Tag: ethics

The Moral Flaws in Corporate Ethics Codes

In the world of modern corporations, ethics codes are often presented as beacons of integrity, guiding employees toward right conduct and fostering a just workplace. Yet, upon closer scrutiny, many such codes reveal themselves to be deeply flawed, prioritizing institutional self-preservation over genuine moral principles. This is particularly evident in how they handle reporting mechanisms, employee treatment, enforcement roles, and inclusivity policies. Far from upholding true ethics rooted in human dignity and fairness, these codes can become instruments of imbalance and dehumanization, rendering them not only unethical but profoundly immoral. By examining these aspects through the lens of timeless moral values — those emphasizing justice, truth, and the inherent worth of every person — we can see why such codes fail to embody authentic goodness and instead perpetuate harm.

One of the most troubling features of these corporate ethics codes is their emphasis on anonymous reporting, which, while intended to encourage openness, often empowers complainers at the expense of fairness. Anonymity allows individuals to raise concerns without personal risk, but it creates a system where accusations can be made freely, even over trivial matters or with ulterior motives, without the accused having a chance to respond directly or challenge the claims. This imbalance undermines the core ethical principle that justice must be even-handed, protecting both the one who speaks and the one who is spoken against. Morally, it erodes trust and invites abuse, as it favors one side’s voice while silencing the other’s right to defend their reputation. In a truly moral framework, accountability should bind everyone equally; by skewing power toward hidden accusers, the code fosters division rather than harmony, making it unethical in its disregard for balanced resolution and immoral in its potential to enable falsehood and injustice.

Equally concerning is how these codes tend to safeguard the company above all else, treating employees as mere tools rather than beings of intrinsic value. They frame ethical behavior as a means to enhance business success — building trust with customers or maintaining operational excellence — while downplaying the human element. Employees are expected to comply rigorously, facing penalties for lapses, yet the code offers little assurance that the company will prioritize their well-being in return. This approach reduces people to interchangeable parts, valued only for their utility, which contradicts the ethical imperative that every individual deserves respect and care independent of their productivity. Morally, it offends the fundamental truth that humans are ends in themselves, not means to corporate ends; by elevating institutional interests over personal dignity, the code promotes a cold, utilitarian mindset that dehumanizes workers and sows resentment, proving its immorality through this inversion of priorities.

Keep reading

College Students Can Take a Class to Learn How to Steal – Yes, Really

New York City college students at a four-year university in Manhattan can now take a course titled “How to Steal,” which promises to look at “radical ethics” around theft. Yes, you read that correctly.

Students at Eugene Lang College of Liberal Arts can take the four-credit class that will cost students upwards of $10,040 to look at things like the “aesthetics of theft in a world where accumulation is sacred,” the New York Post reported.

The report noted the insanity of the course description.

It read:

This field-based seminar explores the politics, ethics, and aesthetics of theft in a world where accumulation is sacred, dispossession is routine, and the line between private property and public good is drawn in blood. 

Students will critically examine what it means to steal-from whom, for whom, and why— through site visits and fieldwork in places where capital is hoarded and value is contested: corporate storefronts, grocery chains, museums, libraries, banks, and cultural institutions.

The one part that really stood out was the part about how the course will ask the question, “Is it possible to steal back what was already stolen?”

It went on:

What does theft look like under capitalism, colonialism, and in everyday life? When is theft survival, protest, or care-and when is it violence, appropriation, or harm?

The course catalog concluded by pointing out that the class is “not a course in petty crime—it is a study in moral ambiguity, radical ethics, and imaginative justice.”

The irony of teaching this class in a blue state like New York, where criminals can shoplift less than a $1,000 worth of goods and face nothing more than a misdemeanor, is not lost. California was also a place where this craziness ruled the day, allowing people to just steal and face little consequences, before residents said enough was enough, passing Proposition 36, as RedState reported.

Keep reading

Terrifying new details of Canada’s advancing assisted suicide laws… including push to euthanize newborn BABIES

Canada‘s assisted suicide laws have continued rapidly expanding in recent years, with a group of doctors now pushing for disabled newborn babies to be euthanized.

The demand for euthanasia is so high that doctors who provide it cannot keep up, according to a new report by The Atlantic.

Assisted dying, legalized in 2016, now accounts for about one out of 20 deaths in Canada, far surpassing countries where it’s been legal for longer. 

