Ethics

'Morning After' Pill in Stores

2006-11-28T20:43:00.000-08:00

The over-the-counter version of the "morning after" contraceptive pill is now available in stores without a prescription. The pill has stirred up a huge controversy. Proponents say it prevents pregnancy, while detractors say it can prompt an early chemical abortion by preventing a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. The drug is highly effective at preventing pregnancy when taken within 72 hours of having unprotected sex. It has been available on a prescription basis since 1999. Many women and health providers say making it more widely available in over-the-counter sales will reduce unwanted pregnancies. Costing between $19 and $50 for a one-dose pack, the pill is intended to be used as a "backup" when regular birth control measures fail or aren't available. The pill is available in case of "mistakes", but is it enabling carelessness? I feel that by making it available without a prescription, women will abuse the service and will use it as a way of birth-control. Requiring a prescription would educate the women about the pill and possibly prevent the mistake from happening again. This story may be found at: http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/511565.html

Illinois Tobacco Case

2006-11-27T08:33:00.000-08:00

The Supreme Court sided with Philip Morris refusing to disturb a court ruling that threw out a $10.1 billion verdict over the company’s “light” cigarettes. Last year, the Illinois Supreme Court threw out the judgment against Philip Morris in a class-action lawsuit involving “light” cigarettes. Because the Federal Trade Commission allowed companies to characterize their cigarettes as “light” and “low tar,” "Philip Morris could not be held liable under state law even if the terms it used could be found false or misleading, the state court said." The case involved 1.1 million people who bought “light” cigarettes in Illinois. They claimed Philip Morris knew when it introduced such cigarettes in 1971 that they were no healthier than regular cigarettes, but hid that information and the fact that light cigarettes actually had a more toxic form of tar. An Illinois judge ruled in favor of the smokers in March 2003, saying the company misled customers into believing they were buying a less harmful cigarette. More may be found at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15919541/

I am not sure I fully agree with this verdict. Smokers know that no matter what they smoke, it is unhealthy. Because a cigarette states "light", the cigarette is still toxic.

Follow-up on OJ Controversy

2006-11-20T17:52:00.000-08:00

Well, I just got done discussing the big controversy over O.J. Simpson's book, "If I did it", and television interview on Fox. They have been canceled after all of the criticism. "I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project," said Rupert Murdoch, News Corp. chairman. "We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson." In both the book and show, Simpson speaks in hypothetical terms about how he would have committed the 1994 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole and her friend Goldman. Relatives of the victims were livid at the situation. "He destroyed my son and took from my family Ron's future and life. And for that I'll hate him always and find him despicable," Fred Goldman told ABC last week. I am pleased at the decision. Allowing Simpson to get away with this would open a whole new door for others, and who knows what that would bring!

OJ Simpson's Interview

2006-11-18T11:35:00.000-08:00

The Fox network plans to air a special featuring OJ Simpson and a hypothetical account of how he "would have" killed his ex-wife and her friend, Ron Goldman. This is creating controversy. Several have concerns that the interview is another publicity stunt, and a way to "earn" more money. Many are outraged over the decision of Fox network to air this interview. Geraldo Rivera and Bill O'Reilly, two of the best-known personalities on Fox News, have attacked the television group's decision to air the programme later this month. The two-part special is scheduled to coincide with the publication of Mr Simpson's book, OJ Simpson: If I Did It, Here's How It Happened, by News Corp's HarperCollins division. Geraldo Rivera is outraged and states that it is "the most appalling thing I've ever seen". Bill O'Reilly had similar comments, "Shamefully, the Fox Broadcasting unit is set to carry the programme, which is simply indefensible, and a low point in American culture. For the record, Fox Broadcasting has nothing to do with the Fox News Channel." More may be found at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15756679/
I find myself outraged also. It is troubling to see that this kind of behavior is what attracts viewers. It is appalling that OJ Simpson would even have an idea like this to write a book about "if he killed [them], this is how it happened"! Is he trying to ease his conscience? I believe this story connects to the issue of business ethics! For Fox network to air this interview for "great remarks", I feel is an unethical decision on their behalf.

