Capitalism by its nature will carry out unethical behavior if it means profit. So no, business was always soulless. That’s why regulation needs to exist, so the penalty for unethical behavior will negate the profit they could make from it.
Comment on Netflix Resumes Advertising on X After Elon Musk Controversy
assembly@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I am so tired of being so disappointed in companies. Was there ever a time when they weren’t just completely soulless? Is there truly no bottom to their ethics?
MataVatnik@lemmy.world 11 months ago
ech@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Ethics never enter the equation. The highest priority in business is capital, and any company at the level of Netflix follows that maxim religiously. They may be seen following progressive trends, but any good they end up doing only stems from it being profitable to do so.
In other words - no, companies have never not been soulless, and it serves us well to always remember that.
MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Ethics are a luxury that can be sold like any other, but when times get hard and cuts must be made, ethical companies get devoured by those that are not.
grue@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This might answer some of your questions: reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-his…
maryjayjay@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Should Elon be willing to pay high profile companies to advertise on Xitter to entice others back? Of just give them advertising for free? Or… Resume running ads from customers who cancelled just to change public perception?
I’m not saying Netflix isn’t a big enough bag of dicks to start advertising with them again, just strategizing
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 11 months ago
In school I had to take Business Ethics. The processor officially renamed the course to Ethical Issues in Business, because, as he explained it in class, business has no ethics, but ethical issues arise all the time. I took it to mean that capitalism destroyed humanity, and those of us that are still left humane must deal with ethical issues in a business setting.
assembly@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I did not take business classes so limited background but if we assume that the US isn’t going to magically transition away from capitalism, we instead have to find a way to legislate a transition to a more ethical capitalism. That phrase seems to be an oxymoron but for things to not keep getting progressively worse I’m thinking we as a society need to figure out a way to make it happen. Any ideas? You seem to have at least taken a course in the matter.
andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 11 months ago
What if we transition away from capitalism non-magically?
assembly@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I mean that’s probably the preferred path but I can’t see how that realistically happens. There are too many individuals globally with too much to lose that will think their loss of capital is worth bringing down the whole human race. I’m sure they would rather see the world in ashes rather than succeed under an alternate system where they may not be on top.
fosforus@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
No, let’s not. Or at least figure out a better theory this time.
fosforus@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
I think you might have misunderstood the concept. Business really has no ethics, and it needs no ethics: its main and only goal is to make money. Government’s job is to define the ethics, and create and enforce a framework in which businesses may operate.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 11 months ago
The people’s job is to define ethics. The government’s job is to uphold that definition. Governments can’t be expected to define ethics on their own.
rambaroo@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This is so fucking immoral it’s enraging. As if people aren’t involved with business and business doesn’t affect people. This psychotic bullshit is how companies end up murdering people and getting away with it.
fosforus@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
I believe murdering people is illegal, sir.
prole@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
And that’s why capitalism is inherently unethical and immoral.
fosforus@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
I’d say amoral.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 11 months ago
(Assuming you aren’t misremembering): That honestly sounds like a really shitty professor.
Ethics are 100% a thing and more people need to improve their intelligence in that regard. What you CAN argue is that morality has no place in business (or engineering (or whatever)). But ethics are not morality or the law.
At this point, I think everyone and their mother is aware of the concept of The Trolley Problem. And… that is pertinent for a reason. Are you going to send the metaphorical train careening into marginalized groups, your workers, your board, or even your family? Or, the inverse of that: Are you going to do something that means you can buy your kids really awesome xmas presents, your board new cars, your workers the nice ramen, or even a moment of lessened horror for trans forlk?
And that ignores the various types of ethics. Even under utilitarianism, there are arguments that you are making a better net good for your board… if only because said marginalized groups suffer so much they will barely notice any relenting.
Improved understanding of what ethics actually are helps to understand WHY good (or more likely) bad things are happening. And it helps those who are in a position to make those decisions to make an intelligent and rational, if not necessarily good, decision.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 11 months ago
I didn’t say ethics had no place in business, nor that ethics wasn’t a thing. I said he renamed it, because business has no ethics. This is the same thing you were saying, but in a lot less words.
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 11 months ago
I realize words are scary, but maybe read them when you are going to reply to someone? Rather than just assume they must agree with you.
Again, business has ethics. Balancing your fiduciary responsibilities with personal gain (and, in rare instances, societal benefit) is an ethical challenge. Do you choose to strictly follow your contractual/legal responsibilities or do you try to find a way to circumvent that for good or for ill?
Yet again: Ethics are not morality