Ethics in Advertising

No, no, no. That's not a contradiction in terms!
Although I'll be the first to admit that ethics are a tad less than obligatory in political advertising, in fact, the most successful political ad campaigns avoid them altogether. But what works in political advertising, doesn't work so well with any products or services that people can touch, judge and experience immediately for themselves.
Lying in politics, however, is such a time-honored tradition that Plato spoke of it as necessary to diplomacy. Today, lying politicians are the bread and butter of comedy. Stand-up comics could not exist without them. 
Why do politicians envy ventriloquists?
    They can lie without moving their lips.
What do you call a politician who swears to tell the truth?
    A liar.
How can you tell when a politician is lying?
    His lips are moving.
The list goes on.
But something remarkable happened Tuesday, June 8, 2010. Two remarkably well marketed bundles of bamboozlery bombed at the polling booths.  Propositions 16 & 17, two corporate exercises in corporate greed, deception, half-truths, mistruths and home-spun charm, crashed and burned on impact.

Or as Greg Pruett, senior vice president of corporate affairs for PG&E reportedly explained in an article on baycitizen.org "While the election outcome hasn’t diminished our steadfast belief that citizens should have a vote in local government efforts to enter the electric utility business, we respect the decision voters made on this initiative." He failed to add that this initiative would have taken the right to majority rule away from those voters.  Ironically, if PG&E had been able to play by the rules they were pushing, their 47.5 percent of the vote would have been enough to stifle the majority’s will. Too bad.  So sad.
Surprisingly the effort that brought the $46 million PG&E juggernaut to its knees accomplished that miracle with a budget of barely $100,000. Similarly, the Mercury Insurance $16 million, attempt to reverse a 1988 consumer protection law, and allow them to manipulate premiums, was defeated with a tiny fraction of their bloated budget. So where did the corporations go wrong, or more importantly, where did the opposition go right?
First it seems the corporate troops went about a lie too far. They each used fake names, tried to hide behind populist rhetoric that they didn’t really understand, spent money like water or Meg Whitman (but I repeat myself). Then inexplicably, they defended their true goals openly in corporate stockholder documents accessible on the web. The opposition only had to point that out and make the truth even easier to find… not all that difficult in the digital “click-here” age. So even though voters (consumers) couldn’t actually touch, judge or experience products (arguments) with their own two hands, the bare facts were all-too-easy to find.
Lying is advertising is always a bad idea. That’s especially true if you have a product, and people are using it. There’s probably a reason they like it.  Which means there’s enough good to say about it, that you don’t have to lie. If you don’t believe me, ask your happier customers. And if you still feel like you have to lie, be sure to give some friends or family a box or two of crayons and construction paper to make your “Going Out of Business Sale” signs. Your competition, their customers and their lawyers will be only too happy to help.
Ethics is advertising is just good business. And... sometimes, not a bad idea in politics either.