Gee 1

Samantha Gee
Professor Leslie Ann Haines
English 1120
3 October 2016
Business Ethics Within Industries
Throughout history, business ethics has evolved to fit the code of society. For example,
various laws have appeared throughout time to ensure ethical business practices. The Civil
Rights Act of 1964 outlawed discrimination in businesses based on race and sex (The U.S.
National Archives and Records Administration). Today, there are motions and efforts to ensure
that this law extends to people with differing sexual orientations. Standards for business ethics
will continue to change throughout history, and businesses should ensure that they do their best
to follow guidelines of society as they change throughout time.
Today, business ethics is complex and dependent on individual situations. However,
certain moral standards exist within various industries and there are general guidelines that
should be followed. A businesss primary goal is to make a profit, but in doing so, they should
ensure that they are remaining within reasonable guidelines with the way they treat the outside
world. Certain companies are expected to follow strict ethical codes, and others are not.
However, it is imperative that businesses find a balance between morals and the drive for profit.
Various industries have different standards and businesses inside these industries should aim to
follow the reasonable codes set for them.
In journalism, reporters are expected to follow a very strict ethical code. They are
expected to report the unbiased truth. A reporting company that is unreliable because it fails to
follow basic mutually understood expectations will quickly lose readers. In the movie Shattered

Gee 2
Glass, Stephen Glass, a reporter for The New Republic, ignores all ethics in order to achieve
maximum fame and success. His falsity is exposed when he finally fabricates a wild and
complicated story that cant be verified. He describes a young hacker who was hired by a
supposedly huge and well known company after hacking into their system. Ultimately, Glasss
boss discovers he created the whole story and many others in his career (Ray). He violates the
understood contract between journalists and readers that of an expectation of truth and
unbiased reporting. Stephen Glasss lack of ethics and honesty destroyed The New Republic.
People expected the truth and the paper had an obligation to report the truth, but Glass focused
on profit and fame. Crazy, outlandish stories might sell sometimes, but they do not represent the
understood social contract of the industry. Some people could argue that the false stories sell
more, and they might initially. These nay-sayers could argue that if the journalism industry truly
does not have a responsibility to their consumers to report the truth, and if consumers dislike the
writings of a particular news source they can find another. Freedom of speech exists, and yes,
journalists could say what they wanted, but they have a responsibility to report the truth. If
writers want to make a profit based on lies, there are other industries they can enter. They should
not waste their time in an industry where there is a previous understood contract concerning truth
and honesty in place. Readers want papers that give accurate, true information. Once Glasss
writings were discovered to be falsified, people stopped trusting The New Republic and quickly
sought out other sources of information they knew they could trust. If a reporter or company
violates the understood contract, it will damage the overall profits of the industry. Because
readers expect the truth from journalists, they put their money towards companies that try to
produce accurate stories. Although the fast-paced, exaggerated stories sell initially, they wont

Gee 3
sell in the long run. Readers will quickly lose trust in sources that have proven to be unreliable
and will spend their money on reliable sources.
Some people argue that business should exist solely for profit. The fast-food industry is
an example of a group of companies that is entirely motivated by profit. The industry makes
money because of the fact that they hide information from consumers. If companies were open
and honest with their consumers, profits would dramatically decrease. However, it is unethical
for fast-food companies to treat their consumers with no respect. Zinczenko makes this point
clear in Dont Blame the Eater fast food industries are partially responsible for the health
problems in this country. He believes fast food companies should honestly portray their
nutritional information. They are clearly selling a potentially harmful product with proven
health hazards and no warning labels to consumers who have no idea what they are actually
consuming (Zinczenko 393). Fast food products often contain shockingly high amounts of
sodium, which can lead to high blood pressure. Empty calories found in fried food and the oils
used in their production cause high obesity rates in the United States. The fast food industry
continues to take advantage of their unsuspecting consumers and nothing is preventing
companies from providing false or difficult to interpret nutritional data. Zinczenko reminds the
average consumer that there is a lack of information about, what, exactly we are consuming
and hes right (Zinczenko 392). Thankfully, in recent years, some restaurants have made an effort
to make their information more readily accessible, such as including nutritional calculators on
their websites or displaying calorie amounts next to items on menus. However, most restaurants
do not have these options and consumers dont truly know what is in their meals. Fast food
restaurants would do well to provide accurate information which people need to make
informed choices about their products (Zinczenko). True, this may hurt profits, but there is a

Gee 4
solution these companies can invest in producing alternative, healthier choices, which in turn
allows them to cater to a wider market. Therefore, they can bring a wider range of consumers to
their restaurants and consequently increase profits and offset the potential loss from the
unhealthy food. Confusing labels and a lack of straightforward nutritional information is not
okay. Customers deserve easy to read, straightforward information. Fast food companies should
find a balance between profits and ethics; just like other companies, they are responsible for the
harm their products cause to consumers. They have a responsibility to produce safe products.
Other companies are constantly sued by consumers because of potential risks in products, yet the
fast food industry rarely faces legal action. If SwagWay LLC is sued for their exploding hover
boards that have the potential to destroy my house, why isnt a fast food company responsible for
the harmful products that could destroy my body?
The medical industry should make more of an effort to balance profits and ethics. If there
is no profit, there is no motivation and no funds for further research and development of lifesaving medications. However, if the industry doesnt follow reasonable moral guidelines, they
endanger the lives of countless people. In a recent case that surfaced about the pharmaceutical
company Mylan, the producer of EpiPens, the unethical firm recently raised the price of their
drug over 600% (Voyles). Mylan took an affordable, lifesaving drug, and made it nearly
impossible for the average consumer to purchase. Families are being forced to choose between
pay[ing] the mortgage or their childs EpiPen (Voyles). Some families must send their kids
to school with expired syringes, praying that the medication is still effective (Voyles). Price
hikes like these are entirely unethical. Mylan was making a profit before the massive price hike,
and they are simply exploiting consumers needs at this point. Basic economic principle tells us
that the demand for EpiPens is inelastic consumers will buy the product no matter the cost.

