Loading...
Publication
A regulação da publicidade ao pecado : análise económico-comportamental
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 772.63 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O tabaco, o álcool e o fast food são, hoje em dia, três dos mais importantes obstáculos que o mercado põe à imagem de sociedade perfeita que os Estados ocidentais pretendem de si mesmos e da sua saúde pública. Três “pecados” com que não sabem ainda bem lidar, e com os quais se deparam constantemente e não sem um certo desespero, quando, através da montra da publicidade, as empresas que ainda os oferecem ao público destapam esta terrível esquizofrenia entre o Estado moralista que quer e do Estado realista que não pode.
Como resposta a este problema, e pela mão da nova doutrina da economia comportamental, os governos têm vindo a adoptar uma nova estratégia, mais cínica na correcção destes enviesamentos da procura. Procurando decifrar então a origem psicológica do pecado no mercado, tentam responder-lhe numa lógica de fogo contra fogo, impondo à publicidade ao álcool, ao tabaco e ao fast food pequenos estímulos psicológicos que encaminhem, suavemente, os seus clientes na direcção oposta.
Este paternalismo libertário demonstra, ainda assim, um confronto que lhe é anterior entre dois valores de grande importância: a saúde pública, materializada no welfare do Estado Social e a liberdade individual do consumidor, que vê questionada a racionalidade ou irracionalidade das suas escolhas pessoais e da forma como utiliza o seu poder de compra.
Este confronto deve ser ponderado pelo mecanismo constitucional que mede o impacto das restrições, por parte do Estado, de direitos individuais com uma finalidade de bem comum: o princípio da proporcionalidade, decorrente do artigo 18º/2 da Constituição da República Portuguesa.
Tendo em conta as três vertentes deste princípio, analisa-se a idoneidade das medidas de paternalismo libertário utilizadas na publicidade ao pecado como meio adequado para atingir o fim pretendido, a necessidade ou grau de nocividade comparativo destas medidas face a alternativas semelhantes e a proporcionalidade ou equilíbrio entre a restrição do direito individual em causa e a importância do fim prosseguido.
Tobacco, alcohol, and fast food some of the most important obstacles that Free Market still raises against the « perfect society » image that Western countries want to see about themselves and their public health. Three different “sins” that they are not yet free from, and constantly come across with certain desperation, when, through the showcase of advertising, companies still offer them publicly, uncovering this terrible schizophrenia between the moralistic state that wants to fight sin and the realistic state that cannot do it. In response to this problem, following the new doctrine of behavioural economics, governments have been adopting a new, more cynical strategy in correcting these consumer biases. By trying to decipher the psychological origin of sin, they intend to answer it in a “fire against fire” logic by imposing small psychological nudges on alcohol, tobacco and fast food advertising, softly leading their potential buyers in an opposite direction. The use of such libertarian paternalism in this case nevertheless demonstrates a confrontation between two values of great importance: public health or the good functioning of the welfare state versus consumers freedom, who see their economical rationality questioned by the State, being indicated on how they should use their purchase power. This confrontation must be analysed by the constitutional mechanism that measures the impact of the State's restrictions on individual rights, based on a greater good purpose: the principle of proportionality, under Article 18/2 of the Portuguese Constitution. Taking into account the different criteria of this principle, we analyse the appropriateness of libertarian paternalism measures used in sin advertising as a suitable means to achieve the intended purpose, the need or degree of comparative harmfulness of these measures in relation to different alternatives and the proportionality or balance between the restriction of the individual right in question and the importance of the pursued purpose.
Tobacco, alcohol, and fast food some of the most important obstacles that Free Market still raises against the « perfect society » image that Western countries want to see about themselves and their public health. Three different “sins” that they are not yet free from, and constantly come across with certain desperation, when, through the showcase of advertising, companies still offer them publicly, uncovering this terrible schizophrenia between the moralistic state that wants to fight sin and the realistic state that cannot do it. In response to this problem, following the new doctrine of behavioural economics, governments have been adopting a new, more cynical strategy in correcting these consumer biases. By trying to decipher the psychological origin of sin, they intend to answer it in a “fire against fire” logic by imposing small psychological nudges on alcohol, tobacco and fast food advertising, softly leading their potential buyers in an opposite direction. The use of such libertarian paternalism in this case nevertheless demonstrates a confrontation between two values of great importance: public health or the good functioning of the welfare state versus consumers freedom, who see their economical rationality questioned by the State, being indicated on how they should use their purchase power. This confrontation must be analysed by the constitutional mechanism that measures the impact of the State's restrictions on individual rights, based on a greater good purpose: the principle of proportionality, under Article 18/2 of the Portuguese Constitution. Taking into account the different criteria of this principle, we analyse the appropriateness of libertarian paternalism measures used in sin advertising as a suitable means to achieve the intended purpose, the need or degree of comparative harmfulness of these measures in relation to different alternatives and the proportionality or balance between the restriction of the individual right in question and the importance of the pursued purpose.
Description
Keywords
Economia comportamental Regulação da publicidade Políticas públicas Saúde pública Teses de mestrado - 2021