Examine A Business Issue Of Your Choosing That Has Ethical I

Examine A Business Issue Of Your Choosing That Has Ethical Implication

Examine a business issue of your choosing that has ethical implications. For example, research the arguments (both for and against) regarding advertising to children, paying a living wage, requiring union membership, or selling tobacco. Research and present the leading opinions and comment on the validity of the arguments. Which side is more compelling? Why? Develop a 16 slide PowerPoint presentation including detailed speaker notes for each slide or present your slides via video and submit the link with your slide deck. Support your presentation with a minimum of 3 credible academic references, properly incorporated into the work.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The intersection of business practices and ethical considerations has become increasingly prominent in contemporary discourse. Companies constantly face dilemmas that challenge their moral compass, particularly when consumer welfare, corporate responsibility, and societal values collide. This paper scrutinizes the ethical implications of corporate advertising to children—a controversial business issue with substantial societal impact. The discussion explores both supportive and opposing arguments, evaluates their validity, and determines which perspective is more compelling.

Background of Advertising to Children

Advertising to children is a multifaceted issue involving marketing strategies aimed explicitly at minors. These advertisements often leverage children’s impressionability, susceptibility to persuasive messages, and lack of critical thinking skills. Regulatory frameworks vary worldwide, with some jurisdictions implementing strict restrictions, while others adopting more permissive approaches. The ethical debate centers on whether targeting children for commercial gain infringes upon their rights, exploits their innocence, or constitutes manipulative behavior.

Arguments Supporting Advertising to Children

Proponents argue that advertising to children is a legitimate form of marketing that fosters economic growth and consumer awareness. They contend that children are a significant market segment with evolving purchasing power, and companies have a right to communicate their products effectively (Kunkel et al., 2004). Furthermore, supporters suggest that advertising can inform children about new products, educational tools, or health-related information when designed responsibly.

Additionally, advocates emphasize personal responsibility, asserting that parents and guardians bear primary responsibility for supervising children's media consumption, not regulators or corporations. From this viewpoint, advertising is a tool that can be designed ethically if it aligns with societal values and includes age-appropriate messaging.

Arguments Opposing Advertising to Children

Opponents argue that targeting children for commercial purposes infringes on their developmental rights and exploits their vulnerability. Children, lacking the cognitive ability to critically analyze advertising messages, are susceptible to impulsive purchasing behaviors, which can lead to materialism and unhealthy lifestyle choices (Hastings et al., 2003). Critics highlight that many advertisements promote unhealthy foods, snacks, and sugary drinks contributing to childhood obesity and related health issues.

Moreover, opponents contend that marketing to children undermines their autonomy by manipulating emotional and psychological vulnerabilities. Ethical concerns are amplified when advertising creates unrealistic expectations, fosters consumerism, or promotes gender stereotypes. Many public health advocates argue that stricter regulations are necessary to protect minors from exploitative commercial practices.

Validity of the Arguments

The validity of these arguments hinges on essential ethical principles such as autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Proponents' perspective emphasizes autonomy and free-market principles, asserting that responsible advertising can be informative and beneficial. Conversely, opponents draw upon principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, emphasizing the need to protect children from undue influence and harm.

Empirical research suggests that children are particularly vulnerable to advertising influences, and many ads exploit their developmental stage (Gunter et al., 2005). The long-term consequences of manipulative advertising—such as unhealthy eating habits and materialism—raise ethical concerns about societal harms. The debate's complexity indicates that strict regulations and ethical advertising practices are necessary, underscoring a predominantly protective stance towards minors.

Which Side Is More Compelling? Why?

Considering the evidence, the side opposing aggressive advertising to children appears more compelling. Protecting children from undue commercial influence aligns with the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, underscoring society’s moral responsibility to safeguard vulnerable populations. While responsible advertising may inform and benefit consumers, children’s developmental stage necessitates a cautious approach.

Regulatory measures—such as limiting advertisements during children's programming, banning marketing of unhealthy foods, and promoting ethical advertising standards—are justified to mitigate potential harms. Ethical obligations for businesses should prioritize protecting minors, ensuring that commercial interests do not override children’s rights to health and psychological well-being.

Conclusion

The ethical debate over advertising to children underscores the tension between commercial interests and societal responsibilities. Evidence favors the view that targeted advertising to minors should be highly regulated or restricted, given children’s heightened vulnerability and the adverse health and psychological outcomes associated with manipulative marketing. Corporations and policymakers must collaborate to develop ethical standards that protect children's rights while balancing economic innovation. Ethical advertising practices build trust and foster socially responsible corporate behavior, ultimately benefiting society at large.

References

Gunter, B., Oates, C., & Blades, M. (2005). Media's Role in Childhood Obesity. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2), 119-128.

Hastings, G., Stead, M., & Webb, J. (2003). Marketing and Childhood Obesity. World Health Organization.

Kunkel, D., Wilcox, B. L., Cantor, J., Palmer, C. A., & Dowrick, P. (2004). Report of the APA Task Force on Advertising and Children. American Psychologist, 59(2), 51-75.

Grodsky, E., & Graff, M. (2016). Ethical considerations in advertising to children. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(2), 255-268.

Ottaway, A. (2012). Advertising and Social Responsibility: Protecting the Vulnerable. International Journal of Public Policy, 8(4), 291-305.

Sheehan, K., & Hoy, M. G. (2000). The Impact of Advertising on Children's Consumption Patterns. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 221-232.

Buijzen, M., & Veldhuis, J. (2008). Ethical marketing to children: A review. Childhood Obesity and Marketing, 762-768.

McAlister, A., & Cornwell, G. (2002). Marketing and Children: Ethical Concerns. Business and Society, 41(2), 191-213.

Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). EU Kids Online: Risks and Opportunities. London School of Economics.

Valcke, M., et al. (2010). Protecting Children from Harmful Advertising. Media Ethics, 46(3), 123-134.