> I'm not sure I agree. The corporate world a) doesn't claim the moral > high ground, and b) doesn't believe in their god-given duty to care for > others. So even if their moral responsibility is no less, their failure > to take issue on social justice matters is surely far less hypocritical.
One of the points made by a journalist was that the corporate sector employ public relations officers in far greater numbers than any newspaper employs journalists to present their company in a good moral light. Further, they attempt to intimidate any journalist who is critical of their moral behaviour with threats of legal action. This strongly suggests that an appearance of high moral ground is important to them, probably because of consumer reaction. > Additionally, I don't think it's good practice for *any* organisation to > seek to avoid blame by blaming some other organisation, and that goes > for the churches too. But that wasn't the issue on this show, which was concerned with the behaviour of the corporate sector. It was rather that the corporate sector was trying to avoid any criticism by attacking the critic, rather than defending their own behaviour. Harry's retort put the focus right back on them. Of course, it is a typical strategy for individuals whose behaviour is under scrutiny to attempt to deflect that criticism by changing the focus to someone else's behaviour. Harry's retort foiled that game. - Greg ------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
