Based on a paper by Nicky Donovan
Summary by Jack Reed
Anheuser-Busch and Bud Light have always been known for
their catchy advertising campaigns and commercials. Anheuser-Busch spent $234 million
dollars on promoting Bud Light in 2008 and in the summer of 2009 Anheuser-Busch
was back at it, with the release of their brand new “Fan Cans”. The newest
marketing scheme for the beer company targeted the school colors of 27
Division-I Universities and Colleges across the country. These cans were
produced to show school spirit and pride for the upcoming 2009 football season.
Anheuser-Busch picked not only the best football schools but also the schools
with the best locations. The new Bud Light cans featured 27 different color
combinations, all reflecting a certain school. From the start there was
controversy with the schools when these new Bud Light cans were released. The
schools did not want the general public to take this marketing scheme as a reflection
of the school condoning binge drinking. The biggest concern for these schools
was the ethical issue of these cans promoting underage drinking. This ethical
case is very interesting because all the ethical theories look at this case
very differently.
Individualistic people would not have a problem with
Anheuser-Busch’s Fan Can campaign. According to Friedman’s Individualism, the
only goal of business is to profit, so the only obligation that the
businessperson has is to maximize profit for the owner or the stockholders. By
distributing these cans, Anheuser-Busch is providing profit for themselves and
the stockholders, which is the definition of Individualism. By releasing these
cans people were actually switching beers just to represent their school’s
colors. Individualistic people would not be concerned with attracting underage
students to drink beer because as long as there is a profit that is not their
problem. This marketing campaign was completely legal and made sales increase
dramatically so Individualists would love the Fan Cans and would have no
ethical concerns.
Utilitarianism is all about maximizing the happiness in
yourself and others. For this specific ethical case there would be different viewpoints
on what truly maximizes happiness. The stakeholders on one side include Anheuser-Busch, the
liquor stores, and the students. By releasing the Fan Cans, Anheuser-Busch is
making a profit and getting their brand out to the public, in turn making them
happy. The liquor stores that sell the Can Cans get more business, due to the
increasing demand. A liquor store near Syracuse University had to order 200
cases due to the increasingly high demand for the cans. This kind of business
makes the liquor stores very happy because they are generating revenue. The
students were also very enthused with the Fan Cans. Many of them bought Bud
Light just because it had their school’s colors on the can. Many students from
the University of Texas said they bought the cans because the burnt orange and
white can was perfect for tailgating. These cans maximized the happiness for
those stakeholders but one stakeholder was very much against the new Fan Cans.
The stakeholders that disapproved were all the Universities. The Universities
did not support the new cans and were extremely unhappy. Syracuse, who had a
sponsorship with Budweiser, asked them if they could not sell the new cans in
the University’s area. The Atlantic Coast Conference even wrote a formal letter
to Anheuser-Busch asking if they would not associate themselves with the
Conference. So if a Utilitarian looked at the big picture, with all the
stakeholders in mind, they would agree that this is unethical because it does
not maximize the happiness of all parties involved.
The ethical theory of Kantianism has principles that include
acting rationally, making rational decisions, respect people, and be motivated
by goodwill. Kantianism would not support Anheuser-Busch’s new Fan Can because
it does not coincide with the four principles. Anheuser-Busch is not acting
rational because they know that they are targeting colleges where underage
students go. That also goes along with making rational decisions because the
beer company made the decision to produce and distribute the Fan Cans.
Anheuser-Busch is also not respecting people with the Fan Can because they
could have foreseen the many University officials who were opposed to the cans.
The Fan Can was not motivated by Goodwill, but instead was motivated by
generating larger revenues for the beer company. One ethical duty Kantians believe in is the categorical imperative. Categorical comparative means to act only in those ways in which the intentions of our acts could be made a universal law. This means that if Anheuser-Busch lied about what they were doing then they would be unethical but since they did not, they were acting ethically. Kantianism also states to act in such a way that you treat humanity,whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same as an end and not just a means. In this, I could see Kantianism being against the idea of the Fan Cans because Anheuser-Busch is using the colleges as a means, because they know they can profit from the school's colors. The Fan Can is not helping the Universities for their own sake but instead for the sake of Anheuser-Busch.
Virtue Theory has four virtues, including courage, honesty,
temperance/self control, and justice/fairness. I believe that Anheuser-Busch
did not cross these virtues. They showed courage when they took a chance and
put out a product they hoped people would enjoy. The stores that sold the Fan Cans
also showed courage by selling a product they didn’t know would sell or not.
They trusted Anheuser-Busch enough to take that chance. Anheuser-Busch was not
dishonest and was never out of control. Although some of the Universities
threatened to sue they never went to court so there was no injustice.
Anheuser-Busch showed respect to the Universities when they decided to drop the
marketing campaign.
Anheuser-Busch ended up acting ethically by
removing the Fan Can from the market. In fact, the Fan Can never even made it to the
beginning of the 2009 football season. Looking back on the situation,
Anheuser-Busch should have asked the schools permission to use the colors and
if they refused there would have never been an ethical controversy. I think
this story was a great representation of an ethical controversy because it
shows how, although, something can be ethical to some it may not be to others.
These facts and analyses are based on an original research paper by Nicky Donovan, "Anheuser-Busch: Fan Cans" (2012)
Blackistone, K "Bud Light 'Fan Can' Brewing Up Trouble" aolnews.com. http://www.aolnews.com/2009/09/03/
bud-light-fan-can-brewing-up trouble/ (accessed April 18, 2012). April 25, 2012.
Bowens, D "Controversy brews over beer cans in school colors" wral.com. http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/
5906226/ (accessed April 18, 2012). April 25, 2012.
Olivares, X "Anheuser-Busch Markets Bud Light Cans to College Students" abcnews.go.com.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/anheuser-buschs-bud-light-markets-beer-college-students/story?
id=8418866#.T5emG5pWo0o (accessed April 22, 2012). April 25, 2012.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/anheuser-buschs-bud-light-markets-beer-college-students/story?
id=8418866#.T5emG5pWo0o (accessed April 22, 2012). April 25, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment