Is it ethical for government officials to promote commercial products?
There are many ethical dilemmas in the news today. Many of these stories tend to surround the actions of President Donald Trump’s administration. When reading through these news stories it is easy to understand why using a sound ethical principle is vital to being able to morally, and in this case, legally justify your decisions. I will be using the Potter Box, which is an ethical system, throughout this blog post to analyze the recent comments of Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway concerning Ivanka Trump’s clothing line recent drop from Nordstrom.
The ethical dilemma in this situation is Conway using her influential-government position to promote Ivanka Trump’s clothing line after Nordstrom, a luxury department store, dropped it because of the line’s low number in sales. According to The Guardian, government employees are not allowed to utilize their official positions to endorse commercial products. However, even more relevant to this situation, according to Politico Magazine, is the Office of Government Ethics’ restriction on government officials to use their influence for the private gain of friends or relatives, which is exactly what Conway did.
According to The Guardian, in an interview Conway stated: “It’s a wonderful line. I own some of it. I’m going to give a free commercial here. Go buy it today, everybody. You can find it online.”
Considering the background of the Trump administration, it seems peculiar that his top advisor would not support the competitive and tough nature of business. Even the president himself tweeted about the subject by calling out Nordstrom for dropping his daughter’s line.
In this situation, Conway morally values freedom and independence to openly express her support for Ivanka’s clothing line. Conway also values justice and fairness in this situation because she believed that Nordstrom dropped Ivanka’s clothing line to make a political statement, which she believes is unfair. However, as stated earlier, this freedom is legally restricted because of her position within the government, which I would hope she was informed upon before taking the position. The value of Nordstrom holds in deciding to drop Ivanka’s clothing line is strictly their commitment to the success of their business, which is a moral value.
However, whether or not it is a political statement, I believe that Nordstrom has the rightful decision-making power, as a company, to choose what clothing lines they will sell within their stores. This freedom is one that is crucial to allow a company to thrive in a free-market government, which is what America claims to have. Trump’s family should understand that concept more than most people.
The next step in the potter box is to determine the ethical principles used by either side to attempt to justify their decision. I believe that Conway could use Islam’s Divine Command to morally-justify her decision to make her comments regarding the issue. Islam’s Divine Command holds justice to be the highest principle, which is also a value that Conway strongly held in this decision. I believe that Nordstrom can morally justify their decision using Kant’s Categorical Imperative. Nordstrom decided to drop Ivanka’s clothing line acting on the maxim that if a line is not contributing to the financial success of the company, the company has the power to drop the clothing line for the sake of the company itself.
If I were to propose a solution to this problem, I would say that clearly Conway must be better educated in the ethical and legal standards she is required to hold within her position. In order to address the issue and provide closure, I would propose that the White House write a news release apologizing for Conway’s actions. Or even better, host a press conference featuring Conway publicly apologizing for her actions. To prevent this problem from repeating itself, I would recommend the entire administration become more knowledgeable on the ethical requirements of their positions as government employees. According to White House press secretary, Conway is now receiving counseling to address her actions. However, I think that the administration should be more transparent with their repercussions for Conway’s behavior in order to maintain the public’s respect for her position and the administration as a whole.
Concerning Nordstrom’s role in this issue, I believe when a product is negatively impacting the financial success of a company, the company has the right to drop the product. Therefore, it was Conway who made a poor ethical decision. She made an expressive decision instead of using an ethical system and principle, and will now experience negative attention because of it.
