1) PayPal is a well-known online payment processor (it’s like a "virtual" credit card for
internet payments). Recently, PayPal attempted to create a policy which would deny the
use of its service to online merchants selling what could be deemed to be obscene written
content. In other words, PayPal would refuse to allow its service to be used to purchase
from any business that sells books/material with obscene content.
In what way is PayPal attempting to be socially responsible - make reference to the
general definition of CSR in your response (it is not necessary to make reference to the
CSR pyramid). Provide 4 arguments FOR and 4 arguments AGAINST PayPal's efforts to
be socially responsible in this context. These arguments should be those identified in our
text and clearly explained by you. And as always, ensure you APPLY, these arguments to
this case.
Answer:
FOR CSR – IE FOR PAYPAL’S POLICY TO DENY OBSCENE CONTENT:
1.Business should conform to societal expectations
As a socially responsible corporation it is imperative that the products that are being used
by a company not be obtained through unethical means. IE PAYPAL SHOULD NOT
CONDONE AND HELP organizations who want to profit from pornography. They
cannot simply turn a blind eye and make money from assisting these unethical
transactions. I.e. if they do that they will LOSE LEGITIMACY IN OUR EYES AND
WILL BE SHUNNED BY SOCIETY.
2. CSR is practical strategy
CSR is a practical strategy used to avoid public criticism and scrutiny. When the public
discovers that PayPal assists the dissemination of child porn or other obscene material
there will be back lash & it could prove to be very costly. By being socially responsible
PayPal would avoid this unwanted attention. WHAT BACKLASH? WHAT KIND OF
UNWANTED ATTENTION? FROM WHOM? GOVERNMENT PENALTY? ethics
WATCHDOGS/child porn opponents…
3. PayPal Must acknowledge network of stakeholders
If PayPal turn a blind eye to where facilitating obscene purchases then they deny
existence of other stakeholders. Who is harmed by these transactions? Possibly children
and other victims of pornography. Also if purchasers are negatively influence by these
purchases. NAMING OTHER Stakeholders: SOCIETY IN GENERAL WHO LOOKS
CRITICALLY AT WHAT THEY ARE DOING. AND PERHAPS HUMAN RIGHTS
ACTIVISTS/ANTI-PORN GROUPS WHO ARE ALSO STAKEHLDERS WHO ARE
CRITICAL OF THIS BEHAVIOR.
4. Long term benefits for PayPal
By making the choice to not be a part of obscene transaction they gain society’s respect.
DMEONSTRATING THIS ETHICAL REPUTATION WILL ESTABLISH
GOODWILL AND ENSURE THAT LONGTERM PEOPLE WANT TO INVEST IN
THIS COMPANY – THAT IS THE LONG TERM BENEFITS TO THESE
BUSINESSES!
Test Bank for Karakowsky and Guriel, The Context of Business, 1e
Copyright © 2015 Pearson Canada Inc. 1
, Case Against CSR – i.e. against PAYPAL’S POLICY TO DENY OBSCENE
CONTENT:
1) Business is business
PayPal has a responsibility to make profits. They cannot be expected to
shoulder both an economic and social responsibility. They are in conflict with
themselves if they try to fulfill both. They cannot be worried about who uses
PayPal for their sales transactions – regardless of the bad nature of the seller.
IE ACCORDING TO THIS ARGUM,ENT THEY SIMPLY DON’T NEED
TO BE CONCERNED WITH obscene material purchases- IT IS NOT THEIR
BUSINESS – THEY SIMPLY Look to make money.
2) Business plays by its own set of rules
PayPal is playing by the set of rules set out by their business environment.
They are playing to win so to speak. They have one objective – to have all
kinds of business use PayPal for their transactions. In personal contexts we
don’t believe in supporting harmful or obscene things but in business they
don’t have to make this moral judgment.
3) Business does not dictate morality
PayPal is n the business of online transactions not morality. This is NOT their
area of expertise. To ask a corporation to take on the task of social policy is
irresponsible. They are not experts on social policy nor should they be as this
is the role of the government. PayPal cannot act as a censor of some
businesses – they have no right to judge morality!
4) Organizations cannot be held accountable
Organizations cannot be held accountable for the actions of their corporate
leaders and constituents. It is not an organization that makes a decision to
participate in unethical activity therefore an organization should not be held
accountable. We cannot tell PayPal who to do business with and who to avoid
since we cannot force them to do something that is not covered by law.
2) How is CSR an issue here?
Answer:
Social responsibility refers to those obligations or responsibilities that corporation has to
go beyond:
1. the production of goods/service for profit
2. the requirements of competition, legal regulations, or customThese companies
made a profit and obeyed the law however they did not go beyond to ensure that
they were being ethically responsible.
