To evaluate the ethical conduct of Curro's marketing team in their portrayal of school pupils in the career day event, we can apply two meta-ethical theories: Aristotle's Golden Mean and Utilitarianism as formulated by John Stuart Mill.
1. Aristotle's Golden Mean
Aristotle's Golden Mean emphasizes the importance of moderation and balance in ethical behavior. According to this theory, virtue lies between extremes, and one should strive for a balanced approach in their actions. In the context of Curro’s social media campaign, we must consider whether the representation of the students reflects a balanced and fair portrayal of all individuals involved.
In this case, the images depicted a black child posing as a cashier while white children portrayed more aspirational or professional roles. This representation can be seen as lacking balance and can reinforce harmful stereotypes, suggesting that certain jobs are more suitable for specific racial groups. The ideal standard of virtue, according to Aristotle, would be to avoid both excess and deficiency—in this instance, the excess being a reinforcing of stereotypes and the deficiency being a lack of opportunity for all children to be represented as diverse professionals.
From the perspective of Aristotle's Golden Mean, the Curro marketing team's conduct appears unethical, as their campaign does not promote a balanced and virtuous representation of all students. Instead, it may perpetuate inequality and further entrench societal biases regarding race and professional roles.
2. Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill)
Utilitarianism advocates for actions that maximize overall happiness and minimize suffering. According to Mill, the ethicality of an action is determined by its consequences, and the best actions are those that promote the greatest good for the greatest number. In evaluating the Curro marketing campaign, we must consider the possible consequences of their imagery on the student body, parents, and the wider community.
While the marketing team may argue that the images were created with parental consent and aimed to celebrate career aspirations, the negative reactions and scrutiny that followed suggest significant societal discontent with the portrayal of race and professional roles. The backlash can lead to feelings of hurt, marginalization, and exclusion among the very students they intended to represent positively. When the broader implications of reinforcing stereotypes are weighed against the intended positive message of the campaign, it becomes evident that the action fails to achieve the greatest happiness.
From a utilitarian standpoint, the Curro marketing team’s actions can be deemed unethical because the negative consequences—such as the reinforcement of racial stereotypes and the distress caused to students and communities—outweigh any potential positive outcomes. The campaign does not serve the greater good and detracts from societal progress towards equality.
Conclusion
Applying both Aristotelian ethics and Utilitarianism to the case study of Curro's marketing campaign reveals that the actions of the marketing team were unethical. The lack of balanced and equitable representation violates the ethical principle of moderation, and the negative societal implications suggest that the actions did not maximize happiness, but rather contributed to a sense of inequality and exclusion. Ultimately, the assessment through these two ethical lenses highlights significant shortcomings in the campaign's execution.