Marketing Social Change: A Comparative Historical and Methodological Analysis of Anti-Smoking Endeavors

Even though assessing social marketing endeavors proves to be challenging, evaluators can learn from previous campaigns and identify which facets of social marketing events, programs and campaigns need to be improved. Additionally, by analyzing social movements and evaluating how they connect to social marketing, we can gain a clearer view on ways to ameliorate the field of social marketing. As social marketing becomes increasingly sophisticated and similar to commercial marketing, there is hope that social marketing can yield higher rates of success in the future. Friend and Levy (2002) claimed that it was nearly impossible to compare social marketing endeavors using quantitative criteria and advocate the use of qualitative methods. However, if social marketing scholars developed a more systematic paradigm to assess events, programs and campaigns employing a combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods, then it would be easier to establish which social marketing efforts generated more success than others. When there are too many confounding variables, conclusions cannot always be drawn and evaluations may not be viewed as legitimate. As a result, critics become skeptical of social marketing’s value and both the importance and credibility of social marketing decline. With the establishment of proper criteria and evaluation methods, social marketing can progress and initiate more social change.

Therapeutic Discourse and the American Public Philosophy: On American Liberalism's Troubled Relationship with Psychology

I explore the main currents of postwar American liberalism. One, sociological, emerged in response to the danger of mass movements. Articulated primarily by political sociologists and psychologists and ascendant from the mid-fifties till the mid-seventies, it heralded the "end of ideology." It emphasized stability, elitism, positive science and pluralism; it recast normatively sound politics as logrolling and hard bargaining. I argue that these normative features, attractive when considered in isolation, taken together led to a vicious ad hominem style in accounting for views outside the postwar consensus. It used pseudo-scientific literature in labeling populists, Progressives, Taft conservatives, Goldwaterites, the New Left and others "pathological," viz. mentally ill. Hence, "therapeutic discourse." I argue that philosophical liberalism, which reasserts the role of political theory in working out norms and adjudicating disagreement, is a more profitable way of thinking about and defending from critics liberalism. I take the philosopher John Rawls as the tradition's modern representative. This inquiry is important because the themes of sociological liberalism are making a comeback in American public discourse, and with them perhaps the baggage of therapeutic discourse. I present a cautionary tale.