Update on Enron Scandal

2006-11-17T17:16:00.000-08:00

Well, here we go again, an update on the Enron trial. Former CFO Andrew Fastow, and company's former investment relations chief, Mark Koenig each received reduced sentences after cooperating with prosecutors to help convict the architects of the biggest scandal in U.S. corporate history. Fastow, the former CFO, received a 3 year and one month sentence, and Koenig, former investment relations chief, received an 18 month sentence. Each of the men were also fined $50,000 that will be sent to a fund for victims of Enron’s collapse, and each will be on probation for two years after they are released from prison. Both men will remain free on bond until they have to report to prison, a process that usually takes four to six weeks. Koenig helped present the company’s false financial reports to investors, pleaded guilty in August 2004 to one count of aiding and abetting securities fraud, which carries up to 10 years in prison. He states, “I want to apologize to all the people who have been harmed by the Enron affair,” Kopper said before he was sentenced. “Families and employees suffered not just monetary failure but reputational failure. I am very deeply sorry for having participated in causing that.”
During his seven days on the stand, Koenig told jurors that Enron, bent on matching or beating Wall Street expectations, fudged its earnings figures with the knowledge of Skilling and Lay, former CEO of Enron. More can be found at:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15767163/

Madonna Adopts

2006-11-11T18:29:00.000-08:00

The pop-star, Madonna, has recently adopted a boy from Africa. The huge controversy is over her motives for the adoption. Was it from the kindness of her heart, or was it for publicity reasons? That is the question in mind. Madonna appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show to defend her reasoning for the adoption. Oprah Winfrey says that the media attacks on Madonna's adoption of a 13-month-old African boy are "both shameful and ridiculous". Madonna is angry at the fact that Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt adopted an African child with great remarks. When she adopted little David Banda from Africa, she was reprimanded, saying that she did if for publicity.
http://www.14wfie.com/Global/story.asp?S=5549659
I believe that this story is linked to the subject of business ethics. Although Madonna is an entertainer, this is her business. Ethically, I believe that Madonna is not the one trying to gain publicity, I believe that it is the media who is trying to gain publicity. Trying to get a good story and drag it out. I think that it is none of our business who Madonna adopts, and how she goes about adopting. I personally think that it is terrible to believe that the only reason she adopted was to gain publicity. She has been in the business for over 20 years, I think she has had enough time in the spot light. Sure, some may think that Madonna had special privilege in the adoption process, but is it true that anyone in Hollywood has special privileges? We need to mind our own business and allow the system to control who and how to adopt.

Pastor Admits to Buying Meth

2006-11-04T11:45:00.000-08:00

Former Head of the National Association of Evangelicals, Rev. Ted Haggard, admitted on Friday to buying methamphetamine from a gay prostitute. Haggard told reporters that "I bought it for myself but never used it." Jones, the male prostitute, stated that Haggard snorted meth in front of him about once a month for two years. Rev. Haggard said that he never had sex with Jones and he bought the meth out of curiosity. Haggard stepped down from the 30 million association and also gave up membership of his 14,000 member New Life Church.
"It is important for you to know that he confessed to the overseers that some of the accusations against him are true,” Ross Parsley, the acting senior pastor at New Life Church stated in an e-mail to church members.
“He has willingly and humbly submitted to the authority of the board of overseers, and will remain on administrative leave during the course of the investigation,” the e-mail stated. A copy was obtained by KMGH-TV in Denver.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15536263/
This is clearly an ethical issue. People are human, and mistakes are made. There are temptations we face everyday. The fact that Haggard was one of the biggest Christian leaders makes this story surprisingly disturbing. But we have to remember that religious leaders are human just like us! We also have to remember that being a religious leader, you are examined and judged extensively, more than the average person. Nothing has been determined with this story, so an open mind is essential. As I was reading this story, I couldn't help but think that it is unfortunate that the religious leaders we depend on for spiritual guidance are committing unthinkable sins. It just shows that just because someone has the prefix "Rev., "Father", "Pastor", or any other religious title, does not mean that they are fit to lead our spiritual life. Be careful, often times the person you think is your religious leader, may be the person hiding an awful lie. You would never think in a million years that your leader could do something like this, but often times it is a cover-up!

California Fire...Was it an Arsonist Attack?

2006-10-31T21:30:00.000-08:00

Authorities have said that the wildfire in Southern California had been deliberately set. Before the firefighters could control the fire, it had already destroyed 40,200 acres, 34 homes, and 20 outbuildings. The California Department of Forestry said that the firefighting costs have reached $9.9 million. The reason authorities think that it was set deliberately, is because residents said that they had seen two young men leaving the area where the fire began. There have been no arrests yet, the the investigation will continue.

