Suppose You Were An Executive At A Major Tobacco Manufacturer ...?

Question

I just read this quote from the World Health Organization (WHO): "Tobacco is a defective product. It kills half of its customers."

Suppose you are a Senior Vice President at a major tobacco manufacturer. You earn a seven-figure salary, your stock options are worth $20 million, and your family has everything it could want.

Would WHO reports like this bother you? Specifically, would knowing the effect your company's product had on your customers bother you or not? Please explain.

Answer 1

If I have lasted so long in the industry to be a Senior VP and making all that money - it's obvious I have no conscience nor a soul.

I personally could not work for a company at any level that was producing a product that kills.

Answer 2

Well, no. I mean I already took this hypothetical job knowing I'm going to be an executive of a tobacco manufacturer. Granted, tobacco definitely gives people cancer and kills massive numbers of people. But I knew that when I came aboard. If I'm a 12 year old offered such a position, then I wouldn't understand all the implications.

But did you know that there is little scientific evidence backing things such as second hand smoking causing cancer. I've read the actual studies myself, and they've definitely fudged with the data. I would definitely not take whatever the WHO said at face value. Most people have an agenda, even people who claim to want to help you.

Personally, I would not work for a tobacco manufacturer, but if someone already took that position they should know full and well what they're getting into.

It should be the people's choice whether they choose to smoke or not, and it should not be up to government to tell me what I can and cannot do (if the government is ok to tell me not to smoke, when does government stop -- why not tell me video games are unproductive, so I have to stop). That said, I think the government certainly has a right, and maybe even a duty, to inform me of its dangers and provide me with an alternative source of information besides tobacco companies.

Answer 3

i suppose its a matter of personal morals
to be honest i suppose i would not be completely happy with what i do but not to the extent that i would change my job or lifestyle
its true that tobacco is a fatal drug however i do not force people to smoke it, they choose to do so by their own free will - choice is a god-given gift as well as a constitutional right is it not?
people should not blame the companies who produce the product, they should blame the people who want the product
- no demand, no supply
take drugs for example, drugs are illegal and millions are spent in counter narcotics operations
but that does little, if any, real good
drugs are quite easily accessible to virtually everyone
it is the same with tobacco except tobacco is legal

Answer 4

I suppose it's a moral dilemma experienced by hundreds of execs in hundreds of industries. Is that exec any worse than an investment banker who directs a tobacco company's acquisitions? A fund manager who has a tobacco company's stock in his fund? A munitions or aerospace exec whose company manufactures weapons and fighter planes? A restaurant exec whose company's food is bad for its customers? A school principal whose teachers are underqualified to deliver the very best education to kids?

Life is full of trade-offs, but sympathy for smokers in today's society where everyone is given MORE than enough information about the health effects of smoking is not high up on my list of priorities, so yes, I'd take that job and simply understand that my product is not good for those people who voluntarily choose to consume it.

Answer 5

If I were an exec., I would quit my job, knowing how much damage tobacco can/does do.
It would bother me, because how can you back a product you don't believe in, that would benefit your customers?
By the way, due to tobacco, in my family, in a nine year span, I personally lost three relatives from illnesses caused by smoking. One died from emphysema, the other two died from cancer. In fact, make that three died from cancer-one of them was my ex sister-in-law.
So, in reaity, I couldn't support working for the tobacco industry.
Besides, greed is not a good thing. Take care.

Answer 6

Yes, THIS report would bother me and, as a good executive, I'd do all I could to improve the product.

Answer 7

Of course not, as this executive my greatest duty is to the stock holders. People know that smoking is dangerous...the fact that they make bad decisions is really no fault of my own

Answer 8

I would only do something like that if I needed to to feed my family. But other than that I could never do something I was morally opposed to. Thats why I'm a porn star.

Answer 9

Only if we were targeting young people trying to get them to start. Competing for people who already smoke isn't unethical, some people are trying to slowly kill themselves. It is no more wrong than selling french fries to people.

Answer 10

absolutely not. Kinda scary to admit but I have no ethics....