Hello, I am looking for someone to write an essay on Case study 3C. It needs to be at least 500 words.
3. I guess that people paying for the lottery are mostly aware of the fact that they pay additional taxes if they understand how the state tax system works. Moreover, the amount of money a person pays for a lottery ticket is not that big to create problems for a person spending money on it. The Oregon Lottery was playing on some kind of local patriotism making its customers believe that buying lottery will contribute to the development of the state and this claim was unethical because it was only partially true.
4. Brands often make advertising statements exaggerating things and emphasizing something that is only half true. Oregon Lottery was using a deceitful tool for attracting clients, and their approach can hardly be called ethical.
1. Creative vagueness in statements is utilized to attract customers as in most cases there is a range of brands similar in their characteristics, and it is only advertising that can persuade a customer choose one product over another. However, if the information about the products would be as precise as facts in the news that could be very useful for consumers.
3. The response of Oregon Lottery on the accusation of Politifacts.com was as vague their advertising campaign: they decide to mothball this “97 percent” but claimed that they decided to stick to it nevertheless. It would be more optimal to provide public with facts and figures proving truthfulness of their statements.
1. I suppose that lottery can easily serve as a means of support of public education as any other legal business. The only thing is that consumers must be fully aware how much and why they are paying for.
2. An ethical campaign for a local lottery must first of all use truthful statements in advertising campaign. The possibility of financial profit can serve as a motto for the company as it is its primary goal. Moreover, the