Business Ethics Chapter 10 Homework Care and reciprocity—a focus on relationships. Carol Gilligan’s feminist consideration of care, and the Golden Rule’s consideration of reciprocity, are introduced.

Unlock access to all the studying documents.

View Full Document

The Fifth Question:

Who’s Whispering in Your Ear?

In general—and specifically in this case—which school of philosophy or set of moral principles

provides you with a moral compass?

he fifth question of Doing Ethics in Media reminds us that we are not alone. While the

moral dilemmas we face may seem different in this age of new technology, the

fundamental questions are the same that philosophers have considered for millennia.

As discussed early in this Instructor’s Manual, we waited until the fifth question to

What’s more important, in our estimation, is a fully reasoned effort to work through the

process of decision making, which may well lead to contradictory (but ethically

justifiable) answers.

The decision to introduce philosophers late may seem idiosyncratic—but so may be

some of the philosophers we introduce in Chapters 10, 11, and 12. As stated in the

• Consequentialism and utility—a focus on ends. We start our discussion with

the utility-based approaches because they seem to be the default position of most mass

communicators who seek to best serve the “masses.” Ends-based approaches are

appealing precisely because of the commercial nature of mass media, as practitioners

try to appeal to the largest number or offend the smallest number of audience members

and/or stakeholders. (The chapter also includes a brief comparison to duty-based

theories.) Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, and William Frankena are introduced.

• Duty and obligation—a focus on means. After the brief introduction to duty-

Chapter 12 looks at three other sets of principles that are important to consider when

“doing ethics” in mass media:

• Virtue and character—a focus on motivations. Aristotle’s concerns about values

of virtue are introduced.

The goal of the case studies for the Fifth Question is to show how different philosophers

might reach different-but-justifiable decisions. The text of Chapter 10 introduces two

case studies, about journalistic deception and marketing a PG-13 movie to children

case.

Throughout the discussion of the Fifth Question, it’s important to remind students that

our discussions of great philosophies are merely brief introductions. Students should do

much more outside reading and studying to appreciate the nuances of the philosophies.

We acknowledge (and, in some cases, apologize for) our shorthand approach to

Chapter 10

Consequentialism and Utility

t is our experience that most young people—and most people in mass communication

disciplines—think about doing the “most good” or the “least harm” once they move

past the pre-conventional, “what’s-in-it-for-me” levels of moral development. Unless

Chapter 10 covers a great deal of ground—some of it repeated in the following two

chapters—in order to introduce students to teleological philosophy and to compare it to

Mass media practitioners preternaturally gravitate toward utility-based decisions. It

seems to make sense to balance potential consequences when your job is to deal with

“masses” of people. Since most mass communicators aim to reach the widest-possible

audience, they produce least-common denominator programming that balances doing

We hope your class’s discussion of consequentialism goes beyond simply the “greatest

good or least harm” fortune-cookie definition and provides insight into some of its

complicated approaches. To “do ethics” correctly with an ends-based approach requires

A student who reads between the lines will discern that, while the authors appreciate

teleological approaches and recognize that (as we wrote) “a lifetime of decision making

Learning Objectives

A successful discussion of Chapter 10 will lead students to:

Understand differences between consequentialism and deontological

approaches to “doing ethics.”

Teaching Suggestions

We suggest these activities:

1. Introduce the topic of moral philosophers by contrasting teleological and

deontological approaches. Discuss one of the two case studies at the start of Chapter 10.

(We’ll refer to these cases in Chapters 11 and 12, too.) In:

a. Case 10-A, “The temptation to deceive,” student journalists have to decide

b. Case 10-B, “Marketing your movie,” you are a script writer asked to add sex

and bad language to attract older moviegoers while also adding a cartoonish character

The PowerPoint for this chapter begins with an explanation of Justification No. 1 and

Justification No 2 for both cases. (Justification 1 is an example of teleological thinking in

both cases; Justification 2 is an example of duty-based thinking.) Note that both

2. Continue with the PowerPoint. Its key discussion points include:

a. An introduction to the Fifth Question. The PowerPoint notes section includes

details.

b. An introduction to the multiple ways to approach ethical thinking, as

considered by key philosophers. They include:

Virtue and character. An image of Aristotle’s head accompanies the discussion of

virtue-based ethics.

c. A comparison between utility-based (teleological) and duty-based

(deontological) ethics. The PowerPoint shows the etymology of the two terms, as well

as other terms.

d. Reasons for utilitarianism: It focuses on people; on doing much good or little

harm; seeks good over evil; can counter egoism, relativism, power.

