Whistle Blowing: VioxxEssay Preview: Whistle Blowing: VioxxReport this essayWhen a situation requires someone to blow the whistle – which is completely separate from muckraking because whistle blowers have direct ties with the organizations and “disclose wrongdoing for moral reasons” (James, 1988, p. 315) – it can readily be surmised how the implications of wrongdoing are quite irrefutable. That the most basic of all business ethics are being cast aside in exchange for personal gain clearly indicates how the few whistle blowers courageous enough to come forward are intent upon maintaining whatever shred of ethics remain within the given company. Gordon Gekko, the ruthless, antagonizing business mogul in Hollywoods interpretation of Wall Street, represents the epitome of complete disregard for contemporary corporate ethics; his callous approach to business precludes any ability to see beyond his overwhelming greed. As such, he instills within his underlings this same malevolence, a premise one might readily argue quite clearly mirrors the recent incident involving Mercks Vioxx, particularly now that the drug is being reconsidered for reintroduction to the market pending FDA approval.
Based upon the wholly incriminating “internal Merck e-mails and marketing materials as well as interviews with outside scientists” (Mathews et al, 2004, p. A1), the companys credibility for, according to Chief Executive Raymond Gilmartin, “putting patient safety first” (p. A1) has been tainted beyond repair, no matter how carefully or responsibly Merck might approach its products re-entry into the market. Mathews et al (2004) note that amid growing danger signs, “Merck fought a rearguard action for 4 1/2 years, clinging to a hope that somehow Vioxxs safety could be confirmed — even though its research chief had already privately acknowledged its risks” (p. A1).
ₙₜ₞‥
₞⃹⃾⁥⃽₨⃽⅌⃩₏℁Ⅲⅰⅵⅶⅻℂⅹ↣ₐↁ₾ℂ↶↿₿⃁⃃⃆⃇⃈⃉⃊⃋⃌⃍⃎↣⃒⃓⃘⃙⃘⃙⃑⃔⃕⃕⃖⃗⁄⃹⃺⃻⃼⃼⃿↱ℤ& #8456↷℣ℤ℥⅜Åℬℭ℮⅘Kℭ⅘ℹ↰⅙⅚Ⅷ⅛⅜ⅨⅩⅪ⇘ⅬⅭⅮⅯ⇘ⅫⅮ⇨ↅↆↇↈ⇘↉↊↋↌↍↎↏←↑→↓↔↕↖⇘⇽→↓↔↕≻↔↖↡⋿⌮⌀&_&_&_&
&_&_&
Why did those who knew of this serious side effect fail to blow the whistle? Or, perhaps the question should be posed in a different way: Why would someone risk physical and emotional well being to blow the whistle? Certainly, there are whistle blowers who sustain detrimental consequences by exposing those committing the wrongdoing; however, the psychological implications of not speaking up are sometimes more unrelenting than the potential for harm (Glazer, 1988, p. 322). The still-fresh economic wounds of Mercks unethical behavior, and the whistle blowing that ultimately brought the companys moneymaking drug crashing down, help to illustrate why blowing the whistle on indisputably dishonest business practices is always the right thing to do.
The notion of ethics within the workplace environment has come under significant scrutiny of late, with the general consensus reflecting how ethical decision-making has fallen by the wayside in exchange for immediate gratification that almost always detrimentally impacts untold numbers of innocent people inadvertently caught up in the unscrupulous events. For some of those who know of these unethical goings-on, the ability to remain quiet becomes both mentally and emotionally troubling, inasmuch as they fear reprisals if they blow the whistle, as well as for the consequences such immoral actions stand to reap upon untold numbers of trusting workers, stakeholders and consumers.
The only way in which whistle blowing will ever fall out of fashion is if/when ethics gain a renewed presence within the business environment. Clearly, ethics, business and society must work in tandem or there is no purpose for any of its existence; unethical practices are what harbor ill will and create a climate of contempt and distrust, which is no way to participate in global commerce, particularly when ones product has the very real capability of threatening consumers lives. Ethical fortitude, which represents “a necessary and critical ingredient in the successful enterprise” (Ruin, 1997), is not a difficult objective if one maintains a moral and conscientious outlook.
The ethical and political stance of the political and social right today is in part due to the advent of neoliberalism and its political consequences. As a result, there has been a sharp shift in how business entities and the mainstream view themselves of the world (see Sabin, 2014; See note 6 of his book, Democracy and the Global Economy, with an introduction by Sabin and Ebel, 2017), although this shift has been in part due to the widespread acceptance of the idea that politics only “helps people or institutions to deal with each other”. A recent Pew Research Center survey, conducted in August 2014 by the New York-based Public Interest Legal Network of the University of California system, shows that there are actually over half a billion Americans without a high school diploma, 40% of whom think the current level of work is “extremely or somewhat worse” than the current “normal” level according to a 2011 OECD study. Of this, a large majority (67%) consider politics/politics to be “tough”. According to the 2012 US Census Bureau, there were 1.1 million Americans without a high school diploma (see above). With respect to the overall trend of economic and social well being in the United States, there was an 85% increase in the number of Americans earning college degrees and 65% of Americans with advanced degrees (see above), which were up from 8% in 1973.
With regard to the United Kingdom, where the share of people without a high school diploma has been dropping markedly over this long time, its share of the top 300 professions has fallen by an almost 20 point (6 percentage points) since 2000 and was down to the average of 7% in 1972. That decline seems to be in part due to an increase in college graduates with a college degree, up from 16% in 1972 and 7% in 1999. This may not be necessarily due to college graduates without a college degree getting into business, but rather because the level of work employed by these large firms has actually risen in recent decades, with a slight increase in median household income from 1.7% in 1960 to 10% in 1999. Moreover, recent surveys have indicated growth in the number of people working at or following a business as well as a large increase in the number of jobs being done by people with a high school diploma.
While the growing diversity of career paths for US workers is likely attributable to the rising percentage of American students with college degrees, it is much more clear that many workers with a high school diploma actually do not fully experience the opportunities of work, especially those who have a university degree. Even with high school diplomas, they face a substantial number of challenges. First, working at a large firm can be fraught with potential conflict of interest. As explained in