Name calling & branding-2 sides of the same coin?

"Name calling" or attacking some one's views based on his reputation/personal attributes is perceived as an intellectually dishonest debate tactic. By that token, why is advertising/ branding not perceived as such? After all, in both, the person's reputation/image/past achievements/ credibility etc clouds how his ideas are accepted. This is the "halo effect".

My point is that if it is OK to brand something, then why isn't name calling also OK?

The corrupt are responsible for the Naxal problem..

Recently in Western Maharashtra, there have been a spurt of attacks on the police killing several & creating a fear psychosis. Predictably, the State has reacted with intensifying armed presence, displaying bravado etc. Naxal leaders are arrested, cadres are fought etc. But no one focuses on the roots..

Why do such movements arise only in the developmentally backward areas? It is because people feel neglected & deprived with no better prospects than to join such anti-national movements which guarantee comfortable(albeit unsafe) living, protection from the State and rewards on surrendering. And why do areas remain backward? Natural & logistical reasons form one part of the puzzle. But corruption is a major reason. Rajov Gandhi's estimate that only 15% funds reach the poor would be even lesser today say 1%. People are deprived of good roads, water supply, education, healthcare, subsidized food due to nexus of contractors, Govt employees, teachers, healthcare workers, doctors who shirk their work. And it is this apathy which breeds resentment in the affected areas