There have been 5 firefighters who have lost their lives due to severe burns. Although this subject is not directly related to "business ethics", I was compelled to this story and my heart goes out to all of the men and women who helped, and those who lost their lives trying to save others. I do suppose that this story is still relates to ethical choices on behalf of the arsonists, if true. We have no control over what others do, but we do have the obligation to get involved when you feel that someone may, or is planning something unethical.

Upcoming Elections, Are they Buying Our Vote?

2006-10-29T12:21:00.000-08:00

It's that time of year again! Election time. This year, the race is for the Democrats to take over the Republicans in office. My main concern is the way election campaigns are being run, is it ethical? All the "dirt" that is brought up against the opponents, all the money that is involved, and all the "back-stabbing" that occurs...is it right? Is that the way you would want to win an election? Better yet, is that the way you want your character to be portrayed? Probably not. It's a little disturbing to see commercial after commercial of representatives "lashing out" at their competitors to get their point-of-view across. I just don't think the way this is being conducted is right. Are these the people we want representing us?
According to MSNBC News, Democratic strategist, John Lapp is in charge of spending $60 million to defeat Republicans. The overabundance of money spent on these elections is outrageous. I understand that to advertise, money must be spent. But why in so much excess? Does money really equal power? So is it whoever has the most money wins!? Who knows, I just know that I feel that this subject of unethical behavior to win a vote is overlooked. Are these really the people you want to represent us and make "Good" decisions for us? Not me!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15463388/

Former Enron CEO Gets 24years...

2006-10-23T18:17:00.000-07:00

Former Enron Chief Executive Officer, Jeffrey Skilling was sentenced today, Monday 10/23/06. He was behind one of the largest scams in corporate history, leading to the loss of thousands of jobs, more than $60 billion in Enron stock, and more than $2 billion in employee pension plans after the company sought bankruptcy protection in December 2001. Enron is the second largest corporate collapse in history, with WorldCom being the first. Today, Skilling was sentenced to 24 years and 4 months in prison; just shy of the 25 year sentence former CEO of WorldCom received. The judge denied Skilling's request for bond and ordered him to home confinement, wearing an ankle monitor. Skilling is also ordered to forfeit his net worth of $45 million. This money will be distributed to the victims of Enron. Skilling said that he is sorry for what happened, but feels that he did no wrong. He plans to appeal this court decision.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15389150/

Size 'Subzero'

2006-10-19T16:52:00.000-07:00

Has it gone too far? Designers are now introducing new supertiny sizes. Next fall, designer Nicole Miller will introduce something tentatively called the "subzero" for women with 23Â½-inch waists and 35-inch hips. But is our obesity-challenged country being fooled? Is there really a size 'subzero' or are we being fooled into thinking we're a smaller size than we actually are? According to standard size measurements, an average 155 pound woman should be wearing a size 16, but thanks to vanity-sizing, she's probably buying a size 10 or 12. Most companies aren't using the standard ASTM [American Society for Testing and Materials] sizes any more. Sizes are creeping up so that women can fit into a smaller size to "feel better about themselves"! But is this right? Why should it matter what size you wear? Well, unfortunately it does...in a woman's point-of-view at least. I guess society as a whole has shaped us women into these unrealistic 'barbie figures' always trying to be a size smaller. You are always hearing how things are trying to change; with larger women being proud and appearing on T.V., but it's when you see articles like this that make you wonder if we are really taking a step back instead of taking a step forward!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15319430/site/newsweek/

IRS Slaps a Damper on Hollywood "Swag Bags"

2006-10-13T15:59:00.000-07:00

Swag bags are known as the gift bags celebrities get at the red carpet events. Companies donate high priced merchandise and pay a high price for the privilege of being included in the event bag. Now, when you think of a gift bag you're probably thinking of a little bag worth $30 to $50. Oh No! These "bags" contain thousands of dollars worth of valuable merchandise. And the term "bag" is not always correct. These gifts are getting larger and larger to where celebrities are wheeling their gifts away. This year's Emmy gift bag was worth over $157,000!
It gets better, the IRS issued a warning in August that these "gifts" constitute as taxable income. That's right! They must pay taxes on these gifts. Why? Well, because the companies who donated their merchandise did not donate "solely out of affection" to the celebrities. For something to be considered a "gift" (no taxes paid), the person giving the gift must give it with no intension of getting anything in return. In this case, the companies donating the gifts did it for publicity reasoning.
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences agreed to settle its past tax obligations with the IRS. Well, it looks like next year the celebrities will be leaving empty handed. So Sad!
Information was found in the Journal Gazette; Saturday, September 2, 2006, pg. 9A.

