#UNTj4470 Modern vs. Classical Ethical Choice Theories

 

            In today’s world, we are constantly changing and working to increase sales and our incomes. This makes the ethical theories inside the hearts of our promotional bodies change just as often and in a more extreme way. The greed over just the past few decades has grown exponentially – and it is no longer just in the financial escapades of Wall Street.

            The main difference I see in the Classical Theories and our more Modern Theories is the cost issue. It drives the client or consumer to move on and find other agencies or representatives too quickly. The cost of making new ad campaigns and new PR events has grown exponentially. So, there needs to be more faith in the client and more precise work from the agent.

            Another issue I see very relevant to today’s world as compared to the decades of the past – the issue of international and cultural differences or respects. For many years, advertising and public relations campaigns didn’t need to transcend throughout the world and be accepted. In today’s world, with the rise of technology we are finding a need for international transcendence and favor.

From a deontological or a teleological standpoint, we find the two largest ethical factors. Deontology looks more into the morality of a person’s action inside them, and puts no weight in the consequence. Teleology will focus more on the moral act when the consequences present to be good or bad. So if ‘ends justify means’ to a teleological manner, we can say that breaking the law would be okay if there were positive consequences. All of these classical theories have a big driving factor to them. Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative is the supreme of the deontologist beliefs and one of the most popular theories is the utilitarianism one. Here, we try for the greatest good for the greatest numbers. The utilitarian will care much less for the act alone or those harmed in it as long as the greatest number of people can largely benefit from it. The last major theory, growing in popularity and contagion is egoism. This can either be applied to one single person or to a larger company of people. Individualism is just like it sounds – whatever is best for that one person no matter the consequence is the moral. In a universal way, people are selfish for a group of people in order to advance the group as a whole.

An egoist example very familiar to Americans is Chevron’s Oil company. Chevron has been accused of many environmental discrepancies and human rights abuses. The company has also been related with the idea of dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste in the Amazon of Ecuador. The oil service giant obviously has no PR person (or just a really bad one). In either case, the ethical dilemma is still hard to put into one box because of the international effects and cost issues. There is no doubt that dumping toxins is wrong however, what we could also take into account is why they chose that solution. Pure Egoism? Probably, considering the human rights abuse case that followed soon after the toxic dump.

The problem with some of these theories is that more often in today’s world, we are seeing situations that represent an exception to the rule of the theory. More often in the modern world, we see situations that cannot be judged solely by the consequence to one person or a single company. Now that there is a domino effect in today’s companies that will do harm or good to all different people, it is very hard to use a certain theory for the beneficial consequence of a specific person or group.

That is not to say that these theories do not show us a great amount about people and human natures. In every way, they do. Human natures and the survival instinct are something that will transcend time, even if they don’t solve a specific problem or dilemma.

Sources: Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/

Ethically Questionable in the Modern World

http://www.elearnportal.com/courses/business/business-communication/business-communication-ethics

Vera's Blog #2

#UNTj4470 Ethics in Buisness : Harder Than It Looks?

            In life, we can come across many complications or situations that threaten your character or moral standings. Ethics is very hard to define, and even harder to abide by completely in our personal affairs and events. In a business setting, however, most believe that ethics should become as ‘cut and dry’ as ethics can be. One definition I found to be extremely helpful is from The Business Dictionary, stating that ethics is “the basic concepts and fundamental principles of right human conduct.”

            The definition sounds quite simple and yet I am still astounded by the amount of mistakes made by professionals in the workplace. Of course, it is hard for me to judge these people completely because I don’t know what the situation entailed entirely. So it isn’t surprising that it is still somewhat difficult to explain an unethical situation to some businessmen. They may not see the action or movement as unethical or immoral. Rather, they may see it as a step forward in income and in ranking. For example, if you write an ethically risky story and defend its purpose as for your personal financial gain and power – it will become very clear to all that your ethical skills need a bit of tweaking.

Sometimes, the case seems to be simpler to outside viewers – like that of American Apparel’s CEO Dov Charney. He owns over half of the brand and clothing line and is the head of the company’s board. This man is obviously at the highest rank, and has come very far in successful standings, however, a few years ago (and again recently) he was accused and sued for sexual harassment against two much younger women (half his age – 18 vs. 40’s). These women also claimed the stress of a very hostile working environment with the overly sexual Charney. Immediately, I was on the side of the girls and assumed it was a cut and dry easy choice, but Charney negated these girls’ accusations by saying that the relations were consensual.  Charney also grew up with a strong feeling of sexual freedom and believes that it is our right (in the first amendment) to pursue those to whom we are attracted.

Still, it seems unethical in my eyes to create a hostile working environment through a relationship-based affliction. In my opinion, you don’t mix work and play. In some cases, it is more important than others. But in an environment where sex is out and about so outlandishly – you need to be smarter about your relationship choices.

Some ethical business dilemmas are far better known, like that of which we do not name (Enron). It seems more and more in today’s world, we are seeing corporations make incredibly stupid decisions in search of wealth, fame and power. HBO did a wonderful made-for-TV movie called Too Big To Fail that was filled with great actors and told a blow-by-blow story of a mortgage company’s mistakes and unethical decisions of other firms. It was far too believable, mostly because the world today has become so corrupt – more and more people think it’s okay because everyone else is doing it.

Considering the rise in ethical mishaps in companies and firms, it makes total sense that the subject of ethics would grow in importance to schools and hiring agents. Throughout my college career and through all of my professors, I seem to have retained that all ethical issues in a business can be a very close call. However, no matter the details and specifics of the dilemma PR or Ad Firms can always rely on the truth. Absolute honesty can only help you when you are stuck in a pickle.

Sources:

“Ethics Definition: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/ethics.html”

“American Apparel Story Info: http://business-ethics.com/2011/03/15/0852-american-apparel-and-the-ethics-of-a-sexually-charged-workplace/”