As the importance of the IMC role increased these last years, becoming one of the most important way ofmarketing, this activity has to find a more specific organization. Indeed, it´s legal environment is not clearly defined. Moreover, as some public relations message, often understood as political message(for example during a political campaign) could be interpreted as commercial messages because of the use of IMC, a legal environment has to be defined in order to differentiate it from messagessuch as advertising.
Indeed, in the United States, when a political message is delivered (or a public relations message to be less specific), it is highly restricted by the First Amendmentlegislation. As a consequence, corporate messages depend of a strict legislation. On the other hand, a commercial message (or expression), including advertising, has less legislation under the FirstAmendment. Consequently, it is obvious that IMC has to be clearer and has to separate what is a commercial message and a political message.
In the mid – 1990’s Nike, Inc responding, after aextensive public criticism by a public relations campaign. This campaign included letters from Nike representatives to university presidents and athletic directors, where there was a pamphletexplaining the company’s labor practices, and advertisements in leading newspapers to publish report from a investigation of working conditions in Nike factories.
In California 1998 Nike gotthemselves into some problems with law sued. Mark Kasky was the one sueing Nike because they, through its public relations campaign the company had engaged in unfair and deceptive practices underCalifornia’s false advertising statue. Nike made it through the law sued by the protecting free speech. But this is also another example of problems you meet with the IMC, where to draw the line?