As assisted deaths have become a major part of Canada’s health care system, the Quebec College of Physicians suggested legalizing euthanasia for infants born severely ill.

As The Atlantic noted, the practice is legal in the Netherlands – the first country to adopt it since Nazi Germany did it in 1939. 

In 2022, Louis Roy from the Quebec College of Physicians raised the notion of euthanasia for babies up to a year old ‘who are born with severe deformations, very grave and severe medical syndromes, whose life expectancy and level of suffering are such that it would make sense to ensure that they do not suffer.’

While parents already have the option of stopping treatment for babies suffering from medical conditions, the proposal would accelerate the infant’s death, sparking questions about consent. 

Keep reading

Harvard ethics professor fired for dishonesty maintains her innocence

A Harvard University professor who lost her tenure due to data fraud maintains she is innocent and said she plans to fight for her reputation in court.

Francesca Gino became the first person since the 1940s to lose tenure at Harvard University after the school investigated allegations she tampered with data. The investigation followed accusations made by a trio of behavioral scientists with the blog Data Colada.

Gino (pictured), a business ethics professor, consistently denied the allegations and is fighting back with a lawsuit against Harvard. A judge previously ruled against her lawsuit against the Data Colada authors. However, the judge ruled Gino’s breach of contract claims can continue. She filed a further response on June 23, while Harvard has filed other motions in the past week.

In an unsigned email to The College Fix, Gino’s team noted several major concerns about the integrity of Harvard’s investigation.

According to Gino’s team, Harvard’s investigation report did not include the underlying data needed to independently verify Harvard’s claims. That is, the school denied the professor a proper forensic evaluation and access to raw datasets.

The response also said the burden of proof was reversed. Harvard’s own policy requires that the university proves misconduct occurred and not place the burden on the accused, but Gino was forced to prove her innocence without the backing of resources. Harvard was also supposed to prove the misconduct was committed “recklessly,” “knowingly,” or “intentionally.”

For example, Gino was reportedly not allowed to question witnesses, including her own co-authors and research assistants. She was also unable to obtain documentation that could potentially show who accessed or edited the data, Gino’s team said.

Gino’s team also noted four of five papers under scrutiny were published more than six years before the investigation, which falls outside the statute of limitations for misconduct investigations set by both Harvard and federal standards.

“The available evidence simply did not allow a thorough audit of the relevant data sets,” the email read.

Keep reading

How NYT Magazine Threw Away Journalistic Ethics on Suicide

The New York Times Magazine recently published a cover story (6/1/25) that gave in-depth representation to the challenges faced by a chronically sick, disabled woman named Paula Ritchie, age 52. Ritchie dealt with underdiagnosed illnesses and pain, as well as challenges in supporting herself and managing her mental health.

The Times then told the story of Ritchie ending her own life out of despair over her situation. The journalist, Katie Engelhart, observed and documented her suicide, up until the last breath left her body. “I was with Ritchie until the very end,” she posted on X (6/1/25). Engelhart gave lengthy justifications for Ritchie’s choice to end her life, and described several people who supported her in that decision.

Articles like this aren’t common in the media. Suicide prevention is typically regarded as both a social good and an ethical responsibility. In the US and Canada (where the article takes place), suicidal people are involuntarily detained to prevent their deaths. It has long been illegal in Canada (and many US states) to assist or even “counsel” a person to commit suicide.

There are also ethical standards that guide media outlets in reporting on suicide, in order to minimize the risk of glamorizing or idealizing it. These guidelines are based on research showing that the media has an outsized influence when it comes to suicide. Graphic, detailed and sensationalized coverage has been shown to increase the “risk of contagion,” according to one guide. AP News specifically tries to avoid detailing the “methods used” in stories that reference suicide, based on this research.

The Times violated almost all of the published guidelines by personalizing, detailing, dramatizing, justifying and sentimentalizing Ritchie’s suicide, as well as by making it a cover story. The story featured close-up images of the method of Ritchie’s death and what appears to be her post-mortem body.

Keep reading

Regeneron to buy bankrupt 23andMe, vows ethical use of customer DNA data

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN.O), opens new tab said on Monday it will buy genomics firm 23andMe Holding for $256 million through a bankruptcy auction, and promised to prioritize the ethical use of DNA data from customers using ancestry testing and other services.

