More Business Columnists

• Stacy Sacco: Savor 'Cheese' book's lessons on tackling change
• Randy Burge: Locally grown foods grow in popularity
• Stacy Sacco: Want to develop a situation card?

MOST RECENT TRIB STORIES

• ABQTrib.com to remain available
  08:48 a.m., February 25, 2008
• Congressman is indicted
  08:37 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Series of attacks target Green Zone
  08:36 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Iran is defying U.N., agency says
  08:35 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Waterboarding approval probed
  08:34 a.m., February 23, 2008

TRIB IN THE BLOGOSPHERE*

• Ty Murray Invitational thrills fans in Albuquerque
• Is Rome Burning?
• Ominous Skies
• The Road to Invalidation
• Albuquerque company participates in “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition”

*Note: The Tribune does not create and is not responsible for the blogosphere's headlines and stories. These links to blogs talking about ABQTrib.com are automatically generated. Use them at your own risk.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• Comments
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

A business associate recently shared his unsolicited opinion that marketing was all "smoke and mirrors" and that most advertisements were basically lies.

Having taught college-level marketing for nearly 10 years and worked as a marketing manager for nearly triple that time, I took umbrage to his comments.

The vast majority of my fellow marketers are quite ethical and don't deserve this portrayal. True, we don't always share the negative aspects of a particular product or service and instead focus on the positive ones, but is not telling the whole story necessarily lying?

In a world of sound bites and 15-second TV commercials, you don't have enough time to explain all aspects of your product or service, and you will naturally emphasize the positive. I've also found that most of my marketing peers are the "cup is half full" types, and so they will lean that direction naturally.

Much of marketing reminds me of "Peanuts" character Charlie Brown and the once-famous statement: "No, he didn't have a large nose but rather a small face."

Take, for example, a local fast-food restaurant I recently visited. I peeled back the little gift card that came with my meal to reveal my prize. Instead of saying I was a "Loser," it said more positively that I was "Not a Winner."

I like that answer better, don't you?

Much to my chagrin when I was in college, Steve Turpen, the president of our Delta Sigma Pi business fraternity, moved our meetings to a larger room so it would look like we didn't have many members. This change gave spirit to a new membership drive. Great leaders are about vision right?

Of course there is a darker side to all these positive messages that one must give some consideration. Take clothing size inflation or what's being called "vanity sizing," for example. The previous women's size 9 is now the new 6 and might someday be a 4.

Certainly consumers will feel better about themselves when buying a new dress and discovering they can now fit into a size 6, even though they didn't keep to their diet. But the downside is that you can't trust the sizing systems anymore. Ordering clothes online has got to be an exercise in frustration. Some standards must be adhered to, right?

So what could my friend have been thinking? What was his real problem with us marketers? Was it that third cup of coffee that morning that had pushed him over the edge?

After more questioning, I realized his theories came out of his long-held belief that most public messages, especially those titillating news stories, like Lindsay Lohan's substance abuse problems or Paris Hilton's latest engagement announcement, are all conjured up by a savvy marketer trying to get a client's name in the news and a profit-driven media trying to sell ad space that fuels the media frenzy.

I was beginning to realize just how much of a conspiracy theorist my friend really was.

Now I'll agree that on occasion I have my suspicions about the validity of some news stories. For example, I couldn't help but wonder if Rosie O'Donnell and Donald Trump had actually planned their well-publicized verbal sparring recently just to garner some additional media attention.

I can just picture Donald calling Rosie and saying something like: "Hi, Rosie, my friend. Hey, I talked with my PR guy recently about my lackluster ratings, and he cooked up this little scheme. It goes something like this: I'll call you a prima donna and make a derogatory remark about your weight.

"In response, you can pick on something about me like my hairstyle. That'll get the media's attention, don't you think?"

In response, Rosie might have said: "Donald, dear, my friend, I love the idea, but I think you've got to spice it up a little. We've got a lot of competition out there. How about you call me a `big, fat pig' and a `bully,' and I'll call you a `snake-oil salesman'? What do you think?"

Donald: "Sounds great! And, hey, when can you and Kelli meet Melania and I for dinner again? We've missed you."

Rosie: "Now, Donald, there are too many paparazzi. How about if we wait until our little spat has played itself out, and then we can fake a reconciliation? That will get us some more media attention."

Donald: "That sounds great, Rosie. You are so smart. Honey, you're hired!"

I would agree with my friend that certainly some marketers might use these types of ploys, but for the most part, marketing is about telling the "good story" based on facts, data and empirical evidence. And that's the truth!