Consumer Protection
Memo: Consumer Protection
In their article in the Harvard Business Review, Robinson, Viscusi & Zeckhauser (2016) argue that consumer warning labels are not effective. They resoundingly assert that the labels do not communicate adequate information for consumers, especially in terms of benefits and risks. Essentially, the current labeling system is miserably ineffective in differentiating between significant and insignificant risks, or between "wolves" and "puppies" as the authors put it. Most of the consumer warning labels place the same emphasis on both small and huge risks. Such a warning system, according to the authors of the article, is of little benefit to the consumer. In the long-term, consumers tend to disregard warnings as they come across considerably more insignificant risks (puppies) than significant risks (wolves). In other words, treating both minor and major risks with the same weight tends to increase consumers' skepticism about warnings, which may cause truly hazardous risks to get snubbed. Accordingly, it is imperative for consumer warning labels to clearly differentiate big risks from small risks, and to avoid conveying even the modest of risks.
Analysis
Consumer warning labels are intended to ensure the health and safety of consumers. From foods and drinks to drugs, cars, cigarettes, and electronics,...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now