John Doe Vs. Acme Case Essay

Business ethics are the moral principles that describe the way a business behaves. Because businesses are treated as “persons”, it can be said that the same principles that determine an individual’s actions can also apply to business. Making ethical choices involves distinguishing between right and wrong, and then making the right choice; and while it can be easy to identify unethical business practices, such as using child labor or not paying employees properly, good ethical practice can be harder to define simply because what is deemed right is not always universally accepted. In other words, everyone has a unique moral compass, and can see black and white as different shades of gray. In the face of this, every business holds corporate social responsibility to act fairly for their employees’, stakeholders’, and sometimes even the earth’s sake. However, whether or not the business adheres to this ethical paradigm varies.

Acme case, I would argue that Mr. Mason could act in a number of ways, and that the ethicality of those actions would depend on who was analyzing the case. For one, it would be perfectly reasonable of Mr. Mason to bribe the judge in order to secure his $5,000,000 (after all, “money doesn’t talk, it swears”). He would not even need to feel that corrupt about it, as he could argue that Acme had a duty to protect its car owners, and that the probable recall of the defective axles could thereby save other members of the public from injury and death caused by his defective axle in the future. However, alternatively, Mr. Mason could choose not take the bribe, as bribery is ethically wrong, especially in the court of law, and as a consequence lose out on the payout, but at least he would be following his duty-based ethics. Conversely, as an added consequence to these actions, he would also be allowing other people to potentially get hurt by the defective axle, which if we are going by outcome-based ethics here, is