e. Reasons against utilitarianism: It can become a cost-benefit analysis that

f. A discussion of utility vs. disutility, using media examples. For each example

of something that has utility, we can find competing examples of disutility. (Example

g. Reach the key question of utilitarianism: Balancing competing loyalties and

competing values to do the most good or the least harm. We look at three approaches:

Bentham, Mill, and Frankena.

h. Jeremy Bentham’s Hedonic Calculus: he said that “happiness” is the key, and

everyone’s happiness has equal significance. Bentham’s consideration of happiness

i. The Calculus of Mass Media. While it seems that Bentham might think the

temporary “happiness” of the audience is the goal, it may be that long-term happiness

j. John Stuart Mill: His dad’s friend was Bentham, who had a hand in educating

the prodigy who was J.S. Mill. Mill’s contribution was to refine Bentham by noting that

k. If John Stuart Mill were sharing your office. Follow the six-point checklist of

making and defending decisions.

l. Categories of utilitarianism (three slides): Definitions of act, general, and rule

utilitarianism.

m. William Frankena: Theory of obligation. Frankena (pronounced FRANK-en-uh)

says we should consider justice as we balance good vs. evil, and that consideration of

3. Given that utilitarian-based ethics is often takes a “for vs. against” approach

when making decisions, use the “for” and “against” approach reasons to use (and to not

use) utilitarian thinking when doing ethics.

a. “For” reasons might include our knowledge from the history of making similar

decisions, the ability to focus on large numbers of people in our mass audiences, the

“No. 1” in any equation, the difficulties of predicting the results, thinking that we did

the right thing because a favorable result occurred, and ignoring our true motivations,

character traits, and moral obligations when making decisions.

4. Choose a “Practical Application” that will work with your class. Question No.

1—about a time when students used a “hedometer” to make a decision, whether they

5. Ask students to choose the case study that best represents their discipline, and

focus on the questions related to the utilitarian approach to that case. Be sure that

Case Study Notes

Note: These cases will be used in Chapters 10, 11, and 12. As stated in the book, the discussion

during the next few class sessions will be better if students write their answers and can refer to

them in upcoming sessions.

It may be worth a reminder that finding the “right” answer in these chapters is not necessarily

Case 10.1) Journalism: How (and Whether) to Cover a Prank

for an ends-based ethical approach, since you’re told that reporting the story will lead

to major damage to the institution. On the other hand, the journalist must balance that

In this case, the reasons for not printing seem tangible—keeping friends, winning the

editor’s post, etc.—while the reasons for pursuing the story seem less tangible. Students

Case 10.2) New Media: Do You Take the Ads?

An increasing number of news-focused websites have been offered this deal to take

their unsold inventory—and they make different decisions as they balance the ad

revenue against perceived credibility and potentially angering consumers who click on

Case 10.3) Public Relations: The Big Weekend

This case is based on a series of South Carolina newspaper stories in the early 2000s that

showed how a series of hospital charity events actually raised little money. Many of the

12,000 people who took part in a “Walk for Life” were surprised to learn that just

The utilitarian argument can come down to a balance of the quantifiable (raising

money, or not raising enough) to less-quantifiable questions of “awareness” and

transparency (to be discussed in Chapter 13.) It may be a difficult to answer the

question of the utilitarian value of “awareness.”

Some students may latch onto the legality of the enterprise, but more astute students

will harken to Chapter 2’s reminder that what’s legal and what’s ethical may not be the

Case 10.4) New Media: The Nathan Freedonia Ad

breaking the first rule of beneficence (“One ought not to inflict evil or harm”) by hurting

the ex-wife and mother. And then there’s the issue of power, with Nathan Freedonia

telling you that the general manager will run the ads or lose his furniture store’s ads.

Here’s hoping students find a way to figure out that a utilitarian focus is difficult when

one of the people involved may seek to “bully” you into doing his bidding. And serious

Case 10.5) Entertainment: The VIMKids

Movies such as Kick-Ass and Let Me In have several things in common: Both star Chloe

Moretz, who wasn’t a teenager when she filmed these R-rated movies filled with

violence and terror. (Even the star said her movies make her “freaked out” sometimes.)

This case study pushed the idea of children playing starring roles in movies they are not

old enough to see, which asks students to consider the value of the good of movie-

making vs. the potential harm toward the actors, or to young children who want to see

people their age in such movies. (Perhaps some will see the larger, but common, issue

of doing/saying things for mass media that they don’t believe or wouldn’t ordinarily