4 Day School Week?

2006-10-09T16:46:00.000-07:00

The Huntington County Community School Board may be soon considering a strange way to cut costs. They are looking at the possibility of consolidating down to a 4 day school week to save money. This indicates that the days would be longer to make up for the lost day. Several teachers, parents, and others have been researching this possibility since August. Going down to a 4 day school week would mean lower transportation costs, lower food costs, and other operational expenses. Parents and teachers that are for the change believe that longer school days would be beneficial for the kids. Longer school days mean more individual, instructional time spent with each child. The state of Indiana requires 180 days of instructional time each school year, the districts may choose how they want to reach that requirement.
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061008/LOCAL/610080498/1006/LOCAL
Several concerns come to mind when I hear a 4 day school week. First of all, children do not have a great attention span. Being in class longer each day may hurt the child's education in the long run. It is easier to learn material over the course of 5 days, and not try to cram it into 4 days of instructional time. I do believe that you could teach kids all the material needed in just a 4 day school week, but the chances of the kid retaining the information is slim. Learning over a 5 day period increases the chance of the kids remembering the information. Also, cutting one day out of the school week could put extra burdens on the parents who work. When a child is in school 5 days a week, it is easier for the parent to provide care. Eliminating an extra day from the week could affect the parents. So, is it right for the districts to cut a day out of the week to save on costs? Is the money worth it? Is saving money worth sacrificing your child's education?

2006-10-01T17:36:00.000-07:00

"Rich in America"

Money, money, money...what would you do with it? The United States is known for its wealth, but are some of us too wealthy? Does money equal Power? Some may say that these people are considered very powerful. But why? Is it because of their money? Bill, Donald, and Oprah are some of the wealthiest people in the world, but how are they spending it? Oprah is one of the most powerful women in America, and some say she is one of the most generous. Although she contributes to great causes, does she still have an over abundance of wealth? How much is too much? I consider money one of the most powerful substances to making unethical decisions. Am I saying that Oprah or anyone else is unethical because of their money? NO! They only thing I am saying, is that money may lead to bad decisions, and always wanting more and more of it. When are we content with what we have? Although Bill, Donald, and Oprah contribute to great organizations and help out financially when needed, when does someone have too much money? As celebrities become more and more wealthy, unfortunately they must be cautious when volunteering their finances. There are people out there that take advantage! So it makes it difficult for wealthy people to help sometimes. There are still several wonderful organizations that could use the help financially and would make the world run more smoothly. Whether it's athletes, musicians, actors, businessmen, or talk show hosts, the over abundance of wealth is outrageous through my eyes. To look at the balance between an average hard working family man, and an athlete, the difference is overwhelming! What I'm getting at with this blog is the frustration of the wealthy people in the world, and all the poor citizens, poor schools, and poor towns in America. Sometimes we have to stop and examine our lives and just be content with what we do have. It's easy in America to always want more and more. But when is enough, enough?

