Money vs. Humans: Your Personal Ethical System Is How You Decide

As an adjunct professor, I taught more than 30 classes at three different colleges and universities over 10 years. For the most part, I taught upperclassmen within the communications major and focused primarily on strategic communications. However, one semester I was challenged to teach a business ethics course and tailor the content toward the efficacy and ethical intentions of strategic communications and messaging from businesses and corporations. 

What was unknown to me at the time, was that I had incredibly strong moral values when it came to ethical marketing. I truly uncovered this realization when I opened my business, a fitness studio, and drew a hard line in regard to the images and messages I choose to create and use to market our business. 

For us, showing six-pack abs and a perfectly rounded backside to make people feel as though they were “not enough” and needed to have these body parts to be happy wasn’t happening. Inserting messages that consciously or subconsciously fed into the insecurities of the vulnerable would never be in our marketing plan. It didn’t matter who was going to use that strategy or how hard our competitors rode the weight loss wave - it was something that I refused to be a part of our narrative. Instead, I wanted to focus on strength, confidence, and community.

I knew that our focus to help individuals, communities, and families become healthier and happier and letting us join them on that journey was not going to start by making people feel like they were not enough or that they needed to adhere to the unrealistic body ideals the society has created. I knew I was going to fuel a fitness movement that rested on true life-transforming concepts, such as confidence, that would transcend and positively influence all aspects of an individual’s life. And those high aspirations could not be achieved through peach-emoji filled retouched booty photos or endless selfies of perfectly toned and taught bodies caught at the right angle, with the right lighting, and topped off with puckered duck lips.

But honestly, while that is a worthwhile tangent to support my views, it is not the exact point I am trying to make right now. The point is, that when I taught ethics, I had to educate myself about ethical value systems and their origins. I read lots of books and articles and learned about philosophers who based their decisions and actions on an ethical system that aligned with their morales. They discussed their reasoning and deep-rooted beliefs. They explained the importance of creating a solid foundation of ethical understanding that if nonexistent, important decision-making without a pause and reflection would be influenced by fleeting factors and could easily conflict with what was at the core.

When I taught the business ethics course, one of the assignments I asked my students to complete evaluated the essence of the advertising messaging produced and endorsed by a variety of companies and nonprofits - Nike, Monstasano, Charity Water, etc. Together, we reverse-engineered the topical messages to extract and list a series of values we found in their digital and print media. The hypothesis was that this “list” would likely mirror the ideals found within the company’s mission and vision statements.

Unfortunately, more often than not, the campaign messages and vision and missions did not align. The contradictory information was either through subtle inferences or complete omission.

And it was then, after discussing the stark contrast and perplexing discrepancies that I and the class truly realized the influence of political organizations and loaded agendas had on 99.9 percent of the marketing messages fed to us through traditional and digital media. 

At that moment, I vowed to always - 100 percent of the time - stay true to my values and never use my marketing or copywriting as a tool to psychologically prey on other humans and convince them to do something because they felt guilty, insecure, or any sort of negative emotion. I promised myself to be true, to be empowering, and to work toward helping every individual feel confident in their own skin and realize that they have a place in the world and that they matter.

Fast forward to today. April 14, 2020, when one of the most controversial topics isn’t what someone said on a talk show or what someone wore to an award show. Instead, it is one of the most morally divisive questions of our generation that when answered, will lead to incredible outcomes. 

The question is, “When should we reopen the economy and allow businesses to resume operations and how long should we continue mitigation efforts to save the lives of thousands?”

While maybe not the most profound question in the history of deep thinking, it is an urgent and timely question weighing heavily on the minds of so many while the decision will be in the power of so few. Ultimately, it is a two-part question that challenges the value of money and the American economy against the value of human life and struggles - it’s money vs. people. 

Of course, this isn’t a new conundrum - it is debated over and over again in various scenarios. But now, money versus humans is placed in an entirely new context and incredibly powerful situation with so much at stake. The decision will ultimately write a huge chunk of our American history and have a ripple effect for years the decades that follow.

Now, while the aforementioned question is stripped down and phrased in a way to get to the simplest form and true essence of the controversy, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that I understand that there are infinite positive and negative effects and consequences that will result from any decision. There are also provisions that will impact the severity of the consequences and therefore it isn’t as simple as going “this way” or “that way.”

However, what I learned from philosophers and the practice of comparing ethical value systems, is that to make a sound decision - to have a solid stance and opinion - you do have to know what you value most. You must boil the bigger question down to the absolute basics and then start layering in the scenarios to justify that the outcome will also align with your moral compass.

So what all that means is that the ultimate question we are grappling with right now and what we must decide to move forward is - which do you value more - the economy or human lives? 

-----------

While the decision that will be made now and in the near future may not be one with which you agree, I challenge you to consider the following…

• Do you understand the basis of the decision made and thought process of those who made the choice? 
• Will you seek to understand the viewpoints of others who may agree or are facing a variety of fears, challenges, and struggles?
• Can you find the positive in the final decision even if you aren’t sure it was the best course of action?