The situation is Pepsi –a renowned beverage company recently penned down a sponsorship contract with Beyoncé worth a reported fifty million dollars. This mutual deal will see her become a close associate of the organization. It’s not the first time she has associated with the company as the two have previously worked together on various projects. Beyoncé is one of the most successful and influential personalities in the world. Many young and youthful Americans perceive her as their role model. Pepsi is one of the most profitable beverage companies in America and world over. However, recent scientific studies have shown daily consumption of sodas it peddles raises the possibility of a child becoming overweight by sixty percent. Obesity or overweight is attributed to more serious risk called diabetes. In recent years obesity has become a pandemic with one in three kids, in America being overweight. In the past Beyoncé has been involved in healthy lifestyle campaigns that aim to persuade kids to practice physical exercises to help reduce the risk posed by obesity, but her latest move to join forces with a company widely criticized as the one that is elevating of this pandemic has raised eyebrows.
The second section in the Potter Box deals with values. Beyoncé decision to strike a deal with Pepsi is of unprofessional value because it denies the public right to know the truth. Though the collaborative deal is of great significance to the public as it is anchors a commitment by Pepsi to support creativity and other collaborative projects unrelated to Pepsi brand, she ignores basic value of truthfulness. She markets the sweetened product that has more and more been linked to worldwide childhood obesity and diabetes especially among the children from low income backgrounds. As a core source of inspiration to the large number of young people, she seems to suggest and sell the idea that consumption of the soda propels people to her level. This is dishonorable advice and by doing so, she exposes the youthful people who look up to her as a role model; to harmful consumption influence that ultimately leads them to probable obesity or even diabetes. Beyoncé fails to consider horrendous impact of surplus intake of the soda, she markets causes to the general public. Therefore committing herself to the deal is in itself unethical as it disregards values.
The third quadrant is ethical principles. Beyoncé does not acknowledge the principle of utility which seeks greater happiness for the superior number as a driver for their actions (Mugerauer &Manzo, 2008). Though the deal includes clauses to support projects mutually exclusive of the brand, the overall effect of marketing Pepsi products will do greater harm than good to the youthful population which follows her religiously. I think she would want others in this situation to observe good health practices as we see her championing in the Let’s Move campaign .The right principles require her to turn down the deal and continue backing the previous exercise campaign she features together with the First Lady.
Loyalty is the forth and the last quadrant. Here the mission is to try and unravel whom the decision maker owes loyalty and duty to. For example in this case, character like herself owes her loyalty to the public who are responsible her huge success. Her duty is to inform them accurate information at all times and endorsing a product with serious misgivings, contravenes this loyalty. The additional obligation is to Society since, as a public figure, Beyoncé bears a social responsibility and moral obligation to the masses to speak of any potential danger the products poses to consumers.
In conclusion, it is not morally and ethically justifiable for Beyoncé to enter into the agreement because the terms of the deal contradicts her previous principled deeds as good health campaigner and disregards an ethical value of honesty. The deal betrays the loyalty she owes to the masses as a public figure and also downplays the obvious enormous implications her immense influence will have on the wider society.
Reference
Mugerauer, R., & Manzo, L. (2008). Environmental dilemmas: Ethical decision making. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
