Ethical dilemmas in Roger & Me and The Insider

Ethics in Business: Movie Review

Ethical decision-making is a crucial segment of businesses and organizations. How ethical an organization's decisions are determines how the organization is viewed by the public. Movies do a perfect job in demonstrating how the concept of ethical decision-making plays out in the contemporary world. This text reviews two movies, Roger & Me and the Insider, to determine exactly how ethics come into play in the decision-making process.

Movie Review: Ethics in Business

The Insider

Plot Summary

The 1999 movie, The Insider, is one filed with controversy, suspense and ethical dilemmas. The film puts Russell Crowe (acting as Dr. Jeffrey Wigand) at loggerheads with Brown & Williamson, one of the largest tobacco companies in the country, and at which Crowe initially served as Vice President. The tobacco industry, at the time, denied allegations that nicotine was addictive, and that continued tobacco use had an adverse effect on people's health. Upon being fired from his position in Brown & Williamson, Wigand decides to come forward with information that, for years, the tobacco industry had known that nicotine causes cancer, yet they still used cigarettes as a delivery device for the same. More so, the companies took advantage of nicotine's addictive properties by adjusting, manipulating them, and adding chemicals to make the drug more rapidly absorbable into the bloodstream. Wigand saw the CBS News Show, 60 Minutes, which was produced by Lowell Bergman, as the best vehicle to use to move his allegations. Bergman shows his willingness to invite Wigand for an interview on the show; however, CBS' management suppresses the story, fearful that Brown & Williamson would file a lawsuit against them, placing at risk the company's proposed merger with Westinghouse and the financial incentives associated with the same. Brown & Williamson, on the other hand, move to protect their business interests at whatever cost -- they threaten Wigand's family, put up an image assassination campaign against him, and get the state to issue a gag order banning him from speaking publicly.

Connection to Readings

In his book (p. 39), Boatright outlines a framework that individuals could use to gauge the morality of their actions. They need to take into account a number of ethical principles, including welfare, duty, rights, fairness, honesty, dignity, and integrity. Including an addictive substance (nicotine) in cigarettes, and knowingly deceiving consumers compromised the welfare of consumers. Customers had a right to be provided with accurate information and safe products, and the tobacco industry had a duty to observe these rights. Moreover, by trying to suppress Wigand's interview, CBS neglected its duty to provide accurate information.

Part Two: Roger & Me

Plot Summary

The film, Roger & Me, zeroes in on how a corporation's actions can affect the lives of the community within which it operates. The film demonstrates filmmaker Michael Moore's numerous attempts to bring General Motors CEO, Roger Smith, to come to the City of Flint and witness first-hand how his decision to close down the company's factory in Flint had affected the lives of citizens. On the 6th of November, 1986, GM closed down its plant in Flint, sending over 30,000 citizens home, unemployed. It becomes apparent that the company's plan was to close down some of its plants in the U.S., and open more in Mexico, where workers work for a fraction of the cost. The savings made would then be sued to take over smaller, promising companies; and the company's profit margins would rise as a result. Flint suffers as a result of GM's actions - the level of poverty escalates, incidences of crime increase, and tenants are continually evicted from their homes for failing to pay rent. One former employee suffers a nervous breakdown as a result of the layoff. Moore tries fruitlessly to get CEO Roger Smith to come and see what the situation in Flint, the birthplace of GM, was like. Smith's handlers, however, try their best to keep Moore away from their boss. Moore does not give up, and at one time disguises himself as a shareholder in one of GM's shareholder meetings. Smith, however, notices him and denies him a chance to speak. In the closing minutes of the film, Moore manages to grab a face-to-face encounter with Smith, though he is still physically restrained from getting close to him. Moore attempts to make Smith see how his former employees were being evicted from their homes in Flint, but Smith rudely answers, "well, I am sure GM didn't evict them. You'd have to go talk to their landlords." He then concludes the interview with, "I cannot come to Flint; I'm sorry." "

Ethical Issues

The element of corporate greed comes out rather clearly in this film -- GM compromises the welfare of its employees and local community just so it could increase its profits. Smith's refusal to go back to Flint and see how his actions had affected his former employees showed that the corporation was just out to generate profits, and had no disregard for human life. GM's actions certainly maximized the wealth of its shareholders; however, they had an adverse effect on thousands of locals and former employees. It was unethical of GM to disregard Flint's interests in the pursuit of its own interests. The organization owed an ethical duty to the community, just as it did to its shareholders.

Connection to Readings

The utilitarian principle of moral behavior, as put forth on page 52 of Boatright, holds that individuals ought to always settle for the action that maximizes the greater good. In this case, relocating plants to Mexico maximized GM's utility and the wealth of its shareholders; however, the number of people that were negatively affected was greater than that of those who stood to benefit. Moreover, Kantian ethics cautions against using humanity as a means to an end. It suggests that the moral bearing of an action depends on whether or not it fulfills the doer's duty. Before one acts, therefore, they should determine whether they would will that everyone acts in the same manner when in a similar situation, and whether their actions respect the goals of humanity rather than just using human beings as a means to an end. GM's actions violated both of these, and hence, the company can be said to have acted unethically.