Anda di halaman 1dari 1

1) To Live and let live

Every human being has a philosophy to life. Similarly a company being a legal person has its
own philosophy. The problem arises when both the philosophies dont match. Ideally for smooth
mutual sustenance, every individual should work for a company where his/her ethics matches
with those of the companies. If there are major conflicts between your own ethics and the rules
of the company, it is better to not continue with that company. If you try to hang on, conflicts are
bound to arise and it will result in bad days for both the parties. For example, in the movie, The
Insider, we come across two main characters, Mr. Jeffrey Wigand, played by Russell Crowe and
Mr. Lowell Bergman, played by Al Pacino. Mr. Wigand is a character who tried to hang on to his
job against his personal morals and ethics. The struggle he is going through in his life because of
his association with the company is well depicted in the movie. On the other hand, Mr. Bergman
is a character who has lived his life completely according to his ethics and morals. AT the end of
the movie, even after airing the uncensored interview, he quits 60 Minutes show siting they
have lost their credibility and integrity. The way he is successful in his life and profession proves
that is the way to go about in life.
Businesses also will continue to sustain as long as they can find people who can believe in their
philosophy. If they are not able to get such people, then the business is outdated and should be
shut down.
2)

Sustainable companies are here to stay

Companies should look out for themselves. But the keyword here is SUSTAINABILITY. To
do everything there are two ways, morally correct and morally incorrect. The morally incorrect
way might be the shorter and quicker way to reach your goal, be it as an individual or as a
company. But in todays world, where sustainability is becoming the keyword for growth, this
shortcut will come to haunt you as a company at a later date. When that situation arises,
whatever short success you achieved will all be in vain.
In The Insider, CBS tried to protect its interest by not airing Wigands interview because
according to tortious interference legal theory, they would have had to face a huge lawsuit
from B&W. By doing this they are deviating from the basic rule of journalism which is to show
the truth to the world. On the other hand if they have to pay such a huge sum in the lawsuit, it
will severely affect the financials of the company. Also this might affect the takeover of CBS by
Westinghouse.
They are in a proper ethical dilemma. Looking from the moral perspective, in this case, the
graveness of the issues of public health and addiction and the duty of a journalist organization
like CBS should have prompted them to taken up the risk and aired the interview daring the
consequences. Even from business perspective, if they dont do it, it will come to haunt them
later like how Mr. Bergman resigned stating reasons of their credibility and integrity.