How did the advertisement come to be, why didn’t someone notice its questionable content and message

Learning/Communication Theory

The writer may choose either option #1 or #2

Option #1

In retrospect, the reaction of the public to a 2017 Dove soap advertisement and Unilever’s apology as told in Humphries-Kil’s (2019) case are both expected and shocking. First, provide a detailed overview of the case. Then, using a learning theory lens, dissect the case. How did the advertisement come to be, why didn’t someone notice its questionable content and message, what lessons were learned, and how can Unilever institutionalize this knowledge?

Reference

Humphries-Kil, M. (2019). Unilever and leadership: Gender, race, and classification incorporate globalization (Links to an external site.). SAGE Business Cases. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526469311

Requirements: Your submission should be 4-6-pages in length (not including title or reference pages) and be formatted according to the CSU Global Writing Center’s APA resources (Links to an external site.). Be sure to discuss and reference concepts taken from the course reading material and relevant research. You must include a minimum of four credible, academic or professional references including the text or other course materials if used as a resource. The CSU Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these references.

Option # 2

In retrospect, the reaction of the public to a 2017 Dove Soap advertisement and Unilever’s apology as told in Humphries-Kil’s (2019) case are both expected and shocking. First, provide a detailed overview of the case. Then, using a communications theory lens, dissect the case. How did the advertisement come to be, why didn’t someone notice its questionable content and message, did Unilever effectively repair its reputation, and what communications lessons were learned?

Reference

Humphries-Kil, M. (2019). Unilever and leadership: Gender, race, and classification incorporate globalization (Links to an external site.). SAGE Business Cases. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526469311

Requirements: Your submission should be 4-6-pages in length (not including title or reference pages) and be formatted according to the CSU Global Writing Center’s APA resources (Links to an external site.). Be sure to discuss and reference concepts taken from the course reading material and relevant research. You must include a minimum of four credible, academic or professional references including the text or other course materials if used as a resource. The CSU Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these references.
MGT500 Mod 4 CT
MGT500 Mod 4 CT
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequirements
10 to >8.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment, including submission length and all assignment components/questions addressed.
8 to >6.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
6 to >4.0 pts
Below Expectation
Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
4 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
20 to >16.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of the case and the selected theory; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources.
16 to >12.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
12 to >8.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
8 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Analysis
30 to >24.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Provides a strong critical analysis and interpretation of the information given.
24 to >18.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Some significant but not major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation.
18 to >12.0 pts
Below Expectation
Major errors or omissions in analysis and interpretation.
12 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Fails to provide critical analysis and interpretation of the information given.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSources Application of Source Material
5 to >4.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Cites and integrates at least 4 credible sources. Sources are well or adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue; knowledge from the course is linked properly to the source material.
4 to >3.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Cites and integrates 3 credible sources. Some significant but not major problems with selection and linkage of sources.
3 to >2.0 pts
Below Expectation
Cites and integrates 2 credible sources. Major problems with selection and linkage of sources.
2 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Cites and integrates fewer than 2 credible sources. Source selection is seriously flawed; no linkage to knowledge from the course.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style.
5 to >4.0 pts
Meets Expectation
Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors in grammar and spelling.
4 to >3.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

The project is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; a significant number of errors in grammar and spelling.
3 to >2.0 pts
Below Expectation
The project is poorly organized; does not follow the proper format. Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in grammar and spelling.
2 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
The project is not organized or well written and is not in proper format. Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates proper use of APA style.
5 to >4.0 pts
Meets Expectation
The project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU Global resources on APA citation style, with no more than one significant error.
4 to >3.0 pts
Approaches Expectation
Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global resources on APA citation style, with no more than two to three significant errors.
3 to >2.0 pts
Below Expectation
Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global resources on APA citation style, with four to five significant errors.
2 to >0 pts
Limited Evidence
Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU Global resources on APA citation style, with more than five significant errors.
5 pts

Image preview for”how did the advertisement come to be, why didn’t someone notice its questionable content and message”

How did the advertisement come to be why didn’t someone notice its questionable content and message

APA

1456 words

Click the purchase button to get full answer.

Open chat
Hello,
If you need further assistance, please send us a text here