E. Coli in Spinach

2006-09-27T09:38:00.001-07:00

As several of you have probably heard and seen on the news, raw bagged spinach around the country is infected with e coli. This outbreak has affected over 175 people, two of which were fatal around the country. For e. coli to occur in spinach is rare. Usually, people are infected through meat, poultry, or fish. The reason that e. coli is more prominent in meat than fresh vegetables is because the e. coli bacteria lives in the intestines of the mammal, such as the cow. So how did e.coli bacteria from the mammal's intestine get into the fresh spinach? Well, several possibilities, most of which involve cross-contamination. Possible contaminations include: people-when people are infected with e.coli, they dispose of the bacteria through their waste. If an infected person picks fresh spinach without washing their hands after using the restroom, they can transfer the bacteria from their hands to the spinach. Animals- the waste of an animal can be around where spinach is grown, or the animal can track the waste from other areas. Runoff-heavy rain can sweep the bacteria from an animal infested area to where the spinach is grown. Food processing- contamination from a food processing plant can come from preparation areas or machines and contaminate other foods very quickly.
Fortunately, protecting yourself from the e.coli bacteria is easy. Here are ways to prevent this from infecting you.
1.When you hear a warning about food you've bought, throw the food away. Don't try to salvage it.
2.Always wash your hands before preparing food and before eating. Otherwise, bacteria from your hands can contaminate your food.
3.Wash fruits and vegetables before you eat them, even if their labels say they've already been washed. For foods with very bumpy skin, like cantaloupe, use a brush to scrub the surface.
4.Keep foods that require cooking, like raw hamburger, away from foods that are ready to eat, like spinach.
5.Refrigerate perishable foods promptly -- bacteria multiply quickly as foods approach room temperature.
6.Cook meat thoroughly to kill any bacteria that may be inside.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/ecoli-spinach.htm
Unfortunately several of the victims infected from raw spinach are now suing for compensation. A few were granted settlements of which the amount was not disclosed. So is today's society "sue happy"? Do we sue for every little incident? I find that this incident was very unfortunate, but I do think that when ever eating meat, poultry, fish, raw vegetables, or fruit, you are taking a risk every time. There is always a possibility of contracting a bacterial infection. There are precautions to take when preparing food. So I can't help but to find these lawsuits unethical. And for the several restaurants suing over lost spinach. Same rule applies to you. You are in a business and with business comes risks. More about the law suites can be found at:
http://www.about-ecoli.com/news/sequoias11.htm

2006-09-18T18:15:00.000-07:00

Boycott Wal-Mart The new Wal-Mart on the south side of Fort Wayne is stirring up controversy. Wal-Mart said its new store would not be open 24 hours, and would not provide lay-away or self check-out lanes. Reverend Michael Latham was ready to boycott Wal-Mart because he felt they were discriminating against residents of the south end of Fort Wayne. After meeting with Wal-Mart executives, Reverend Michael Latham understands the business decisions. Wal-Mart explained that they were eliminating all lay-away programs nation-wide.

The fact that Wal-Mart south is not going to be open 24 hours and will not provide self check-out lanes may relate the message of discrimination. On the other hand, I can understand the decisions. Wal-Mart is in business to be profitable. If the organization felt that it was in their best interest to eliminate these services in order to remain profitable, that is their right. If perhaps Wal-Mart could not back up their incentives behind excluding these services, then I would conclude that Wal-Mart was being discriminating against the residents in the south side of Fort Wayne.
Information regarding this story can be found at:
http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/Story.aspx?preview=&type=ln&NStoryID=3946

Online Gambling

2006-09-17T20:13:00.000-07:00

The internet has become one of the most powerful tools. Anyone can virtually do anything through the use of the internet. In particular, gambling online has escalated to an all time high. There are millions of Americans gambling online on hundreds of Web sites, but it is illegal to gamble online. Nigel Payne who runs Sportingbet, which is one of the world's largest online gambling companies says, the reason online gambling companies are so lucrative is because he doesn't have to face the traditional costs that a casino does. "I don't need a hotel. I don't need any croupiers. I don't need any cocktail waitresses. I don't have to comp any drinks. I don't have to comp any hotel rooms." This year alone, the online gambling companies are estimated to profit $10 billion dollars. Although the companies are all based over seas, nearly 80% of their sales come from the U.S. Terri Lanni, the CEO of MGM, says that the solution is simple, we should license it, regulate it, and tax it. So if gambling online is illegal, why is nothing being done about it? Unfortunately, we can't keep up. The amount of Americans gambling illegally is to massive to control. My question to you is, is it okay to gamble online in the privacy of your home? It's your credit card, and it's your prerogative to spend as you please. Or is it? As I am opening my eyes and ears, I am realizing that ethical issues are all around. Whether you think it is right, or whether you think it is wrong, what you believe in is what makes you...YOU. Just remember that what decision you go with, reflects the person you stand for.
More information and the sources used are available at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/17/60minutes/main1052420_page2.shtml

2006-09-14T21:56:00.000-07:00

Ethnic Diversity

It's a huge risk, but CBS's reality TV show "Survivor" has divided the contestants into four ethnic groups. They were divided into Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, and Asians. Already this has stirred up a huge controversy. While I look at it as an inventive strategy for publicity, others feel that it's outrageous to divide the contestants based on their race. There has been some concern that the people watching at home will cheer for their own race, dividing the audience. I am curious to see how the contestants will act toward one another, especially after a few days without food. Will they show the world that it does not matter where you come from? Or will the contestants reveal true division between cultures and race? I think this is a big reason Survivor decided to take this risk. Dividing people into ethnic groups is a strategic business move, not a malicious move to intentionally turn ethic groups against one another. I felt that this controversy tied into my blog about ethics. Is this right or wrong? I would enjoy to hear feedback about this dilemma.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/14/earlyshow/series/survivor/main2007913.shtml

2006-09-12T12:35:00.000-07:00

Defense Lawyers...

