Consumer Protection: Is it ethical for corporations not to perform corporate social responsibility and provide consumers’ with harmful products in order to maximize their profits?
Nowadays, the consumer’s world is facing always more greedy companies whose aim is to maximize their profits as much as possible regardless of the tragic consequences their behavior often leads to. Diverse industries, like that of food, clothing, and technology tend to overcome their social and ethical duties in order to satisfy their costumers’ needs and wants with products whose ingredients and components at large, are cheap, but addictive or irreplaceable, so that the buyer is constrained either by neurological stimuli or by necessity to purchase the good again.
…show more content…
That of corporate social responsibility is today a hotly debate topic given the different positions that economists took over time, too. Is the case of Milton Friedman and Peter Drucker, two pillars of the history of the economic thought, who, during the 70’s, decided to investigate in more depth the role of the company in the society. Along with times, also customs, habits, tastes, but especially information, have changed, so companies face the high social criticism that both consumers and activists for consumer protection do. Several objections are made against the close link between advertising strategies and diseases, for example the strict connection between advertising of junk food and obesity, planned obsolescence of products, for example that of smart phones, smart TVs, and other technological devices, and exaggerate mark-ups. The subject matter of criticism is mainly based on the unethical behavior of most corporations and the threaten …show more content…
According to the writer, playing a crucial role in the process of marketing unsafe products to consumers are the advertising strategies and the “sophisticated lobbying and public relations” (Freudenberg, 3). In fact, “once food industry technologists have designed irresistible foods, the next task the company faces is to market these products” (Freudenberg, 9). What makes the best interest of companies, is the difference in cost of production and return on sales both provided by processed and unprocessed food. Unlike healthy products, unhealthy food contains cheaper ingredients that guarantee the enterprise with higher return. The writer claims that there is a strict connection between advertising strategies and health diseases, provided that marketers’ role is that of creating commercials that will “make customers view these items as irresistible treats” (Freudenberg, 11). Being the major source of acquisition of customers, advertising represents one of the field in which enterprises invest money the most. For example, in 2010 food and beverage industry spent 12 billion dollars for advertising their goods with rather traditional but intensive campaign that according to the Institute of Medicine, would “play a major role in shaping what children and adults
The fast food industry also hurts environments around farms in general. It has created an unsustainable cycle that farmers cannot escape. In order to feed themselves and their family, farmers play it safe and buy more fertilizer than needed. When the farmers do not use all of it, they must dispose of it, because that fertilizer will not be as effective next year, so they dump the fertilizer in the areas surrounding their farms. But what this causes is too much nitrogen in the environment because too much nitrogen can kill plants and throw the nitrogen cycle out of balance, in turn hurting the environment.
The essay repeatedly states that we do not know what our food goes through, where it comes from, and that we are ignorant to the food industry. Berry says, “The consumer must be kept from discovering that in the food industry, the overriding concerns are not quality and health, but volume and price.” In basic terms, the food industry does not care about the health of their consumers but their profit. The essay also repeats questions that the reader should ask themselves, such as, How fresh is it? How pure or clean is it, how free of dangerous chemicals?
In David Freedman’s essay How Junk food Can End Obesity, Freedman makes the claim to policy arguing that instead of demonizing processed foods, Americans should instead support the idea and production of healthier processed and junk foods. He calls on the public to recognize that while many products on the market these days are labeled as “wholesome” and “healthy”, consumers should learn to become aware of the fat and calorie content in these products because many times they have the same- if not more- fat and calorie contents as that of a typical Big Mac or Whopper. In his essay, Freedman primarily places blame on the media and the wholesome food movement for the condemnation of the fast and processed food industries saying, “An enormous amount of media space has been dedicated to promoting the notion that all processed food, and only processed food, us making us sickly and overweight” (Freedman), he further expresses that this portrayal of the
¬¬-Corporate ethics comes at a price- one that either businesses have to absorb or consumers have to pay for. Too often consumers complain about big business, but then shop at Walmart because the small, family owned stores are more expensive. However, people still drink it. Not only do businesses need to be held responsible, consumers do as well. If there was not a demand, Coke would discontinue the supply.
So, a conclusion could be drawn that consumers will and do choose the unhealthy option a majority of the time. However, it does not address the disconnect, or why people are still consuming foods that are unhealthy for them even when given other options. One reason prominently stands out above the rest and that is the lack of education on the real effects the American diet, a highly addictive diet comprised of processed foods, high in sugar and fat, and void of fresh produce and other
The director’s assertion, in the film, is also that food companies are in control of what goes in our food and how is it produced. The documentary investigates
In “How Junk Food Can End Obesity,” by David H. Freedman, he claims that processed foods can help fix the obesity crisis in a more realistic manner, rather than whole-some foods. The popular opinion emphasizes whole-some foods because they aren’t informed about the similitude between processed and unprocessed foods. The essence of the essay is that people believe processed foods are bad and unhealthy for us, therefore whole-some foods are highly recommended for the health of an individual. Freedman mentions many prominent authors who wrote books on food processing, but the most influential voice in the food culture Freedman makes a point of is, American journalist, Michael Pollan. The media and Michael Pollan indicate that everything should be replaced with real, fresh, and unprocessed foods, instead of engineering in as much sugar, salt, and fat as possible into industrialized foods.
