Discussion 1 and 2 Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Discussion 1 and 2 - Coursework Example Libel basically encompasses the negative exposure of ones’ character to the public through the print media or general publishing. In most cases libel may lead to a person being perceived negatively, hated and exposed to shameful facets of daily life. For instance: A libel may include a journalist providing the public with published information that exposes a politician of corruption acts or even murder and drug businesses; this includes published internet sources (eMedia Law Insider n.d.). . In regards to Bob’s case, it is possible for him to demand the exposure of the identity of the person who posted the defamatory statements about him on the internet. There are various stipulations in the law that gives Bob the capacity to demand for such information: To begin with, Bob has the right to demand for such information provided; he gives the court a prima facie that shows that he was actually exposed negatively on the internet. He should also provide evidence on the extent of damage he underwent after the comments in accordance to the law (eMedia Law Insider n.d.) Campus Trash Mouth is a website that allows anonymous writers to post comments; in this perspective, Bob may not win the case against Campus Trash Mouth since his allegations that he was negatively exposed on their website will depend on whether or not the comments were posted by the Campus Trash Mouth website themselves or it was done by an anonymous writer. However, according to the case study, it is evident that the defamatory statements were posted by an anonymous writer which renders them completely unreliable for the allegations. (The comments were posted by an anonymous person hence Campus Trash Mouth may not be held responsible) Additionally, Bob may also lose the case against Campus Trash Mouth on the condition that there are various stipulations in the law that may not necessitate the owners of the website to provide the identity of the anonymous writers.

Child Protective Services Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Child Protective Services - Essay Example It is essential to discuss some concepts that this body assumes in undertaking their tasks before discussing its roles. They state that it is the duty of the parents to take care of a child various needs. These needs range from mental needs, medical needs, emotional needs and physical needs (Connolly 60). This is aligned with the ideology that children are best looked after in their family units. Incapability of parents to meet these needs may be attributed to their own problems like mental diseases and drug abuse. The CPS performs its roles in processes (Lonne 76). The agency is charged with the responsibility of obtaining reports about suspected abuse cases. Reporting of cases is, therefore, a mandate of the public and the body’s workers. In the next stage, the case facts are sought. The case is thus weighed to meet the body’s standard of maltreatment (Depantills and Dubowitz 100). Thereafter, the nature of the family is assessed to establish the cause of abuse or neglect. Future risks of abuse are evaluated at this stage. From that stage, the child protection team links with the family in reducing the likelihood of future abuse. They can alternatively involve a court process where the situation becomes unmanageable at the family level. In conclusion, it should be noted that the agency cannot fulfill these functions by itself. This is partly because their powers are limited (Seghal 267). It must involve the court process in scenarios that necessitate the same law intervention. This means it cannot prosecute the offenders of the abused child. It cannot also provide a valid report if it does not involve health care professionals. This, however, does not compromise its main role of treating the affected

The impact of out of stock in convenience sector( retail) Literature review

The impact of out of stock in convenience sector( retail) - Literature review Example They can be categorized as discount store, super market, convenience store, hyper market or departmental store. In the literature based on supply chains and logistics, when a customer is unable to find an item of his choice the retail store is considered to be out of stock. Actually, it is not difficult to say â€Å"out of stock†, but like many other issues taken under research; this issue has its own implications which can only be clarified through research (Charlton and Ehrenberg 1976). â€Å"Out of stock can be classified into two types: item and brand† (Fitzsimons 2000). Firstly, a stock keeping unit (SKU) of a particular brand may be out of stock and secondly all options of a particular brand in a single product can be out of stock. Out of Stock (OOS) has been defined differently by different researchers. Gruen and Corsten (2002) define OOS as â€Å"the percentage of SKUs that are OOS on the retail store shelf at a particular moment in time†. This means that the customer perceives that the item he wants will be available but it is not. Alternatively, from a consumer point of view, OOS is â€Å"the number of times a customer looks for the SKU and does not find it† (Corsten and Gruen 2003). ... First, retailers are battled with more charges in providing string of connections, due to high inventory, procurement, management, and warehouse costs. Second, it furthermore raises the likelihood that out-of-stocks (OOS) may happen, which may lead to clientele displeasure and shop disloyalty. As retailers strive to contend with discounters on service, OOS can harshly jeopardize their comparable place in the buyers’ mind. According to Campo et al. (2000), out of supply position not only decreases revenue but furthermore decrease of clients as well. In 20% situations shop swapping is due to out of supply situations. Presently, there have been a vast number of studies carried out by Emmelhainz et al. (1991), Verbeke et al. (1998), Campo et al. (2000), Gruen et al. (2002), Corsten and Gruen (2003) and Sloot et al. (2005). They were responsible for formation of factors which encourage buyer reactions, such as the category of inventory, the extent of brand devotion, type of consume r and the urgency of the requirement for the item. So all of these investigations were rather associated to assess buyer answer as an outcome of OOS position at retail- OOS position is too exorbitant for retailers, as it can originate a decrease in revenue; the study performed in 1968 for Progressive Grocer assessed more than eleven percent decrease in sales. Emmelhainz et al (1991) study outcomes display, for example, that a stock-out can make a constructor misplace more than fifty percent of his clients to competitors, alternatively retailers countenance the decrease of up to fourteen percent of the purchasers of the missing product. This income decrease does not only owe to lost sales all the way through the OOS experience, but can

