Non Case Study Samples

Ethics is the principle of conduct governing an individual or group. It is also a study of morality. Ethics is the discipline that examines the moral standards of a person or the moral standards of the community. Ethics asks whether those standards are applied to our life and whether they are reasonable or unreasonable. Business ethics is the specialized study of moral right or wrong that focuses on business institutions, activities and organizations. Business ethics is the study of moral standards and how they apply to social systems and organization through which modern societies are supplied with goods and services. Business ethics usually investigates systemic, corporate and individual issues. The statement that business ethics apply ethical and moral concepts is most of the time puzzling. We cannot with certainty state that the all acts of corporations are moral or immoral.
On June 28, 2008, the mammoth case pitting the US Department of Justice (DOJ) against Philip Morris and eight cigar rate companies. The DOJ asked the courts to force the companies to give the company millions of dollars they had earned since 1953 since the companies had conspired to lie about the risks of cigarette smoking; it is addictive nature and because they operated as outlaw companies as defined by RICO (Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations). RICO requires companies to disgorge the profits they have earned over the years. In 1953, the DOJ showed that the eight companies teamed up to form the Tobacco Industry committee Research that countered the claims the smoking caused diseases despite the evidences. They further went on to spend millions in advertising that there was no proof that smoking caused lung cancer. One of their advertisements went on to claim that more doctors smoked camel than any other cigarette that was true. In the 1960’s, the companies spent more in advertising that there was no cause and effect established between smoking and diseases. The DOJ further presented evidence that the companies advertised that nicotine was not addictive and went on further to control nicotine delivery to cigarettes to win new customers. Evidence presented also reviewed that their marketing strategy aimed at the young audience. Finally, the evidence provided stated that the companies had an obligation to test their product and design a safe product and yet the companies did not warn consumers of the dangers of the product as even it continued to kill many Americans. Until 1963, the companies did not warn the consumers of nicotine addictive nature and the health risks associated with smoking. In 2006, Judge Gladys Kessler ruled that the DOJ had fully argued its case. She, however, ruled against DOJ demands to have the companies turning over their profits. She ruled that the companies avoid committing further RICO violations. The companies tried to appeal the decision but the Supreme Court rejected it.
The case above represents a case of business ethics. The companies opted to continue producing cigarettes despite the known health risks to consumers and addictive nature of nicotine. The eight companies defied the evidence linking smoking to lung cancer and several deaths in the United States of America. Despite the knowledge of the dangers of smoking, the companies continued to produce cigarettes for profits. They did not put into consideration the consumer’s rights as they even did not put warning signs in packets of their produce. They even went further to counter any arguments presented linking smoking to lung cancer and deaths. This case presents the case of companies defying all odds to retain their market share and win more consumers with the ultimate goal of more profits.
Issues related to the consumers reign supreme and businesses should always put this into consideration. Businesses producing products with negative consequences to consumers should apply business ethics. Their products need to warn the consumers of the negative health effects. The violating of consumer’s rights in the name of profits is unethical business practice that deserves heavy punishment by the court of law. The ruling against Phillip Morris et al. served justice as the companies had for long violated consumer’s rights in the name of profitability. The eight companies needed heavy fines and bans since their products led to many deaths and many health problems among their consumers. The principle of double effect permits the doing of an action to promote a good action. Double effect comes into play if one action would lead to better results despite the known devastating consequences. In this case, the cigarette companies only focused on their profits. It is of no good to sell products that would have devastating health effects on the consumers. Business ethics demands that the production of goods and services maintains good moral practices. Going against what society deems, as good business practice would be engaging in unethical business practices that would ultimately have a negative effect on the consumers of the goods or service.