319−339. Available through PubMed (website)
<http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144610>
[Accessed 5 January 2018].
5. Holcombe, R. F. (2015) The ethics of marketing cancer. Journal of Cancer Policy [e-journal]
3:1−2. Available through Science Direct (database) <https://ac.els-
cdn.com/S2213538315000028/1-s2.0-S2213538315000028-main.pdf?_tid=818e3480-f3d1-
 11e7-96a5-00000aab0f27&acdnat=1515346861_5dc0bc0ac939f57dc371726571538418>
[Accessed 5 January 2018].
6. Kumar, V., Rahman, Z., Kazmi A. A. and Goyal, P. (2012) Evolution of sustainability as
marketing strategy: Beginning of a new era. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science [e-
journal] 37: 482−489. Available through Science Direct (database) <https://ac.els-
cdn.com/S1877042812007926/1-s2.0-S1877042812007926-main.pdf?_tid=6e08a210-f3c7-
11e7-aec3-00000aab0f26&acdnat=1515342533_0f485999305a95342b1c5232e7283e65>
[Accessed 5 January 2018].
7. Laczniak, G. R. and Murphy, P. (2006) Normative Perspectives for Ethical and Socially
Responsible Marketing. Journal of Macromarketing [e-journal] 26(2): 154−177. Available
through Sage Pub (website)
<http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0276146706290924> [Accessed 5 January
2018].
8. Marinova, N. (2013) Marketing Ethics and Social Responsibility. Trakia Journal of Sciences
[e-journal] 11(1): 535−538. Available through NBU (website)
<http://eprints.nbu.bg/1975/2/N.Marinova.pdf> [Accessed 5 January 2018].
9. Nowak, G. J., Gellin, B. G., MacDonald, N. E. and Butler, R. (2015) Addressing vaccine
hesitancy: The potential value of commercial and social marketing principles and practices.
Vaccine [e-journal] 33: 4204−4211. Available through Science Direct (database)
<https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0264410X15005034/1-s2.0-S0264410X15005034
main.pdf?_tid=bea2341e-f3ce-11e7-96a5
00000aab0f27&acdnat=1515345674_9d75dd3c3154b181cd6873e7f6cf5d81> [Accessed
through 5 January 2018].