Gee 5
Producers like Mylan knows that means they can raise the price to absurd amounts without
losing most customers. Taking advantage of consumers in life or death situations is not ethical.
Once again, medical companies need to find an appropriate balance between profit and ethics.
The main result of a strong pharmaceutical industry is a healthier world, but the industry needs
funding to improve. Its possible for Mylan to make a profit without raising the price this much.
Mylans actions are clearly indecent, and do not represent a balance between ethics and profit.
Generally, I consider myself more conservative on issues of business, but I cannot support a
companys free market decision when it unnecessarily endangers the life of thousands of children
and adults.
Some people argue that the medical industry, much like the fast food industry, has a right
to only exist for profit. They say that the encouraging of free-market decisions and unhindered
price hikes ultimately benefits everyone by encouraging competition in the market. True, high
prices encourage other producers to enter the market when they realize the industry is profitable,
but competition and alternative products take time to develop. Price hikes like Mylans are
entirely unfair to consumers, specifically in life or death situations. Medical companies should
not take unfair advantage of a consumer when they have no choice but to purchase an overpriced
product. High prices might spark competition, and producers supposedly have a right to choose
their prices in a free market. However, if companies wish to increase their profits, they do not
have to raise prices to unreasonable levels they can raise prices slightly, but not high enough to
make a difference between a humans life or death. When companies like Mylan can clearly still
make a substantial profit without raising the prices of the drug to unfair levels, they have an
obligation to their consumers to offer reasonably priced medication.

Gee 6
To ensure that consumers are treated fairly, the government must intervene. Companies
like Mylan often have a monopoly on the drug they are selling. As I mentioned previously, I
typically support little government intervention in the overall economy, but when customers are
so clearly being taken advantage of in life or death situations, the government should step in.
This brings into play the overall role of the government to protect peoples rights. The United
States government was established with the role of protecting rights, and we all have a right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When Mylan raises the price of a lifesaving drug so
high that the average consumer can no longer afford it, the blood of the consumer is on Mylans
hands. The government must protect the unalienable right that the consumer has the right to life
and set a fair price ceiling to prevent the company from violating citizens rights. This
maximum price should be fair to both the consumer and the drug company. It should ensure that
the company makes a profit and that the consumer is not exploited. No one should die (or be
forced to pay absurd amounts) because of a companys overwhelming greed.
Unlike the medical industry, when the journalism industry acts unethically, people are not
at risk of death. Journalists do have a moral code they are expected to follow, but government
intervention is not necessary because lives are not at risk. Fast food industries represent a middle
ground part of the responsibility falls on the fast food corporations themselves, and part on the
government. Stricter regulations about accurate and clear nutritional information should be
installed in order to protect the consumers right to life. However, fast food industries are not
responsible for the life or death of their consumers the way that drug companies are. It is unlikely
that we will drop dead because we ate a 1200 calorie burger, but if we are denied access to a
particular drug, the likelihood of death is extremely high. Therefore, intense government
regulation is necessary when it comes to pharmaceutical companies, but not the fast food

Gee 7
industry. However, this does not mean that the food industry does not have ethical standards they
should uphold, but rather that the government need not take such drastic interventionist
measures.
The field of ethics, specifically business ethics, is complicated. There are rarely clear
answers when dealing with morality. Ethical codes vary within industries and companies should
attempt to follow the codes within their industries. Companies that are expected to be truthful
and honest with their consumers should make this a priority. Companies that determine whether
consumers live or die obviously have an obligation to consider their consumers lives when
making drastic changes. Particular industries should be held to higher ethical standards than
others specifically when they deal with life or death situations. Across all industries, however,
all companies should have some sort of moral code that of aiming to be truthful towards
consumers and producing products that their consumers can rely on. Its up to individual
companies and industries to balance profits with ethics. Consumers know this, and pressure from
consumers can encourage and appropriate level of morality, as they will not buy from a company
that has no regard for morality. However, businesses cannot put ethics first in most situations
they wouldnt make a profit. Corporations must find a balance between ethics and revenue that
will satisfy both themselves and the consumers.

Gee 8
Works Cited
Dandurant, Karen. EpiPen price hike hurts families. 4 September 2016. 28 September 2016.
<http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/20160904/epipen-price-hike-hurts-families>.
Shattered Glass. Dir. Billy Ray. 2003.
The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. Teaching with Documents: The Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. n.d. 28
Septemeber 2016. <https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act/>.
Voyles, Liz Richardson. The EpiPen boss tried to defend price hikes to Congress. No one bought
it. 2016 September 2016. 28 September 2016.
<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/22/epipen-maylan-ceo-defendprice-hikes-congress-heather-bresch>.
Zinczenko, David. "Don't Blame the Eater." Graff, Gerald, Cathy Birkenstein and Russel Durst.
They Say, I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing. New York: W. W. Norton
and Company, 2012. 391-393.