The Ethics of Neuromarketing: Where Do We Draw the Line?

One of the most persistent fears around neuromarketing is the idea of a “buy button” in the brain — a secret trigger brands could push at will.

As I write in my book:
"The “Buy Button” — Myth or Reality?
Since the very birth of neuromarketing, one fear has followed it like a shadow:
What if brands discover a “buy button” in the brain — a secret trigger they can press at will?
At first glance, it sounds terrifying — a few brain scans, and we all become mindless shopping zombies.
But that myth collapses under scrutiny.
As Roger Dooley — one of the earliest authors to write about neuromarketing — aptly notes:
"If such super-ads truly existed, decades of advertising experiments would have produced at least one commercial capable of hypnotizing the audience. That has never happened."

Reality is much simpler and far more ethical.
Even the most neuroscience-informed ad can only make a message slightly more noticeable, emotional, or memorable. It cannot make anyone buy something they don’t want."

So where is the ethical boundary?
It’s not the method. It’s the intention.
Are we helping people make better decisions? Or are we pushing them toward things they’ll later regret?

When done ethically, neuromarketing helps brands communicate more clearly, reduce noise, and respect the buyer's brain.
When done manipulatively, the problem isn’t with neuromarketing, it’s with the business model behind it.

Where do you draw the ethical line in marketing?
Is it about intention?
Is it about transparency?
Is it about consumer autonomy?