Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.
This assignment requires you to choose an article and then write about the ethical implications and the impact of the events that are described in the article.
Preparation
Read and reflect on one of the following articles.
Google Code of Ethics on Military Contracts Could Hinder Pentagon Contracts.
Can Ad Copy Be False but not Misleading? If so, Is That OK?
Menu Science: The Subtle Ways Restaurants Get You to Spend More.
Instructions
Write a paper in which you:
Analyze the following questions associated with your chosen article and discuss them using concepts you learned in this course.
What ideals, effects, and consequences are at stake?
Have any moral rights been violated?
What would a Utilitarian recommend?
What would a Kantian recommend?
Explain your rationale for each of your answers for your chosen article, with supporting evidence.
This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information, please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Hello this is my Article
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
Evaluate the ethical implications and impact of the events of selected business situations using predominant ethical theories and concepts.Business Ethics Highlights
Business Ethics News, Curated by Chris MacDonald & Alexei Marcoux
Search
Pages
About BEH
Resources
Essay Topics: Business Ethics & CSR
How Instructors Can Use Business Ethics Highlights
How Students Can Use Business Ethics Highlights
More Essay Ideas: Business Ethics & CSR
The Concise Encyclopedia of Business Ethics
Follow us via Email!
Email Address:
Email Address
Follow
Can Ad Copy Be False but Not Misleading? If So, Is That OK?
« Previous / Next »
By The Editors / December 20, 2018 / Uncategorized / 3 comments
business_ethics_highlights_2We know that sometimes even a true statement can be misleading. For example, when Publisher’s Clearinghouse Sweepstakes entry forms state that “nobody has a better chance of winning than you,” some people take that statement – wrongly – to mean that they have a better chance of winning than everyone else. (The statement is, of course, consistent with everyone who enters having an equal chance of winning, but that’s not how everyone reads “nobody has a better chance of winning than you.”)
But what about the inverse case? Can a false statement be innocuous because it’s not misleading?
Recently, one of the editors bought a bottle of McCormick maple extract (pictured). The box in which it came contains the claim (at the top) that the 2-fluid-ounce bottle contains “2x [two times] more than our 1 fl oz” bottle. But the 2 oz bottle doesn’t contain two times more maple extract than the 1 oz; it contains two times as much. In order for it to contain two times more, it would have to contain 3 oz (because 3 is two times more than 1). So, the statement is literally false.
However, it is likely that most people – and perhaps all people except the editor in question – use ‘x times more’ and ‘x times as much’ interchangeably to mean ‘x times as much’, and thus read ‘x times more’ to mean ‘x times as much’. Put differently, perhaps no one expects a bottle promising ‘two times more’ to contain three times as much—and they might be misled about the volume on offer if it did contains three times as much.
Is McCormick in the clear here after all?>>>
(Photo: It doesn’t contain two times more, but it says it does.)
What do you think?
Brought to you by:
business_ethics_highlights
Too Tired? Too Anxious? Need More Time? We’ve got your back.