Eating Healthy Michael Pollan, a health food spokesperson, made some interesting critiques on how he believes that there is an American paradox such as, “a notably unhealthy population preoccupied with… the idea of eating healthy” (Maxfield, 442). The idea taken from Michael Pollan’s quote is that he believes the definition of healthy eating has more to do with how it is “driven by a well-funded corporate machine” (Maxfield, 442). He is also claiming that the food industry is benefiting on our lack of knowledge on how to eat properly when it comes to being healthy. In her article Food as Thought: Resisting the Moralization of Eating, Mary Maxfield directly attacked Pollan’s claims, pointing out the hypocrisy in his words because he is sharing
“The general public apparently believes subliminal advertising exists” (Broyles 393) however, what effects, if any, are there to the people that view them? There is a belief that companies can influence our behavior in life to the extent where they can, in part, remove the consumers ' choice in their purchases. The idea of advertising firms crafting advertisements with hidden messages that influence the audience to shop at stores, buy a certain product or even which foods we ingest is common in contemporary culture. David Zinczenko addresses many concerns about the marketing and health impacts of the fast food industry in his article, “Don’t Blame the Eater”. Zinczenko says is directly, “Fast-Food companies are marketing to children a product
In “What You Eat Is Your Business,” Radley Balko tackles the issue of who is responsible for fighting obesity. Balko argues that the controversy of obesity should make the individual consumers culpable for their own health and not the government (467). As health insurers refrain from increasing premiums for obese and overweight patients, there is a decrease in motivation to keep a healthy lifestyle (Balko 467). As a result, Balko claims these manipulations make the public accountable for everyone else 's health rather than their own (467). Balko continues to discuss the ways to fix the issue such as insurance companies penalizing consumers who make unhealthy food choices and rewarding good ones (468).
Media promotes all forms of obesity. In If You Pitch It, They Will Eat, a New York Times article written by David Barboza, Susan Linn, a psychologist who studies children’s marketing at Harvard’s Judge Baker Children’s Center states, “It used to just be Saturday-morning television. Now it’s Nickelodeon, movies, video games, the Internet, and even marketing in schools”(5). Essentially, Linn is saying that their has been an increase in food marketing because of how advance technology has gotten which has lead to the increase of weight in children and many americans. David Barboza, in If You Pitch It, They Will Eat, explains how marketers use television by stating, “Marketers know that children love animals and cartoon characters, and industry observers say they have used that knowledge not just to create new shows but to produce a new generation of animated pitchmen”(29).
Author of the essay “Eat Food: Food Defined” Michael Pollan, states that everything that pretends to be a food really isn’t a food. Michael persuaded me into agreeing with his argument by talking about how people shouldn’t eat anything their great grandmother wouldn’t recognize as food and avoid food products containing ingredients that are unpronounceable, lists more than five, and contains high fructose corn syrup. He opened my eyes to information I wouldn’t have thought about or researched myself. He got into depth about a type of Sara Lee bread that contains way more ingredients than needed to make the bread, including high fructose corn syrup that isn’t good for you. Marketers are doing this to sell more of their product by making it taste
Introduction This case study explores the acquisition of the Body Shop, which is one of the largest franchise cosmetics companies in the world, by L’Oreal. The main concentration of the case study aims at investigating the impact on business ethics and corporate social responsibility by the concentricity of the Body Shop and L’Oreal and how the general attitude and buying behaviour is distorted in the course of this acquisition. L‘Oreal being the big conglomerate in the cosmetics industry acquired the Body Shop International which is comparably small but having iconic brand of environmental and socially responsible concerns, on 17 March 2006, through a covenant of $1.2 billion. The combination of two brands in a newly formed conglomerate implies a combination of values, principles and associations that might affect a company’s appeal. The verity that L 'Oreal 's acquisition of the Body Shop provides plenty of potential growth opportunities is undeniable; nevertheless the question of how well the acquisition sits in the group of the world 's largest cosmetics company is another matter.
Goals or needs can play an intense role in the different views of culturally motivated reasoning. We often have or mind set in stuff that benefit us or are that are in our favor. If we have a certain idea or mindset we can go out of our way to make that idea true and conclusive. This not only includes personal point of views to keep ourselves from believing things we don’t want, but views that can be altered by others to keep us from seeing things they don’t want us to see. This is often common in the political world where information is shared a certain way so that we can see what they want us to see and not what it really is.
This sociological study will analyze the problem of commodity fetishism in American consumer culture. Karl Marx’s theory of commodity fetishism is a major problem in the United States due to the inability of consumers to see the intrinsic value of a commodity. American consumer culture tends to become trapped in the “magical qualities” of a product, which makes them unable to understand the object as it was made by a laborer. This abstraction of the commodity is part of Marx’s analysis of capitalist products that is separated from the labor and become valuable objects in and of themselves. This is an important sociological perspective on commodities, which creates an irrational consumer culture in the American marketplace.