Halachos of Marketing: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
Jeremypurow (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Jeremypurow (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== General Marketing Considerations == | ==General Marketing Considerations== | ||
# The marketing profession poses the | #The marketing profession poses the difficulties of ensuring one does not lie about a product or deceive a potential customer.<ref>Chullin 94a, The gemara discusses the concept of gneivat daat where the owner withholds critical information from the potential buyer. The gemara quotes many different cases regarding cases of gneivat daat.</ref> | ||
==False Advertising== | ==False Advertising== | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Presenting the Good without Mentioning the Bad== | ==Presenting the Good without Mentioning the Bad== | ||
#While there is no problem with presenting the positive aspects of merchandise (as long as it isn't blown out of proportion in a deceitful way and even a reasonable person would be deceived by it), sellers are obligated to disclose any defects, deficiencies, shortcomings, or imperfections in their merchandise in order to prevent themselves from violating Geneivat Da'at. This is true even if the merchandise is being sold at a fair price for the condition it is really in. <ref>Geneivat Da'at: The Prohibition Against Deception in Today's World, 2002 article by Professor Hershey H. Friedman</ref> | #While there is no problem with presenting the positive aspects of merchandise (as long as it isn't blown out of proportion in a deceitful way and even a reasonable person would be deceived by it), sellers are obligated to disclose any defects, deficiencies, shortcomings, or imperfections in their merchandise in order to prevent themselves from violating Geneivat Da'at. This is true even if the merchandise is being sold at a fair price for the condition it is really in. <ref>Geneivat Da'at: The Prohibition Against Deception in Today's World, 2002 article by Professor Hershey H. Friedman</ref><ref>Maharsha Chulin 94a, The Maharsha poses a case where a seller withholds information about a defect in an object he is selling. Despite the fact that he withholds this information, the seller still sells the object at a lower price (which is fit for the object with the defect). This is still gneivat daat even though there is no onaa because the buyer believes he is getting a bargain on the object as he does not know about the defect. </ref> | ||
==Overcharging in Comparison to the Market== | ==Overcharging in Comparison to the Market== | ||
Revision as of 01:37, 3 July 2019
General Marketing Considerations
- The marketing profession poses the difficulties of ensuring one does not lie about a product or deceive a potential customer.[1]
False Advertising
- One is not allowed to use superlatives to present a product if the superlative will likely deceive a reasonable person.[2]
- It is one's responsibility to gather relevant information on products one intends to buy.[3]
Presenting the Good without Mentioning the Bad
- While there is no problem with presenting the positive aspects of merchandise (as long as it isn't blown out of proportion in a deceitful way and even a reasonable person would be deceived by it), sellers are obligated to disclose any defects, deficiencies, shortcomings, or imperfections in their merchandise in order to prevent themselves from violating Geneivat Da'at. This is true even if the merchandise is being sold at a fair price for the condition it is really in. [4][5]
Overcharging in Comparison to the Market
- When dealing with overcharging in the marketplace, the main concern is the prohibition of Ona'ah (overcharging). To see more of what constitutes Ona'ah, see the page dedicated to it here: Onaah.
Telemarketing
- A telemarketer who as a desperate gesture insults the consumer is in violation of onat devarim.[6]
- Calling at an inconvenient time such as dinner time (all the more so in the middle of the night) such that the consumer will interrupt his dinner to pick up the phone is a violation of onat devarim. Furthermore, the telemarketer who tries to convince consumers who aren't interested to buy the product are in violation of lo tachmod and lo titaveh of the consumer's money.[7]
- Negotiating for a discount isn't lo tachmod or lo titaveh since the seller is willing to sell it at the right price and setting a price isn't a final decision rejecting the offer. However, if the seller says he is convinced of the price and isn't willing to lower it, negotiating or convincing that resort to empathy or emotion or the like are a violation of lo tachmod.[8]
- Soliciting for a charitable cause even using persuasive tactics isn't a violation of lo tachmod or lo titaveh since you are helping them fulfill a mitzvah. However, persisting and pestering a potential donor are onat devarim.[9]
Unethical Competitive Practices
Undercutting the Competition
Monopolies
Overcharging for a Staple Item
Sources
- ↑ Chullin 94a, The gemara discusses the concept of gneivat daat where the owner withholds critical information from the potential buyer. The gemara quotes many different cases regarding cases of gneivat daat.
- ↑ Economic Public Policy and Jewish Law by Rabbi Aaron Levine 1993 p. 76-77
- ↑ Economic Public Policy and Jewish Law by Rabbi Aaron Levine 1993 p. 77
- ↑ Geneivat Da'at: The Prohibition Against Deception in Today's World, 2002 article by Professor Hershey H. Friedman
- ↑ Maharsha Chulin 94a, The Maharsha poses a case where a seller withholds information about a defect in an object he is selling. Despite the fact that he withholds this information, the seller still sells the object at a lower price (which is fit for the object with the defect). This is still gneivat daat even though there is no onaa because the buyer believes he is getting a bargain on the object as he does not know about the defect.
- ↑ Tradition 38:3 2004 article by Rabbi Aaron Levine p. 11-12
- ↑ Tradition 38:3 2004 article by Rabbi Aaron Levine p. 11-12
- ↑ Tradition 38:3 2004 article by Rabbi Aaron Levine p. 9-10
- ↑ Tradition 38:3 2004 article by Rabbi Aaron Levine p. 13
