Running head: CASE STUDYStudent's Name:Professor's Name:Course Title:Date
CASE STUDY1. GIVE SUMMARY OF THE CASE STUDYThe case study is about the alcohol advertising, the attack on alcohol marketing,alcohol marketers defending their advertisements, restrictions on alcohol advertising, whetheralcohol ad restrictions are constitutional and the alcohol advertising in perspective. Alcoholadvertising majors on the various kinds of ads used which included informational and persuasiveadvertisement.in informational words are the primary forms of expressing an advertisementwhile the persuasive use more of pictures and images.Due to these ads attacks arise with claims that they are persuasive to the young,and they major on marketing their products without showing their side effects. The alcoholmarketers defend their advertisements and products arguing that they do so due to the Highcompletion of the same products. Due to these conflicts, constitutional laws are set to govern andcontrol the advertisements and the modes of making the posters. These were to regulate the rateat which the ads reach the underage.2. Were Spykes and Wide Eye bad products? Do you think they were marketed inobjectionable or misleading ways? Do you think companies should be allowed to sell othercaffeinated alcoholic beverages?Based on their overall market performance, they were good products since theygenerated huge profits to the manufacturer companies. Based on the consequences for theircorporate parents they are bad. They were bad because their social impact was negative. Theirabuse was associated with rape, assaults, drunken driving, and fatal accidents. The beverageswere marketed in misleading ways. They had features that attracted young drinkers such asinviting flavors, small containers, garish bottle labels, and website with adolescent themes andimagery.