In the article “Starbucks Won’t Slug It Out In Ad Wars” a study was done on an ad campaign launched by McDonalds against Starbucks. The company raised billboards in the Seattle area targeting Starbucks as being a snobby, pretentious alternative to their coffee line. The food giant has recently begun selling espresso in the Washington based Starbucks backyard. The slogans “four bucks is dumb” and “large is the new grande” have been posted to billboards in that area. McDonalds says their placement near Starbucks cafes is simple coincidence. Alan Finkelstein, who owns four McDonalds in King County said, “The billboard placement was done because we picked high visibility locations.” Will Starbucks respond in kind? Unlikely. Starbucks chief marketer Davenport says that they will “keep doing it our way.” The coffee company will likely focus on their social responsibility and where the extra cost of their products go. McDonalds can hardly claim that they provide health insurance for their workers the way baristas at Starbucks have. While comparative ads can sometimes be distasteful, they are not necessarily unethical. The ethics involved depend on the degree to which the advertiser is factual. Due to the nature of most ads, this is difficult. Advertisements frequently refer to the target audiences…show more content… Research has not shown any firm evidence on the effectiveness of these ads. Often, the advantageousness of comparative marketing is directly related to the credibility of the advertising company and the personal relevance consumers have with the product. Put simply, if a consumer has no experience with the products and/or does not believe the things said about the product, this advertising strategy will not be effective. Rarely do I pay any attention to these type of ads. I would rather hear about what your product can do for me than what another product may or may not be