Through the deal, Tarrytown, New York-based Regeneron aims to bolster its capabilities in genomics-driven drug discovery by integrating 23andMe’s trove of more than 15 million customer DNA profiles, collected via its popular direct-to-consumer saliva-testing kits.

South San Francisco, California-based 23andMe filed for bankruptcy last month, seeking to sell its business at auction after a decline in consumer demand and a 2023 data breach that exposed sensitive genetic and personal information of millions of customers.

The second-highest bid, for $146 million, was submitted by a nonprofit research institute founded by 23andMe’s former CEO and cofounder Anne Wojcicki, according to court documents.

The transaction, expected to complete in the third quarter, puts the spotlight back on data privacy issues sparked off by the data breach. 23andMe, once a trailblazer in ancestry DNA testing, has also faced dwindling demand for its core services.

The transaction “starts to bring about a good conclusion to what otherwise could have been a difficult bankruptcy case,” said trial attorney Daniel Gielchinsky, co-founder and partner at DGIM law.

Gielchinsky said Regeneron, with its proven track record, will do a better job in the long run of protecting consumer information safeguarded by privacy laws.

Keep reading

Human ‘bodyoids’: We will soon be able to manufacture brain-less human bodies to generate replacement organs

Why do we hear about medical breakthroughs in mice, but rarely see them translate into cures for human disease? … [In] large part from a common root cause: a severe shortage of ethically sourced human bodies.

[We are forced] to rely heavily on animals in medical research, a practice that can’t replicate major aspects of human physiology and makes it necessary to inflict harm on sentient creatures. In addition, the safety and efficacy of any experimental drug must still be confirmed in clinical trials on living human bodies. These costly trials risk harm to patients, can take a decade or longer to complete, and make it through to approval less than 15% of the time.

Keep reading

Columbia Journalism Review editor fired after insisting on ethics, deadlines: report

The Columbia Journalism Review fired Sewell Chan as its executive editor after he insisted on ethics, deadlines, and showing up in the office for work, the longtime journalist alleges. A journalism expert told The College Fix that it seems Chan acted appropriately and within his bounds as the executive editor.

Chan, who recently started a new job at the University of Southern California as a senior fellow in its Annenberg communications school, alleges the school fired him after “three pointed conversations.”

Chan (pictured) is the former editor of the Texas Tribune and also worked for the Los Angeles Times and New York Times.

“One was with a fellow who is passionately devoted to the cause of the Gaza protests at Columbia and had covered the recent detention of a Palestinian graduate for an online publication he had just written about, positively, for CJR,” Chan wrote in a LinkedIn post.

“I told him there was a significant ethical problem with writing for an outlet he had just covered,” Chan wrote.

This description fits CJR Journalism Fellow Meghnad Bose, who wrote an article about the Substack page Drop Site News for Columbia Journalism Review in February.

In late March, Bose wrote an article for Drop Site about Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate and Palestinian activist, arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement on March 8. The article quotes Khalil’s claim that his arrest was a “direct consequence of exercising [his] right to free speech as [he] advocated for a free Palestine and an end to the genocide in Gaza.”

Bose did not respond to two emails sent in the past week that asked about the accuracy of Chan’s statements on what happened.

While Chan declined to comment further to The Fix, a journalism professor at DePauw University said, “it would seem [Chan] has a good point in trying to reel in the apparent conflict of interest for the one fellow.”

“This kind of management would be expected from an executive editor who values the reputation of his outlet,” Professor Jeffrey McCall told The Fix via email. McCall regularly writes about journalism ethics and the media.

“Normally, an executive editor has wide leeway in making personnel and content decisions, and it appears Chan was perhaps having his role undercut,” McCall said.

“Conflict of interest policies are essential to any media organization in that they protect both the readers and the reporters, and provide transparency for news decisions,” he said.

Keep reading

Raphael Warnock Slapped With Ethics Complaint for Living in Free $1 Million Luxury Home

When it comes to the lavish $1 million Atlanta home where Sen. Raphael Warnock has lived rent-free since 2023, the Georgia Democrat can’t expect to have his cake and eat it too, an ethics watchdog alleged in a complaint filed Monday.

