Case 1.1: Made in the USA – Dumped in Brazil, Africa, Iraq… Fire-retardant children’s pajamas found to contain Tris, a flame-retardant chemical found to cause kidney cancer in children. Millions of pairs of the pajamas expected to be sold now had to be disposed of. Exporting companies began purchasing the pajamas at a wholesale price with the intention of dumping the banned product on overseas markets. Dalkon Shield was a birth control device found to have adverse reactions including pelvic inflammation, blood poisoning, tubal pregnancies, and uterine perforations. The Office of Population within the US Agency for International Development purchased the product and dumped it on foreign markets for the intent of population control. They claimed that Third World countries would prefer any method of birth control over none, as the rate of infant mortality is high. Arguments: foreign countries should be free to decide for themselves whether the benefits of these products are worth their risks. U.S. regulates in that they must keep foreign countries fully informed on what products have been banned. Argument: most Third World countries lack regulatory agencies that are concerned about their people’s safety. Argument: Not all agencies inform the State Department of banned or harmful products, which means that when the products are dumped into foreign markets, these countries will not know the harm. Issue: even if certain products were not allowed to be exporting, it is very easy to illegally export and sneak around the rules. In the case of pesticides banned in the US – they have been dumped onto foreign markets, but these chemicals bled into the water, and we have no way of stopping it from spreading in the water and not coming ... ... middle of paper ... ... When those laws are so reprehensible that conforming to them would be unethical, they should be ready to withdraw from that market.” Other companies have stated that if they resist the Chinese government and their operations are closed down or if they choose to leave the country for moral reasons, they would only deny to ordinary Chinese whatever fresh air the Internet, even filtered and censored, can provide in a closed society. Tech companies are considering what laws would be able to help provide a company like Yahoo with directions on what to do when a situation like this arises again. If companies had an American law to abide by, they could say their hands are tied and they can’t break the law, and the Chinese government would have no choice but to accept this in order to reap the benefits brought about by having US tech companies operating in their country.
The political environment in which Cisco operates also has its challenges. Cisco’s alleged involvement in the PRISM surveillance program could create a great set back in the Chinese market. PRISM is a mass electronic surveillance data mining program operated by...
It is interesting to note that some of the new Internet regulations contradict International Laws signed by the Chinese government. China signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1998 that states that “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print…or through any other media of his choice”.
Deva, Surya. “Corporate Complicity in Internet Censorship in China: Who Cares for the Global Compact or the Global Online Freedom Act?” The George Washington International Law Review. Washington, DC: The George Washington Intl Law Review. 2007. Web. 31 Jan., 2011.
Dr. Mercola, an osteopathic physician exclaims that the only reason the government wants regulations on supplements is to have power over consumers (par. 3). Mercola explains that if dietary supplements are bad for public health then why the government is not taking action for other substances that are considered dangerous, “You don't see Durbin beating down the door of Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts, even though coffee is the primary source where most people get their caffeine fix” (Mercola, par. 5). Furthermore the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) is doing enough to regulate the dietary supplements. As stated on the DSHEA mission, “DSHEA grants the FDA the authority to regulate dietary supplements in to important respects” (“Dietary Supplements…par. 3). DSHEA does give the FDA the right to regulate many different types of dietary supplements, so there are some regulations to keep Americans healthy and happy without taking away the freedom to purchase these products at a
risk, for drugs and medical devices, weighing risks against benefits is at the core of
...lthier nations provide enough incentive for them to continue ARV production regardless of what happens in poorer countries. Perhaps due to pressure from the United Nations the United States eventually dropped their complaint. (AVERT).
...cation in China is also impacted by its strict censorship. In China, the government restricts information given and taught in schools. For example, on January 11, 2011, China banned the Bayesian statistics textbook written by Andrew Gelman (Doctorow, 2011). The book was believed to contain examples of election polls and one being on testing for election fraud. China also monitors, filters, and restricts information in the internet. Chine had made an agreement with search engine companies such as, Google and Yahoo to ensure that they block access to sites such like BBC and Voice of America (Sheets, “Internet Edu. And Censorship”). Along with blocking and restricting information on the internet, school textbooks are often altered. One Chinese textbook claims that the main reason for the victory of World War II is because of the Chinese Communist Party (French, 2004).
Economic risks faced by companies that want to expand their business globally are exchange controls, local content laws, import restrictions, tax controls, price controls, and labor problems (Cateora, Gilly & Graham, 2011). These risks can be just as harmful, in some cases, as the political risks faced. As implied by its title, import restrictions are limitations placed on certain goods being shipped in from another country. “There are especially tight import restrictions on goods with a potential to be hazardous” (Dugger, 2016). Many restrictions are placed on imports in order to protect and promote the domestic market within the host country. Tax controls are put into place primarily to generate revenue and operating funds. Unfortunately, many companies that attempt to expand their business overseas experience unreasonably high taxes. Elevated tax rates can also be seen as a form of protectionism in efforts to deter threatening foreign companies from entering their market, thus allowing domestic companies to
However local governments both here in the US and abroad are either banning or “heavily restricted the sale of the products” stating they “are threatening
The manufacturers justify their actions because their goal is to sell their product, no matter what the effects of it are on the consumers who purchase the product. Because actions are viewed as having essentially good and bad qualities, we need to understand where the manufacturer’s styles of thinking come from. The manufactures intent or action is to market their product in order to make a profit. Deontologist view their rights or wrongs based on the action not the outcome of the action. So, unless they are breaking the law, the manufacturer does not see anything wrong with their marketing
Since the 1990’s, the Chinese government has had systems in place that block, monitor, and filter the Internet inside/outside of China (Guobin 52). The ‘Great Firewall’, very well is the largest internet filte...
Google is the largest search engine across the globe, which has significantly transformed the use of the Internet as an information source. The influence of Google in Internet use as information source is evident in the fact that by June 2010, it accounted for more than 70 percent of total Internet searches in America. In addition to its success and profitability in the global market, Google is renowned as a highly ethical company as demonstrated in its corporate philosophy features. However, the firm’s behavior during the launch of its China-based search engine in 2006 generated huge skepticism from the United States government and several human rights organizations (Baker & Tang, p.2). Since the launch of Google’s Chinese search engine, the company complied with China’s censorship regulations by deciding to filter out terms that are considered politically sensitive. This decision attracted criticism from political leaders and human rights activists who accused Google of betraying its adopted ethical standards by ignoring the essence of freedom of expression and information access. As a result, Google faced a dilemma involving the clash between law and ethics. In the subsequent years, Google reacted to the dilemma by changing its rhetoric strategies in efforts to respond to the changing needs.
Smith, Craig, "Tough New Rules Don't Faze Chinese Internet Start-Ups," The New York Times, 4 October 2000. Retrieved 26 April 2004.
... that Yahoo had faced when the information it turned over to the Chinese government was used to sentence people to prison terms.
Everyone in this world has experienced an ethical dilemma in different situations and this may arise between one or more individuals. Ethical dilemma is a situation where people have to make complex decisions and are influenced based on personal interest, social environment or norms, and religious beliefs (“Strategic Leadership”, n.d.). The leaders and managers in the company should set guidelines to ensure employees are aware and have a better chance to solve and make ethical decisions. Employees are also responsible in understanding their ethical obligations in order to maintain a positive work environment. The purpose of this case study is to identify the dilemma and analyze different decisions to find ways on how a person should act