Dear Mr. Sayre:

It is deplorable that sex in poor taste is exploited to advertise certain products and services. It is also a fact that we buy products and services so advertised, whether we approve of the advertising or not. If most of us refused to buy things sold with tasteless advertising, with over-emphasis on sex, the advertisers would have to abandon those methods. I feel as strongly on this as you do.

But let's be fair. We do see some very tasteful advertising as well as the other kind. Consider the Volkswagen campaign as an example. No cheesecake. The vehicle is sold on its merits. Frequently the ads actually poke fun at the product. But sales are still climbing.

We are daily exposed to some highly effective, wholesome advertising by airlines. United's "Friendly Skies" theme, to name but one. Avis may be only No. 2 (or is it 1 1/2?) but we could hardly feel the company is responsible for offensive advertising. Allstate and State Farm sell a lot of insurance--much of it to young people--and they don't use sex or copy that is in poor taste. Kraft sells a lot of cheese, without cheesecake. ...

There are good, indifferent, and bad practitioners in advertising, just as there are some teachers less than wholly dedicated, some doctors who charge exorbitant fees, some government officials who are less than honest.

Public tastes dictate much of the use of graphics in advertising, and it is my understanding that use of sex symbolism is heaviest in publications read by young people. Such techniques, in my opinion, indicate a lack of creativity on the part of persons preparing the ads. The technique is a crutch where talent is absent.

Leaf through some of the highly regarded trade journals. The September 2, 1967, issue of TELEPHONY, for example, contains 73 display advertisements selling a wide variety of communications products. Not one uses sex in any form whatsoever. Since most of the advertisers are "regulars" one must assume they do very well without using sex. All sixty display advertisements in the August, 1967, issue of ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT told their story, sold their products, without sex symbolism of any kind. We could parallel this in dozens of fine commercial and industrial publications that move millions of dollars' worth of goods and services each year.

Look at FORTUNE--a publication with its greatest appeal to businessmen. The September 15, 1967, issue has over 130 display advertisements in its 220 pages. Less than half a dozen picture a female. The few that do, show their models fully clad, and necessary to the advertisements. (One is a recording star, another the designer of a chair featured in the advertisement.) Apparently the tastes of FORTUNE readers--mainly businessmen--do not dictate the use of sex symbolism.

PLAYBOY, on the other hand, with its greatest appeal to college men uses sex themes editorially to sell the magazine, and in advertising to sell products. The same thing, I understand, is true of many other publications with heavy campus circulations.

Examine some of the more general publications. True, there are advertisements which catch the eye with a stunning girl. But, count the girl-oriented ads as a percentage of the total number of advertisements in the magazine. You may want to adjust your opinion of business advertising on the basis of such research.

The National Advertising Council and other professional organizations in the advertising field do a certain amount of policing in their ranks. Most corporations use the services of advertising agencies where they can draw upon a wider variety of advertising talent than it would be practical to employ in-house. "Client-approval" is something that advertising people are constantly striving to obtain, and in giving or withholding approval, we in business can--to a large extent--control the content of our advertising.

Most of the men and women in the advertising profession are highly reputable people with a keen sense of responsibility to both their clients and the public. There are the other kind, too.

Men at your school--University of Arizona--some of your friends, will enter the advertising profession. Most will become the former; few, I hope, will be interested in unethical advertising practices, or make needless use of sex symbolism in their work.

Robert W. Galvin

Chairman, Motorola Inc. Dear Mr. Galvin:

The most effective means that business has of reaching the American people is through advertising. We are bombarded by advertising from every side.

Last year, twelve billion dollars were spent on advertising in America alone. Unfortunately for business, the American people--particularly idealistic college students--are repulsed by much of this advertising.

It is difficult to reconcile the expressed interest of business in raising the level of society with the taste and the intellectual level of its advertising. Why does sex have to be used to sell everything? Why can't business sell a product on its own merits? I would like your comments on this.   Fred W. Sayre

Mr. Fred Sayre, University of Arizona student, is one of four college students invited by Mr. Robert W. Galvin, Motorola Chairman, to debate the pros and cons of business. Letters exchanged between Mr. Sayre and Mr. Galvin and the other dialogists are being published throughout the school year in this and 20 other college papers. The other three dialogists are students at Northwestern, Princeton, and Stanford. Mr. Sayre describes a two-year course he took at a Diocesan Seminary as full and valuable. Football, baseball, drama, and student/national government are among his interests. He is majoring in government, minoring in speech. His career goal is law. The letter-exchange is part of an effort by Mr. Galvin to improve campus-corporation understanding.