000 respondents" (Krauss 18). The difference in speed is enormous as well. Researchers have found, for instance, that where telephone surveys might produce 200 responses in two weeks, an Internet approach can deliver "2,000 responses in two to three days" (Krauss 18). The temptation to proceed without much caution is very great indeed.
Marketing is a utilitarian enterprise and, even with the understanding that it is impractical in the long run to engage in deceptive practices and exaggerated claims, the outlook on marketing ethics usually remains entirely pragmatic. A utilitarian approach to ethics is one that is oriented toward the consequences of an action. That is, "the manager will attempt to produce the greatest possible amount of positive value or the smallest possible amount of negative value for the persons affected" (Nantel and Weeks 10). Good arguments are made for the applicability of a deontological ethical approach to marketing ethics. This approach states that an action is not ethical "unless the person who adopts it would see nothing reprehensible in its adoption by all others and unless this practice does not threaten the survival of society" (Nantel and Weeks 10). But it is not necessary to apply this more severe test to marketing ethics in order to demonstrate that unethical practices are self-defeating. It is highly unlikely, however, that any marketer would approve of deceptive practices directed at his/her own children or approve their use by his/her competitors. This simple test alone is enough to demonstrate that a utilitarian ethic is inadequate since this particular example demonstrates that under such an ethic somewhat deceptive practices would be assessed in terms of the limited amount of harm they might do to children--to which it might be asked, why harm them at all?
The marketing opportunities offered by e-mail constitutes one change that is unique to the Internet. Marketers ask for e-mai...