Can You be Ethical and Still

Represent?

As my husband and I were watching CSI over the weekend, a question was brought up about a defense lawyer being ethical or not. Can a defense lawyer ethically represent a murderer? I suppose if you believe that the person you are representing truly is innocent, there is nothing unethical about it. My personal view is that most defense lawyers know that the person on trial is guilty, but their job is to convince other wise. To stand in front of a jury and try to convince them that your client is innocent, knowing that there is concrete evidence that they are guilty is unethical. Naturally, if there is enough evidence to convict, justice is served. But the question on hand is if the defense lawyer is practicing ethically or not. My personal thought is NO. A person with ethical values can not justify why a person is not guilty, or try to minimize their sentence consciously knowing that the person they are representing is guilty. Lawyers are out there to make money and make a name for themselves, to become "successful". I understand that there are people out there that ARE innocent, and need a defense lawyer, but for those who have committed the crime and need someone to defend them to lower their sentence is unethical in my book. I would love to hear from others to see your point-of-view on this subject. As the picture in the beginning says...how important are ethics in society today? Are we so "Money Hungry" that all ethics have been lost?

2006-09-10T17:53:00.000-07:00

"Money Hungry America"

So, we are touching base on the subject of ethics in my communications class. As my professor gives examples of everyday life situations and asks the class whether or not they feel that it is ethical or not, it is interesting to see how everybody just sits and thinks without answering. My philosophy on "ethical decisions" heavily depends on the upbringing and family values taught to the individual. That is why I think that when asked an ethical question, many people pause to answer, or it leads to a heavy argument. What I may find "wrong" another person may think that it is okay.

My communications professor brings up an interesting point as to reasons for unethical behavior in the business world. As I have said before, the term "business" doesn't always bring a nice picture to mind. Personally, when I hear "oh, that's just business", I immediately picture people being deceitful, trying to earn an extra buck. As my professor points out, reasons that lead to unethical behavior definately includes GREED. People always want more. Greed will get in the way of making an ethical decision. In business, COMPETITION is another reason for unethical behavior. Businesses are in to compete and be number one in their field. The main purpose of running a business is to compete to be the best. Unfortunately, there are a lot of business out there that will stop at nothing to be number one. Even if it means unethical decisions. People also compete in business to get promotions, and will do whatever it takes to advance.
Being in the "money hungry" world we are in, just remember that your actions speak volumes. Whether or not you think you are being watched, or whether or not you think you will get caught, I am a strong believer that things always come back around. Those who are content and wait, great things will come!

2006-09-04T18:08:00.000-07:00

In any business, the accountant is highly responsible for the accuracy of the finances. As many know, World Com and Enron are two well-known publicly traded companies who went under and filed bankruptcy because of dishonest bookkeeping. As it stands now, several are in prison serving a sentence for fraudulent activity. CNN Money.com elaborates on how prosecutors what the CEO of Enron to pay $183 million in repayment.

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/Enron/

Enron and World Com are just two examples of the consequences when violating "common" ethics. Perhaps the pressure from the CEO or the pressure from the CFO was too much for some employees to handle. Or, perhaps the pressure from the stock market was too much for the CEO and the CFO to handle. The fact is, that the pressure of the "business world" got a hold of them in such a way to fraudulently alter the accounting records to hide a tremendous debt.

Although ethics is very important in accounting, regardless the profession, being truthful and honest is the way to go. Just remember that one lie always leads to another lie to cover up the truth.
-Truthfully Yours!

2006-08-31T20:58:00.000-07:00

I would like to introduce myself and briefly explain why I chose business ethics as my interest. I am an accounting major at IPFW. I will be graduating in the fall of 2007 and entering the world of corporate business. I chose the topic of ethics because it is an extremely important aspect in conducting honest business. Although ethics is covered in most business courses, the true core lies within. I will be covering the importance of ethics in the accounting profession, and tie it in with everyday situations. I would enjoy to hear feedback at any point and get a feel of how everyone else views this subject.

-Cheers!