Home
entries friends calendar user info Previous Previous Next Next
brentwennekes - Mattel - Another reckless corporation

Advertisement

[info]brentwennekes
Add to Memories
Tell a Friend
Mattel - Another reckless corporation

Reckless
Mattel’s irresponsibility is classic to the character of many corporations that exist today.  Corporations have repeatedly been reckless with the health and well-being of consumers.  They are responsible for the deaths of not only their consumers, but citizens in general. The tobacco industry alone can claim responsibility for over a million deaths.  But it doesn’t stop there.

Supreme power
The power corporations hold grows everyday.  In fact, the largest 200 companies had sales that added up to more than a quarter of the world’s economic activity. Those firm’s total sales were larger than the combined economies of the world’s smallest 182 countries.  That kind of clout, and well-funded conservative think tanks and lobby groups are allowing corporations to have a massive influence on both public opinion and government policy.

Getting away with murder
The worst part is – corporations can cause an absurd number of deaths and get away with it – even after they are caught.  Here are a few examples:

Altria – Parent company of Philip Morris, tobacco giant, deliberately deceived the public for decades both directly and through front groups, about the deadly consequences of smoking.
Merck – Kept Vioxx on the market despite having evidence that the hugely profitable arthritis drug posed major heart attack risks.
ExxonMobil – Heavily funded fake grassroots organization and dubious experts to stall action on climate change, possibly jeopardizing all of humanity.
Dow – Refuses to compensate the families of the 20,000 killed and 100,000 injured by toxic gases leaked from an Indian chemical factory by Union Carbide, a wholly owned Dow subsidiary.
Monsanto – Found guilty by the courts of “conduct so outrageous in character and extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency” for polluting an Alabama town with toxic PCBs.

Mattel
I would not lump Mattel together with these corporate criminals, but who is to say that they shouldn’t be?  How do we know that they weren’t aware of the amount of lead in the paint on their product?  Does that even matter?  The bottom line is that their negligence could severely affect the lives of thousands of children and their families.

Change
Just like the issue of the environment, the issue of corporate responsibility is and will continue to see positive change.  Families, more and more, will discuss at the dinner table the negative impacts that many corporations have, and as a result, will not support them either through buying shares or purchasing their products.  However, something more needs to be done.  As is the case with the Mercks, Dows and the Exxonmobiles.  They still exist!  If any single citizen were responsible for a fraction of what these corporations have done, they would get the death sentence or life in prison (where they would likely be killed). 
Since these corporations have so much power – they can cover things up and its business as usual.  Laws need to be changed to ensure corporate leaders are held accountable.  Like the climate change issue, it won’t be an easy battle to win.

 

http://www.atkinsonfoundation.ca/publications/PDFCOR.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co.#Vioxx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxonmobil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Chemical_Company#Union_Carbide_Bhopal_disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporations

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_5460.aspx

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/FL/00068.html

 

 

Comments
From: [info]chriswmorrison Date: November 22nd, 2007 02:28 am (UTC) (Link)

Question

Shouldn't the effects of this crisis on Mattel be punishment enough for the CEO? The company has a responsibility to it's shareholders and as such were merely looking for the best return on investment. Wouldn't new laws simply help drive up costs for Canadian consumers and end up punishing us instead?
From: [info]brentwennekes Date: November 26th, 2007 12:41 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Question

Punishment
As a punishment - the effects of this crisis on Mattel’s CEO are a start, but are not punishment enough. This is not how society works. Corporations are looked at as a single identity, and thus should be treated and punished like a regular citizen. If you or I were to sell even a thousand products that endangered the health and well-being of children - our businesses, our relationships, and our lives would be crippled. Unless, of course, we came out and admitted to our mistakes, in a timely manner and without placing blame on others, only then could we salvage our reputation and the respect of those around us.

A responsibility to its shareholders
It’s a fact; the company has a responsibility to its shareholders. Again, I believe if we continue to see positive change in consumer’s support for reckless company’s, then companies will be forced into social responsibility. That is, included in a company’s commitment to its shareholders, will be that it behaves in a socially responsible manner. However, this trend will be slow to evolve and there has to be a limit to the extent of damage a corporation can cause while continuing to be run by the same greedy and irresponsible killers.

The cost of new laws
In the short-term, yes - more strict regulations would very likely drive up costs for consumers. However, in the long-term, these regulations could very likely prevent catastrophic illness and deaths, and possibly save all of humanity (see Exxonmobile). The cost should be looked at as an investment in society’s future – short-term pain for long-term gain.
2 comments or Leave a comment
profile
Name: brentwennekes
calendar
Back October 2007
123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031
page summary
tags

    Advertisement

    Customize