• Provide students with an overview of the activity prior
to viewing The Corporation so that they can take appropriate
notes. Consider providing a template to assist them in recording relevant
information.
• After viewing The Corporation , discuss the nature
of ethics as a class. Be sure to discuss the difference between "ethical"
and "legal" issues.You may wish to provide relevant pre-reading for students
prior to viewing the film.
• Generate a list of ethical issues raised by the film. Issues
might include (but are certainly not limited to):
- "Free agency" of corporate CEOs - individuals such
as Noam Chomsky remind us that we must differentiate between the institution
and the individual. Is there a problem when a ?nice? person is involved
in a company that engages in some unethical practices? What responsibilities
do people have to call attention to or try to stop practices that they
view as unethical.
- A stockbroker in the film said "in devastation, there is
opportunity," and gave examples of the positive market outcomes of tragedies
such as 9/11 and wars. Are there any implications for this attitude, or
is it simply looking for the "silver lining"?
- Michael Moore felt that corporations and their CEOs are
?out of touch? with what the majority want, because the majority of citizens
are women and the working poor. Does it matter whether or not CEOs know
who the "majority" are and what they want? (Note: encourage students to
look at National Post Business magazine's November 2003 "CEO
Scorecard" to investigate the gender and ethnic composition of Canadian
CEOs).
- Is it a conflict of interest for corporations to determine
what constitutes socially responsible behaviour?
- Is it fair for those who own media (e.g., book publishers,
newspapers, television station owners, etc.) to be able to decide what
is said? Is it fair for advertisers to exert influence over how they are
portrayed in the media?
- What, if any, responsibility do corporations have to the
environment?
- One CEO stated that export processing zones (low-wage labour
in developing countries) allow people in those countries to contribute
to their economies and make a living. Others describe this as "sweatshop"
labour that violates human rights. To what extent do either or both of
these positions have merit?
- What responsibility do corporations have to provide consumers
with the risks associated with their products? What are their responsibilities
for testing products? Is there a difference between what is legally required,
and what is ethically required?
- Who should own "commons" such as natural resources and services
for citizens (e.g., healthcare, police, education)? Who should make the
decision about ownership? Is it the case that only those who own such
commons can have an interest in maintaining them?
- Many arguments for privatization focus on the belief that
corporations can run operations more efficiently (and therefore minimize
waste of public funds). Is this true a valid position? Should economic
efficiency be the primary concern for commons and public services? Are
there other criteria to determine who should own or operate them?
- One individual in the film stated "when organizations go
international, governments lose power." What are the implications of such
a shift in the balance of power? Is balance of power in favour of transnational
corporations ethical?
• Have each student select an ethical issue for analysis.
Distribute BLM 1: Ethical Analysis Sheet to use as a guide. Consider using
BLM 2: California Academic Press Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric to
assess their responses. If it is to be used, it should be distributed
and discussed before students begin the activity.
• Provide adequate time to complete the analysis. Students
should be encouraged to work in pairs so that they can share ideas and
perspectives.
When students have completed the analysis, allow them to share their findings
in a large group.
|
