Case Study #3 - Curro schools’ racially insensitive marketing campaign

Question

Curro recently came under scrutiny over the images posted on its social media pages depicting the Curro primary school pupils' career day event. The images showed a black child posing as a cashier, while white children posed as professionals or buyers. The school however claims that they received the consent of the parents before the images were used. Was the Curro marketing team ethical in their creation of this campaign?
Choose two suitable metha-ethical theories apply them to the case study and make evaluation as whether the conduct was ethical according to each of the two theories: a. Utilitarianism
B. Ross pluralistic theory of value
C. Kant's Categorical Imperative
D. Aristotle golden mean

Answer 1

To evaluate the marketing campaign by Curro schools using two meta-ethical theories, we can apply Utilitarianism (option A) and Kant's Categorical Imperative (option C) to assess whether the conduct was ethical.

A. Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that suggests that the best action is the one that maximizes utility, defined as that which produces the greatest well-being of the greatest number of people.

Evaluation:

1. Assessment of Outcomes: The marketing campaign in question produced a significant backlash and controversy, particularly in terms of its racially insensitive implications. This indicates that it caused harm and distress to many individuals, particularly those in marginalized communities.
2. Broader Impact: The negative perception of the school can lead to a downturn in enrollment and community trust, ultimately affecting a large number of stakeholders (students, parents, teachers, and the community at large).
3. Overall Happiness: The campaign likely did not maximize happiness or welfare but rather contributed to divisiveness and a feeling of exclusion among communities.

Conclusion: From a utilitarian perspective, the creation of the campaign was unethical as it did not promote the greatest good for the greatest number and led to negative consequences for a large segment of the community.

C. Kant's Categorical Imperative

Kant's Categorical Imperative posits that one must act according to that maxim which one would wish to become a universal law. This theory emphasizes duty and the inherent dignity of individuals, requiring that people are treated as ends in themselves rather than means to an end.

Evaluation:

1. Respect for Individuals: By positioning the black child in a less prestigious role (cashier) while white children took on more valued roles, the campaign arguably treats individuals based on race rather than their inherent dignity. This approach violates the principle of treating everyone with equal respect and value.
2. Universalizability: If the principles behind the marketing campaign were to be universalized (i.e., that it is acceptable to depict individuals in roles based on race), it would create a society that legitimizes discrimination and reinforces negative stereotypes, which is not acceptable.
3. Informed Consent: Even if the school claims to have obtained parental consent, this does not negate the ethical considerations of how the imagery perpetuates racial stereotypes and the potential harm that these portrayals can cause.

Conclusion: Under Kant's Categorical Imperative, the actions of the Curro marketing team were unethical as they failed to uphold the dignity of all individuals and relied on a discriminatory framework that cannot be universally accepted.

Final Evaluation

In conclusion, applying both Utilitarianism and Kant's Categorical Imperative concludes that the conduct of the Curro marketing team was unethical. The campaign not only failed to promote the greatest good but also violated fundamental ethical principles of respect and dignity for all individuals, further perpetuating harmful stereotypes.