This article discusses about the relationship between media and terorism in convergence era. The object was terorism news in TV One. Broadcasting of terorism through media in convergence era demanded to hold tightly of ethical principles of journalism. If not, the media would be a tool spreading terror out to society. This study was a qualitative research using descriptive method because this research aimed to get answer related to perception and opinion thereby requiring detailed quali. Data analysis was carried out using Miles and Huberman’s approach, consisting of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data validation was conducted using source triangulation to recheck the obtained data.
This case describes an ethical dilemma faced by an employee of an established business organization. Working in a business environment rife with unethical practices, Zafar came to believe that some of these practices were acceptable for the business to survive, particularly in the context of dysfunctional state institutions. Where he drew the line was when an act became detrimental to the interest of his organization. Also, he chose not to become directly involved in such practices. In his personal life, a cause close to his heart was helping the poor for which purpose, in addition to other things, he started a school for children of poor families in a low-income area with the help of a friend named Qasim. Funds were needed to run this school, which he generated from his income and through the support of his family and friends. He also convinced Qasim to secure business from his organization, ZSP, even if it required using commissions, and use the funds generated through this venture to further their charitable causes. The dilemma Zafar faced was when a company, FEP, contacted him to help it materialize a deal with ZSP in exchange for a handsome commission. Being a reputable name, FEP had all the ingredients of a valuable partner. While Zafar believed that taking a commission for a deal of this kind would not harm his organization, he could not bring himself to benefit from the financial gain personally. One way out was to utilize the funds for the poor children who attended his school. Refusing to take the commission would not have any impact on this practice since someone else in his organization would be quite willing to accept it. It would also mean the loss of a good opportunity to support an important cause. Zafar was unable to decide.
The case recounts the story of Johnny and Jugnu, the fast-food restaurant’s initial journey. The story is then supplemented by details of the marketing mix (price, product, place and promotion). All decisions have been made, except for the pricing decision. The case hinges on this important decision. The four partners seem to disagree on pricing, and the case data helps students make this decision for the protagonists.
This case describes an ethical problem faced by the owners of a reasonably successful business. It gives students an opportunity to analyze the contrasting approaches of the two owners of this business towards an ethical dilemma commonly faced by those businesses in Pakistan that have to pay heavy duties on imported goods. The case highlights the fact that morally upright individuals can be pushed into very difficult situations wherein they, despite their good intentions, at times choose not to uphold duties imposed by law and morality. The difficulty felt in remaining within the confines of law, and upholding moral principles is amplified by the cumulative effects of moral failures that become endemic to a society. The pressure created by the policies of a government deemed corrupt, inefficient and, in the final analysis, illegitimate on the one hand, and unscrupulous competitors on the other, can become, at times, important contributors to morally questionable behaviour. This brings to the fore the dilemma of an individual trying to make an honest living in a very unfavourable context. The moral conundrum may be resolved either by making the difficult choice of following the law to the hilt, or through constructing an argument that legitimizes an illegal and seemingly unethical course of action.
Continuous losses had forced Union Railways (UR) to look for possible sources of incremental revenues, and selling advertising space on UR trains and stations seemed one such lucrative option. However, despite multiple attempts, UR was unable to receive reasonable bids from the market. The team tasked to execute the auction was at a loss to understand why the market had shown little interest when everyone knew that UR assets had substantial passenger footfall and time exposure. Not only this, UR faced greater disappointment when it arranged a brand conference where top multinational brand executives participated and shared scepticism for the project. An added source of confusion was the fact that few other organisations, both in the public and private sector, were able to execute similar projects with substantial success. Realising the gravity of the situation, UR solicited the help of external consultants to evaluate the process and identify reasons and corrective measures so that advertisement space rights could be auctioned off.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.