Journal of Business Ethics 175 (4):689-699 (2022)

Tim Aylsworth
Florida International University
Critics of persuasive advertising argue that it undermines the autonomy of consumers by manipulating their desires in morally problematic ways. My aim is this paper is to refine that argument by employing a conception of autonomy that is not at odds with certain forms of manipulation. I argue that the charge of manipulation is not sufficient for condemning persuasive advertising. On my view, manipulation of an agent’s desires through advertising is justifiable in cases where the agent accepts the process through which the desires were developed. I show how the standard manipulation objection proves too much as it would also condemn cases of that kind. I argue that this distinction is especially important when we consider the implications of “new media.” In addition to increasing vulnerability to manipulation, new media have considerable impacts on well-being. By siding with the traditional autonomy argument, we would be compelled to take an implausible stand against all forms of manipulation through advertising, but I suggest that only a proper subset of those cases are morally problematic. This conclusion opens up a space for persuasive advertising that is permissible while nevertheless condemning cases that violate consumers’ autonomy.
Keywords Advertising ethics  Business ethics  Autonomy  Marketing ethics  Applied ethics
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10551-020-04590-6
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person.Harry Frankfurt - 1971 - Journal of Philosophy 68 (1):5-20.
The Ethics of Authenticity.Charles Taylor - 1992 - Harvard University Press.
The Theory and Practice of Autonomy.Gerald Dworkin - 1988 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 37 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Business Ethics.Jeffrey Moriarty - 2016 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
On the Duty to Be an Attention Ecologist.Tim Aylsworth & Clinton Castro - 2022 - Philosophy and Technology 35 (1):1-22.
Business Ethics.Alexei Marcoux - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Persuasive Advertising, Autonomy, and the Creation of Desire.Roger Crisp - 1987 - Journal of Business Ethics 6 (5):413 - 418.
Irrational Advertising and Moral Autonomy.Alonso Villarán - 2017 - Journal of Business Ethics 144 (3):479-490.
What’s Wrong with Motive Manipulation?Eric M. Cave - 2006 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (2):129-144.
Autonomy and Online Manipulation.Michael Klenk & Jeff Hancock - 2019 - Internet Policy Review 1:1-11.
Freedom and Indoctrination.Michael Garnett - 2015 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 115 (2pt2):93-108.
The Parallel Manipulation Argument.Taylor W. Cyr - 2016 - Ethics 126 (4):1075-1089.
Manipulation and Unsavory Seduction.Eric Cave - 2014 - In Manipulation. New York, NY, USA: pp. 176-200.


Added to PP index

Total views
287 ( #37,120 of 2,504,875 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
142 ( #4,577 of 2,504,875 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes