Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 179–189 | Cite as

Huckstering in the Classroom: Limits to Corporate Social Responsibility

  • G. J. M. Abbarno
Article

Abstract

The familiar issue of corporate social responsibility takes on a new topic. Added to the list of concerns from affirmative action and environmental integrity is their growing contributions to education. At first glance, the efforts may appear to be ordinary gestures of communal good will in terms of providing computers, sponsoring book covers, and interactive materials provided by Scholastic Magazine. A closer view reveals a targeted market of student life who are vulnerable to commercials placed in these formats. Among the most effective corporate intervention is Channel One News. It offers a newsworthy show but with mandatory commercial viewing. This increasing trend of corporations intervening to assist schools that need more money and/or equipment is disingenuous.

In this essay, I present the background of this commercialization of education and demonstrate the violations against student autonomy and integrity. Although there may be utilitarian merits to some interventions, I argue that these infringe upon the moral value of personhood. Advertising in schools in its current practice is immoral on deontological grounds.

I construct a framework for a resolution between corporations and education through a Covenant. This Covenant will provide the moral duty that corporations have to the autonomy of the student-learner. The agreement will sanction some assistance to schools but not without the consent of local educational constituents and principles of the Covenant.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arrington, R.: 1982, ‘Advertising and Behavior Control’, Journal of Business Ethics I, 1.Google Scholar
  2. Bain, A.: 1859, The Emotions and the Will (John Parker and Son, London).Google Scholar
  3. Bandura, A.: 1986, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social-Cognitive Theory (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A.: 1965, ‘Influence of Model's Reinforcement Contingencies on the Acquisition of Imitative Responses’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1, 589–595.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A., L. Reese and N. Adams: 1982, ‘Microanalysis of Action and Fear Arousal as a Function of Differential Levels of Perceived Self-Efficacy’, Personality and Social Theory 13, 173–199.Google Scholar
  6. Baron, M.: 1984, ‘The Alleged Moral Repugnance of Acting from Duty’, Journal of Philosophy (April), 197–220.Google Scholar
  7. Bayles, M. (ed.): 1968, Contemporary Utilitarianism (Doubleday, Garden City).Google Scholar
  8. Beck, L. W.: 1960, A Commentary on Kant's Critique of Practical Reason (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  9. Benn, S.: 1988, A Theory of Freedom (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  10. Bentham, J.: 1789, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Hafner Press, Oxford, 1948).Google Scholar
  11. Blanshard, B.: 1961, Reason and Goodness (George Allen and Unwin, London).Google Scholar
  12. Blum, L.: 1988, ‘Gilligan and Kohlberg: Implications for Moral Theory’, Ethics 98, 472–491.Google Scholar
  13. Brandt, R. B.: 1979, The Right and the Good (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  14. Carter, S.: 1996, Integrity (Basic Books: New York).Google Scholar
  15. Chisholm, R. M.: 1964, Human Freedom and the Self (University of Kansas Press, Lawrence).Google Scholar
  16. Christman, J. (ed.): 1989, The Inner Citadel: Essays on Individual Autonomy (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
  17. Crittenden, J.: 1993, ‘The Social Nature of Autonomy’, The Review of Politics 55 (Winter), 35–65.Google Scholar
  18. Crittenden, P.: 1990, Learning to be Moral: Philosophical Thoughts About Moral Development (Humanities Press International, New Jersey).Google Scholar
  19. Daniels, N.: 1978, Reading Rawls: Critical Studies of a Theory of Justice (Basil Blackwell, Oxford).Google Scholar
  20. Dunn, J.: 1987, ‘The Beginnings of Moral Understanding: Development in the Second Year’, in J. Kagan and S. Lamb (eds.), The Emergence of Morality in Young Children (Chicago University Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  21. Durham, T.: 1984, ‘Information, Persuasion, and Control in Moral Appraisal of Advertising Strategy’, Journal of Business Ethics III, 3.Google Scholar
  22. Duska, R. and J. Whelan: 1975, Moral Development: A Guide to Piaget and Kohlberg (Paulist Press, New York).Google Scholar
  23. Dworkin, G.: 1988, The Theory and Practice of Autonomy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  24. Edwards, C.: 1987, ‘Culture and the Construction of Moral Values’, in J. Kagan and S. Lamb (eds.), The Emergence of Morality in Young Children (Chicago University Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  25. Eisenberg, N.: 1986, The Altruistic Emotion, Cognition and Behavior (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
  26. Feinberg, J.: 1992, Freedom and Fulfillment: Philosophical Essays (Princeton University Press, Princeton).Google Scholar
  27. Fleischacker, S.: 1992, Integrity and Moral Relativism (Brill, Leiden).Google Scholar
  28. Frankfurt, H.: 1971, ‘Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person’, Philosophical Review 68(1).Google Scholar
  29. Frey, R. G. (ed.): 1984, Utility and Rights (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis).Google Scholar
  30. Friedman, M.: 1962, Capitalism and Freedom (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  31. Gaita, R.: 1981, ‘Integrity’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Suppl 55, 161–176.Google Scholar
  32. Gauthier, D.: 1986, Morals by Agreement (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  33. Gibbs: 1977, ‘Kohlberg's States of Moral Judgment: A Constructive Critique’, Harvard Educational Review 47, 42–61.Google Scholar
  34. Glover, J. (ed.): 1990, Utilitarianism and its Critics (Macmillan, New York)Google Scholar
  35. Goleman, D.: 1995, Emotional Intelligence (Bantam, New York).Google Scholar
  36. Hayek, F.: 1976, The Mirage of Justice (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London).Google Scholar
  37. Holt, R.: 1967, ‘On Freedom, Autonomy and the Redirection of Psychoanalytic Theory: A Rejoinder’, International Journal of Psychiatry 3, 524–536.Google Scholar
  38. Hook, S. (ed.): 1958, Determinism and Freedom in the Age of Modern Science (Collier, New York).Google Scholar
  39. Hospers, J.: 1971, Libertarianism (Nash, Los Angeles).Google Scholar
  40. Johnson, O.: 1977, ‘Heteronomy and Autonomy: Rawls and Kant’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy 3, 277–279.Google Scholar
  41. Kagan, J.: 1987, ‘Introduction’, in J. Kagan and S. Lamb (eds.), The Emergence of Morality in Young Children (Chicago University Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  42. Kane, R.: 1985, Free Will and Values (State University of New York Press, Albany).Google Scholar
  43. Kant, I.: 1785, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals, translated by L. W. Beck (Bobbs-Merrill, New York, 1959).Google Scholar
  44. Kant, I.: 1788, Critique of Practical Reason, translated by L. Beck (Bobbs-Merrill, New York, 1956).Google Scholar
  45. Kant, I.: 1775–1780, Lectures on Ethics, translated by L. Infield (Harper and Row, New York, 1963).Google Scholar
  46. Kant, I.: 1797, The Metaphysical Principles of the Virtues, translated by J. Ellington (Bobbs-Merrill, New York, 1964).Google Scholar
  47. Kerr, D.: 1984, Barriers to Integrity (Westview Press, Boulder).Google Scholar
  48. Kohlberg, L.: 1981–1984, Essays on Moral Development. The Psychology of Moral Development, 2 vols. (Harper and Row, New York).Google Scholar
  49. Kukathas, C. and P. Pettit.: 1990, A Theory of Justice and its Critics (Stanford University Press, Stanford).Google Scholar
  50. Kurines, W. and E. B. Grief: 1974, ‘The Development of Moral Thought’, Psychological Bulletin 81, 453–470.Google Scholar
  51. Langford, P.: 1995, Approach to the Development of Moral Reasoning (Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
  52. Larmore, C.: 1987, Patterns of Moral Complexity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  53. Lyons, D.: 1965, Forms and Limits of Utilitarianism (Clarendon Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  54. Melden, A. I.: 1961, Free Action (Routledge and Kegan Paul, New York).Google Scholar
  55. Mill, J. S.: 1861, Utilitarianism (Bobbs-Merrill, New York, 1957).Google Scholar
  56. Nell, O.: 1975, Acting on Principle. An Essay on Kantian Ethics (Columbia University Press, New York).Google Scholar
  57. Ross, W. D.: 1954, Kant's Ethical Theory (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  58. Santilli, D.: 1983, ‘The Informative and Persuasive Functions of Advertising: A Moral Appraisal’, Journal of Business Ethics II, 2.Google Scholar
  59. Shapiro, D.: 1981, Autonomy and Rigid Character (Basic, New York).Google Scholar
  60. Shweder, R. et al.: 1987, ‘Culture and Moral Development’, in J. Kagan and S. Lamb (eds.), The Emergence of Morality in Young Children (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
  61. Swanton, C.: 1992, Freedom: A Coherence Theory (Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis).Google Scholar
  62. Wilson, G.: 1982, Free Will (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  63. Young, R.: 1986, Personal Autonomy: Beyond Negative and Positive Liberty (St. Martin's Press, New York).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. J. M. Abbarno
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyD'Youville CollegeBuffaloU.S.A

Personalised recommendations