Warnock’s lavish DeKalb County home came equipped with a plethora of luxury accommodations, including a 100-bottle wine fridge, a bluetooth-enabled cooking range, and remote-controlled privacy curtains. The senator hasn’t paid a penny out of his own pocket to live there because the church where he serves as a part-time pastor is footing the bill, the Washington Free Beacon reported. It’s a great deal for Warnock, but it may violate Senate ethics rules that limit how much lawmakers can accept from outside employment, the ethics watchdog Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) alleged in a complaint to the Senate Ethics Committee.

“This is a matter of plain common sense,” FACT executive director Kendra Arnold said in the complaint. “It is difficult to fathom [how] any citizen could look at this situation (a U.S. Senator being a part-time employee of an organization that happens to buy him a million-dollar house to live in for free after he was elected to Congress, and after which he sells his own house) and not think something potentially very wrong is afoot.”

In her complaint, Arnold said Warnock’s free luxury housing arrangement likely violates the Ethics in Government Act, which could carry a range of sanctions for the Georgia Democrat including public reprimand, fines, or censure. She said Senate ethics rules only allow for Warnock’s free housing deal if it’s customary for Ebenezer Baptist Church to provide free luxury homes to its part-time pastors and if it’s something the church provided to Warnock independently from his position as a senator.

Those requirements “have not been met,” Arnold said in her complaint, noting that the value of Warnock’s housing benefit appears to far exceed the part-time nature of his work with the church.

“Especially given the limited amount of time Senator Warnock has for outside employment and the $31,815.12 annual salary he receives from the church in addition to the housing, it appears clear that the housing is excessive and unreasonable for the services he is actually performing,” Arnold wrote.

Arnold’s belief that Warnock’s housing benefit is excessive is shared by Dr. Albert Paul Brinson, a former associate of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who was ordained at Ebenezer Baptist Church by the civil rights icon in 1965. Brinson said during an interview with a local activist in March that King “would have never endorsed” church funds being used to facilitate luxury living for its pastor. Brinson said Ebenezer Baptist Church’s housing allowance was designed to provide modest accommodations for its pastors.

Keep reading

Gaetz Ethics Inquiry Takes Dubious Turn

Amid the hurly-burly of presidential dropouts, attempted presidential assassinations, and novel presidential conventions, the gears of Washington grind on. 

A sideline moment of the winding last week in Wisconsin was a direct confrontation between Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and his pet aversion, the former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. 

“What night are you speaking?” Gaetz quizzed McCarthy. “Are you speaking tonight?” 

“If you took that stage, you would get booed off of it,” he added. “You would get booed off the stage.” In a game-after interview with CNN, McCarthy shot back: “[Gaetz] looks very unhinged.” 

The representative from Florida’s First District, of course, led the successful charge last autumn to defenestrate the then-speaker. Gaetz alleged a panoply of heresies—spending issues, foreign policy, etc—where McCarthy was said to be deficient in comparison to alternatives. 

Gaetz eventually backed now-Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA). 

McCarthy, as of late, has said the story is simpler. The Californian wouldn’t stop a House Ethics Committee investigation into years-old allegations against Gaetz (allegations for which he was never charged). But from the outside looking in, McCarthy’s side of the story would seem no clean tale of moral probity. 

Far from being above the fray, McCarthy in private life has initiated a “revenge tour” of sorts, attempting to primary his former foes in Congress. 

Perhaps most prominently, Charleston-area Congresswoman Nancy Mace—a former McCarthy acolyte turned ally of Gaetz et al.—survived a primary challenge in June. “I want to send him back to the rock he’s living under right now. He’s not part of America.… I hope I drive Kevin McCarthy crazy,” Mace told the Times.

Now the primary effort of the hardliners and the ethics investigation against Gaetz have apparently merged. 

Congressman David Joyce (R-OH) is a member of the House Ethics Committee, which is probing Gaetz. The American Conservative found financial disclosures that reveal Rep. Joyce’s campaign and his leadership PAC donated a combined $7,000 to Gaetz’s primary challenger, Aaron Dimmock.  

For his part, Gaetz told TAC: “It is no surprise to see Mr. Joyce, a stock-trading member of the ethics committee, funding my opponent. The ethics committee was hand picked by McCarthy and they will do his bidding in elections and in their witch hunt coming after me.” 

There is evidence here of a $2,000 transaction from Friends of Dave Joyce (his campaign committee) and then $5,000 from Defending American Values Everywhere PAC (DAVE PAC)—his leadership committee.

What comes next is unclear. 

Keep reading