Full text of this item is not currently available on the LRA. Embargoed until June 2011. The published version is available on the publisher's website at: http://mtq.sagepub.com/\ud doi: 10.1177/1470593110366671According to recent statements by prominent Critical Marketing scholars, there remains a problem of how to clarify this ambiguous label for interested colleagues. Beyond the usual gestures to paradigmatic pluralism, epistemological reflexivity and ontological denaturalization (Fournier and Grey, 2000; Tadajewski and Brownlie, 2008; Whittle and Spicer, 2008), I argue that Critical Marketing Studies possesses similar characteristics to the vein of thought promoted by the founding members of the Vienna Circle. Critical Marketing and logical empiricism, I suggest, are not the diametrical opposites that we might otherwise suppose. Subsequently I claim that Critical Marketing Studies needs to engage with marketing actors and this requires a different relationship between Critical scholars and practitioners than may have been the case previously. Finally, I provide an alternative way of thinking about theory production in marketing
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.