A third area whereby unethical practices may be performed is the world of

digital marketing which have been evidently exhibited in Gascoyne et al. (2021)’s
research. To initiate, according to Kelly et al. (2019), young people consistently and
selectively receive numerous daily exposures to unhealthy food and beverage
marketings (as cited by Gascoyne et al., 2021). To elaborate, Gascoyne et al. (2021)
claim that food and beverage companies seem to use digital platforms to market
their products, which are not conditioned to the matching measures of orders by
government as traditional publicizing. For example, according to the Australian
Communications Media Authority, Gascoyne et al. (2020) explain that the usage of
digital platforms by food and beverage companies has significantly increased and
seems to potentially have a substantial impact on consumer behavior. This means
that digital media seems to be permeating freely, giving advertising companies a
desirable potential to connect with a wide range of people, especially adolescents
(as cited by Gascoyne et al., 2021). Moreover, Gascoyne et al. (2021) comment that
digital platform advertising seems to spread innovative marketing techniques
through the use of word-of-mouth to advertise products. Based on these
circumstances, and in accordance with the Processing of Commercialized Media
Content (PCMC) model, Gascoyne et al. (2021) report that the interactive marketing
materials seem to encourage the expansion of ambiguous brand perception, which
possibly has a significant impact on spontaneous consumption patterns. Moreover,
according to Mangold and Faulds (2009), this information occasionally is more
likely to be discussed among peers by blurring the line between marketing and
entertainment, a phenomena known as consumer-generated media, which is likely
to encourage normative behaviors (as cited by Gascoyne et al., 2021). This means
that digital marketing seems to be more adaptable than traditional forms because it
can be quickly adjusted to respond to societal changes. Furthermore, according to
the Australian Communications Media Authority, the majority of teenagers in
Australia regularly use Facebook, Instagram and other social media platforms (as
cited by Gascoyne etal., 2021). To elaborate, Gascoyne et al. (2021) assert that
youths are likely to be more exposed to blogs utilizing products approved by social
media ‘bloggers’, all of which seem to demonstrate compelling connections with
consumption of unhealthy food or beverages. Furthermore, Gasoneye et al. (2021)
hypothesize that seeing ads of unhealthy products on social media seems to be
positively correlated with their rate of consumption. This means that when
someone is using social media and sees an ad of a fast food restaurant, he or she is
more likely to order goods from that restaurant. Specifically, Gasoneye et al. (2021)
argue that interacting with the post rather than merely viewing it is what may lead
to higher consumption rate. This means that it does not significantly matter whether
someone sees the ad or not, what matters seems to be the engagement with that ad.
For example, if someone is on social media and sees an ad for a fast food restaurant,
it would not increase his or her consumption at the same rate as it would if he or she
had liked the post. This is especially illustrated as those who share content of fast
food, tend to consume more from it (Gasoneye et al., 2021). For example, an
individual who shares a post about burgers is more likely to consume a burger than
those who do not. Likewise, advertising online in general seems to be better than
traditional marketing efforts because it leads to a higher conversion rate (Gasoneye
et al., 2021). Therefore, it seems that advertising online is more effective than its
traditional counterpart. Considering the widespread of teenage utilization of these
digital platforms and the subsequent risks on their eating behaviors, Gascoyne et al.
(2021) reveal the shortcomings of current regulations governing the advertising of
food and beverages to youth which may include: lack of stakeholder involvement,
insufficient conformity, an absence of consequences, uncertainty, and the general
participation of such efforts. Additionally, according to Australian Food and Grocery
Council, Gascoyne et al., (2021) emphasize that restrictions do not seem to be
imposed to teenagers over the age of fourteen. As a result, middle-aged and older
adolescents are vulnerably subject to the captivating effects of advertising for junk
foods. Hence, these results in the digital marketing world plainly convey unethical
practices through digital marketing platforms which may relate to an ethical
dilemma.

Gascoyne et al. (2021)’s research established credibility. One strength would be

the usage of references. For example, Gascoyne et al. (2021) refer to the Australian
Communications Media Authority, The World Health Organization (WHO), World
Cancer Research, Australian Food and Grocery Council, The PCMC model. Also, the
author cite numerous researchers such as Kelly et al. (2019), Freeman et al. (2015)..
This means that the research is reliable and was done under many investigations
and proper researches. However, the article is not free of limitations because it does
not include a counter argument; and hence shows bias. The research tackles
advertising of unhealthy food and beverages but mentioned nothing about healthy
food and drink advertising. Hence, healthy food advertising would be a counter
argument. To explain, a counter argument is important because it drives away bias
and it shows that the authors are convinced with their claim by refuting the counter
argument which is not provided in this research. Thus, the impartiality of the
research is diminished by the lack of the counter argument.