Is marketing “the Devil’s art”? Or can it improve the world?

I'm an ordinary guy who began a career in marketing for no other reason that it allowed me to combine my creativity with my analytical skills. I've generally worked for companies that seemed to me to be doing some good in the world, such as LEGO and the Eden Project. However, I've become increasingly aware that many people see marketing as actually evil. This was brought home to me at Eden when I received an email from co-founder Sir Tim Smit, that said "Marketing is the Devil's art" - as the Sales & Marketing Director, this view from my CEO took me somewhat aback! In fact this opinion is surprisingly widely held, and was most notoriously put forth some years ago by comedian Bill Hicks in his trademark vitriolic style (have a look - though be aware he uses strong language).

I've always believed that marketing was a force for good - identifying problems, designing solutions and communicating their benefits to those most likely to need them. But I also appreciate that sometimes problems are over-stated, or even invented, in order to create demand for a product. And I know that there are plenty of products that don’t solve problems at all, that exist solely to be traded for no other motive than financial gain. I’m aware that the public has concerns about how big data and consumer psychology might be used against them. I’m aware that driving consumption seems to be our raison d’etre and that’s an issue in a world that’s running out of resources. I’m aware that many feel we only care about money, and at the expense of the finer things in life like art, beauty, aesthetics.

So I'm going on a journey into the ethics of marketing to try to find the answer to the question: is marketing truly the Devil's art? I plan to talk to its supporters and critics, commentators on ethical matters, people using business for good, and those who perhaps are perceived not to be. I'm starting by having a conversation with Sir Tim Smit.