Test Bank for Karakowsky and Guriel, The Context of Business, 1e
Copyright © 2015 Pearson Canada Inc. 2
internet payments). Recently, PayPal attempted to create a policy which would deny the
use of its service to online merchants selling what could be deemed to be obscene written
content. In other words, PayPal would refuse to allow its service to be used to purchase
from any business that sells books/material with obscene content.
In what way is PayPal attempting to be socially responsible - make reference to the
general definition of CSR in your response (it is not necessary to make reference to the
CSR pyramid). Provide 4 arguments FOR and 4 arguments AGAINST PayPal's efforts to
be socially responsible in this context. These arguments should be those identified in our
text and clearly explained by you. And as always, ensure you APPLY, these arguments to
this case.
Answer:
FOR CSR – IE FOR PAYPAL’S POLICY TO DENY OBSCENE CONTENT:
1.Business should conform to societal expectations
As a socially responsible corporation it is imperative that the products that are being used
by a company not be obtained through unethical means. IE PAYPAL SHOULD NOT
CONDONE AND HELP organizations who want to profit from pornography. They
cannot simply turn a blind eye and make money from assisting these unethical
transactions. I.e. if they do that they will LOSE LEGITIMACY IN OUR EYES AND
WILL BE SHUNNED BY SOCIETY.
2. CSR is practical strategy
CSR is a practical strategy used to avoid public criticism and scrutiny. When the public
discovers that PayPal assists the dissemination of child porn or other obscene material
there will be back lash & it could prove to be very costly. By being socially responsible
PayPal would avoid this unwanted attention. WHAT BACKLASH? WHAT KIND OF
UNWANTED ATTENTION? FROM WHOM? GOVERNMENT PENALTY? ethics
WATCHDOGS/child porn opponents…
3. PayPal Must acknowledge network of stakeholders
If PayPal turn a blind eye to where facilitating obscene purchases then they deny
existence of other stakeholders. Who is harmed by these transactions? Possibly children
and other victims of pornography. Also if purchasers are negatively influence by these
purchases. NAMING OTHER Stakeholders: SOCIETY IN GENERAL WHO LOOKS
CRITICALLY AT WHAT THEY ARE DOING. AND PERHAPS HUMAN RIGHTS
ACTIVISTS/ANTI-PORN GROUPS WHO ARE ALSO STAKEHLDERS WHO ARE
CRITICAL OF THIS BEHAVIOR.
4. Long term benefits for PayPal
By making the choice to not be a part of obscene transaction they gain society’s respect.
DMEONSTRATING THIS ETHICAL REPUTATION WILL ESTABLISH
GOODWILL AND ENSURE THAT LONGTERM PEOPLE WANT TO INVEST IN
THIS COMPANY – THAT IS THE LONG TERM BENEFITS TO THESE
BUSINESSES!
Test Bank for Karakowsky and Guriel, The Context of Business, 1e
Copyright © 2015 Pearson Canada Inc. 1
, Case Against CSR – i.e. against PAYPAL’S POLICY TO DENY OBSCENE
CONTENT:
1) Business is business
PayPal has a responsibility to make profits. They cannot be expected to
shoulder both an economic and social responsibility. They are in conflict with
themselves if they try to fulfill both. They cannot be worried about who uses
PayPal for their sales transactions – regardless of the bad nature of the seller.
IE ACCORDING TO THIS ARGUM,ENT THEY SIMPLY DON’T NEED
TO BE CONCERNED WITH obscene material purchases- IT IS NOT THEIR
BUSINESS – THEY SIMPLY Look to make money.
2) Business plays by its own set of rules
PayPal is playing by the set of rules set out by their business environment.
They are playing to win so to speak. They have one objective – to have all
kinds of business use PayPal for their transactions. In personal contexts we
don’t believe in supporting harmful or obscene things but in business they
don’t have to make this moral judgment.
3) Business does not dictate morality
PayPal is n the business of online transactions not morality. This is NOT their
area of expertise. To ask a corporation to take on the task of social policy is
irresponsible. They are not experts on social policy nor should they be as this
is the role of the government. PayPal cannot act as a censor of some
businesses – they have no right to judge morality!
4) Organizations cannot be held accountable
Organizations cannot be held accountable for the actions of their corporate
leaders and constituents. It is not an organization that makes a decision to
participate in unethical activity therefore an organization should not be held
accountable. We cannot tell PayPal who to do business with and who to avoid
since we cannot force them to do something that is not covered by law.
2) How is CSR an issue here?
Answer:
Social responsibility refers to those obligations or responsibilities that corporation has to
go beyond:
1. the production of goods/service for profit
2. the requirements of competition, legal regulations, or customThese companies
made a profit and obeyed the law however they did not go beyond to ensure that
they were being ethically responsible.
Test Bank for Karakowsky and Guriel, The Context of Business, 1e
Copyright © 2015 Pearson Canada Inc. 2
