When one thinks of Corporate Social Responsibility, all they see is philanthropic companies and the government taking part in taking care of employees and society amongst other favorable welfare deeds. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is the virtue whereby corporations extend funds or resources for the betterment of the general society around them instead of exclusively making profit and focusing on the shareholders. Many companies often come out in public to announce their efforts in CSR via the media. Although corporations and the government might argue that their CSR efforts are bearing fruit, their intention is majorly to disguise under the philanthropy with the aim of attracting publicity.
Corporate Social Responsibility can take the form of customer, employee, government, suppliers and environmental welfare (Tai " Chuang, 2014). A number of critics argue that CSR is not the sole responsibility of companies. Milton Friedman, a philosopher, once argued that the primary existence of businesses is to make profits with the aim of maximizing shareholder value (Tai " Chuang, 2014). According to him, a taking part in societal welfare meant deviating from the core purpose of the mission of profit-making. The icon purported that as long as a company was obeying the rule of law, there was nothing wrong in ignoring CSR. Archie Caroll, another award winner in Economics and business, heads the school of thought that entities should imply ethical and discretionary conduct via CSR (Tai " Chuang, 2014).
CSR by Corporations: A Total Pretence
In CSR towards customers, companies often paint the picture of themselves being fair in pricing, quality and towards the health of their consumers (Carroll, 2015). McDonald’s for instance, reports in every financial statement to the public that it is socially responsible ("Forbes Welcome", 2018). As early as in 2010, McDonald’s had already begun facing legal suits with regards to its unhealthy food practices (“Healthy” Fast Food Ads Often Misleading, Study Finds", 2018). For instance, a consumer interest group sued the entity for enhancing childhood obesity. The consumer group said that the company was enticing its customers to opt for unhealthy choices. McDonalds on the other hand, defended itself claiming that consumers had a variety of choice when it comes to choosing of healthy foods. The entity defended itself via Forbes claiming that it also practiced healthy and truthful marketing to children. Years later, it is still evident that the picture being painted by McDonald’s is false. The company is interested in publicizing itself under the disguise of CSR.
Research found that children are confused when they watch advertisements by fast food organizations (“Healthy” Fast Food Ads Often Misleading, Study Finds", 2018). For instance, McDonald’s once advertised fresh apples under the name ‘Fresh Apple Fries’. It was found out that children faced confusion while distinguishing fresh food from fast food. The scenario depicts an entity that falsely pretends to engage in CSR at face value in the media when in real sense it is exploiting customers. Through packaging, advertising and food presentation, children consume junk food because it becomes difficult to differentiate them from healthy foods. An instillation of such an idea at a tender age leads to addiction to such consumption and obesity habit amongst adults. Obesity is a menace in the US and is one of the causal factors of lifestyle diseases such as diabetes (Sahooet al, 2015). One of the methods of adept CSR is truthful advertising and McDonald’s is certainly not practicing it.
The Tobacco industry is another entity that uses the media to spread fake news. Normally, the sector wants the consumers to have a negative picture of any contradicting idea on cigarettes. Forbes magazine published that many interested stakeholders are using the industry to their own benefit ("Forbes Welcome", 2018). The magazine posited that ‘the consumer was the real victim’ in that case, citing the fact that cigarettes became less affordable and scarce. The industry put itself at a position of being the ‘good’ person who is being injured. Forbes purported that politicians received credit after going against the bad guys, backed up by activists who were against the tobacco sector ("Forbes Welcome", 2018)
In real sense, the tobacco industry has been the culprit for causing health diseases for years, disguising under CSR (Gaurangkumar, 2015). The Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement was a contract signed in the late 1990s for the purpose of promoting ‘healthy smoking’. Four major companies of tobacco consented to an agreement that would supposedly make them avoid harming users. The giant manufacturers agreed to shun bad market practices and compensate people who had been affected by tobacco smoking. The vice had been related to health cancer amongst other diseases. Additionally, the entities nodded to funding anti-smoking lobbyist groups. Tobacco companies now claim they have introduced healthy smoking and are on the frontline in social responsibility.
Tobacco business moguls are cleverly spreading fake news to tarnish the name of those who are really advocating for CSR. To begin with, the companies cannot claim to mind the welfare of the smoker when they are still selling tobacco, an aspect which would have been factual only if they closed shop. On the one hand, the firms are in pretence funding anti-tobacco campaigns. On the other hand, they are selling harmful products to the society whose health they are claiming to protect. The ordeal presents the case of a company creating a false picture in the minds of the general public.
The Government: Painting a False Image
Another way in which CSR can be practiced is through public welfare. The public is often led to believe that government is impeccable in social CSR as seen through its adept remuneration and work policies. The factor has misled many citizens to believe that the system is in pursuit of greener pastures for them, ignorant of the premise that politicians are using the media as a political tool to portray false images. In the wake of the new republican tax law, the minimum wage rate was increased ("US jobs and wages rise in January", 2018). BBC News praised the government as having taken care of its citizens and painted the picture of an America whose employment rate was escalating and unemployment dwindling. According to the media channel, “average hourly rate for the private sector would rise by 2.9 percent and unemployment would be held at 4.1 percent” ("US jobs and wages rise in January", 2018). The media posited that without higher wages, economic stagnation would e a reality.
The Truth
At the same moment, big companies, the likes of Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, responded by increasing the minimum wage (Murray, 2018). Wal-Mart even doubled up by paying its employees bonuses. The public saw a win-win situation for themselves and the government which had just boosted the economic status. However, on the same day that Wal-Mart announced wage increments, it also closed down more than 53 stores and converted them to fulfillment centers (Murray, 2018). The move meant that many employees would lose their jobs, an adverse occurrence in the name of CSR. On the one hand, many people were accorded with income boosts. On the other hand were a set of employees who had realized that a false picture had been painted; the group who were about to lose their jobs.
Conclusion
Corporate Social Responsibility has been used by the government and corporations to preach dummy welfare when in real sense the philanthropic stance is being misused to attract publicity. Both the government and corporate domain uses the media to paint a false icture of societal welfare in the public eye. Tobacco companies and fast food chains take part in false advertisements and customer care. The government also uses the media to create the image of positive contribution towards the public. However, CSR as a tool has been used to deceive when in real sense the government and corporate world creates a win-lose situation where the public suffer in the end.
References
“Healthy” Fast Food Ads Often Misleading, Study Finds. (2018). Voices Action Center. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://www.voicesactioncenter.org/inside-track-may-8-e
Carroll, A. B. (2015). Corporate social responsibility: The centerpiece of competing and complementary frameworks. Organizational Dynamics, 44(2).
Forbes Welcome. (2018). Forbes.com. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/csr/2010/06/25/in-defense-of-the-happy-meal/#5b769f195051
Forbes Welcome. (2018). Forbes.com. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/fredsmith/2016/05/03/you-might-just-be-the-next-tobacco/#23becc5571f8
Gaurangkumar, B. C. (2015). Cost benefit analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Advances in Management, 8(5).
Murray, K. (2018). Issue: Wage Stagnation Wage Stagnation.
Sahoo, K., Sahoo, B., Choudhury, A. K., Sofi, N. Y., Kumar, R., " Bhadoria, A. S. (2015). Childhood obesity: causes and consequences. Journal of family medicine and primary care, 4(2).
Tai, F. M., " Chuang, S. H. (2014). Corporate social responsibility. Ibusiness, 6(03), 117.
US jobs and wages rise in January. (2018). BBC News. Retrieved 7 March 2018, from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-42921615
