Case:

Virgin Mobile has a history of using cutting edge advertisements. Its 'Christmas-hanukwanzakah' campaign was designed to poke fun at religion. As a part of the 'Nothing to Hide' campaign, the company's founder, Sir Richard Branson, stood in New York's Times Square in a nude suit. In early July, the company began a 'Strip2Clothe' advertising campaign.

There are millions of homeless teenagers in North America. Using the slogans "someone out there needs clothes more than you," and "You take off yours, we donate ours," Virgin Mobile invited teenagers to upload videos of themselves disrobing. For every uploaded striptease video, the company donated a new piece of clothing. For every five times a video was viewed, an additional piece of clothing would be donated. Virgin Mobile said that it would screen all the videos. Additionally, the strippers had to be 18 or older, and there was to be no full nudity. By July 12, there were 20 videos on the site, someone of which featured young people dancing around in their undergarments, which had generated 51,291 pieces of donated clothing.

The campaign sparked immediate criticism. A representative of the Catholic Charities of St. Paul and Minneapolis said the campaign was "distasteful and inappropriate and exploitive." Parents were concerned that their under 18 year-old children would strip, upload videos, and not reveal their real ages. On July 15, the National Network for Youth (NN4Y) said that it would not partner with Virgin Mobile. Some of the 150 charities associated with NN4Y said that the campaign was inappropriate given that many of the homeless teenagers were sexually exploited. Others said that the campaign was in poor taste and targeted youth. Still others said that the homeless needed shelter and safety rather than clothes.

However, there were some supporters. Rick Koca, the founder of Stand Up for Kids in San Diego, said that the campaign wasn't hurting anyone and that it was raising public awareness. In the week ending July 19, the controversy and the campaign had resulted in a further 15,000 clothing donations.

Questions:

1. The controversial campaign raised thousands of pieces of clothes for the homeless. Using two ethical theories, determine whether the campaign was ethical.
2. How would you differentiate an ethical advertising campaign from an unethical advertising campaign?