Individualism versus Collectivism Essay Example for Free

Individualism versus Collectivism Essay The concepts of individualism and collectivism apply to the description of societies and individuals within the society. Cultures vary in their levels of individualism/ collectivism while individuals within these specific cultures vary on the same dimension. Idiocentric and allocentric are constructs that are very important in differentiating consistent variations of an individual’s attitudes, beliefs, self-definition, normative behavior and self-definition. Individualism is termed as the person’s level of idiocentric while collectivism is the person’s level of allocentric (Udehn, 2001). Idiocentric individuals emphasize more on their own goals and needs over those of the group to which they belong. They are much independent and self-reliant. On the other hand, allocentric individuals tend to be more cooperative, interdependent and they also have a stronger desire to partner with others. In addition allocentric and idiocentric individuals differ in their source of intimacy and companionship to satisfy their several needs and to strengthen their self-esteem. For instance, idiocentric obtains their social support from peers and best friends while allocentrics obtain their social support from their parents. Individuals with allocentric tendencies have fewer daily but more in-depth discussions than individuals with idiocentric tendencies. People who express more allocentric or idiocentric tendencies vary in various ways. For instance, the people who tend to be more allocentric have good reliability and inter-correlation thus showing convergent validity. They are characterized with three main aspects which include individual to group goals, in-group as extension of the self and in-group identity. Individuals who are more idiocentric mainly use equity and need in distributing rewards. Individuals who are more allocentric mainly emphasize on the values of cooperation, fairness and honesty while individuals who are more idiocentric put much emphasis on values of comfortable life, competition, pleasure and social recognition. Persons who are allocentric receive much and better quality social support while those who are more idiocentric are usually higher in achievement motivation, alienation and greater loneliness. The difference between collective and individualist cultures is mainly based on self. In collectivist cultures, the self is more linked to in-group memberships while in individualist cultures; self-concept is obtained from independently groups which are based on the varying characteristics and contributions of the individual. In collectivists’ cultures, there is high adherence to the goals of the in-group and to in-group values and also the maintaining of in-group harmony (Lee Kelly 1996). In individualistic societies, the aims and the goals of a particular individual are more important and less significance is attached to in-group harmony. Nevertheless, individualism is mainly based on Western cultures while collectivism is related with Eastern cultures. Collectivistic cultures have lower rates of suicide, psychopathology and relatively higher marital satisfaction than individualistic cultures. I consider myself to be idiocentric. This is because I always concentrate on my own goals and achievement over those of the other people and I carry out my tasks independently. I normally display a different tendency towards the allocentric. For instance, in making purchase of luxury brands, I purchase goods for my own sake pleasures ad interests while the allocentric purchase the luxury brands only with an aim of seeking social recognition (McCarthy, 2005). As a result of these differences, conflict and misunderstanding emerges. This is because as a personally motivated consumer, I will purchase the luxury brands for self-interests while on the other hand an allocentric individual who is socially motivated will make the purchase of luxury brands with an aim of seeking social recognition.

Why the Brother in The Scarlet Ibis is Selfish :: James Hurst

Some people are selfish in such a way that affects only their own selves, but others’ selfishness can hurt those they care about. One of these such people is Brother in â€Å"The Scarlet Ibis†. In James Hurst’s â€Å"The Scarlet Ibis†, Brother is selfish and only teaches Doodle to walk to benefit himself. Brother is too engulfed in his selfish desire for a ‘better’ brother that he does not give Doodle a chance to rest. â€Å"I made him swim until he turned blue, and row until he couldn’t lift an oar.† This excerpt shows the reader how ruthless Brother is in the training he has set up for Doodle. Brother appears to care more about him being capable of doing these ‘fun’ things than his brother having fun doing them does. â€Å"Success lay at the end of the summer like a pot of gold† When Brother says this, he relays how he is greedy for a better brother and will do anything to get what he wants. Brother is selfish because he is not concerned about how the rigorous training is negatively affecting Doodle. â€Å"†¦ Doodle began to look feverish, and Mama felt his forehead. At night he didn't sleep well, and sometimes he had nightmares, and I touched him and said, "Wake up, Doodle. Wake up.† Even though Brother is lucid of the fact that the training is making Doodle unwell, he continues to press Doodle to train harder. Every day, Brother makes Doodle train, even if he does not wish to. Brother is someone that Doodle always looks up to. Brother uses this to persuade Doodle that he must not be different. In conclusion, Brother shows his self-interest in how he treats his younger brother. He treats his younger brother, Doodle, as something to ‘fix’ and he cannot accept his brother as he is. When Doodle finally learns to walk, Brother’s selfish need for a more ‘ideal’ little brother is not satisfied for long. Soon he demands a little brother who can run, jump, climb, swim, swing on vines, and row a boat. When he gives Doodle lessons for these activities, he does not do so for concern about Doodle wanting to be able to do them, but because he wants Doodle to be able to be a ‘normal’ brother.

Who are the real winners and losers in RJR Nabisco takeover

Most Of us looks at LOBO transactions from outs idà ©e and have completely different viewpoint how these transactions are done. Barbarians at the Gate presents a n insider's perspective. We somehow have these believe that when there is billions of dollars involved in transactions, Coo's, investors, investment bankers make their decisions based on numbers, trying g to be objective to make rational decisions and very seldom let their subjectivity such as their ego to drive thee r decisions.However after reading the book, I realize how wrong we all are. This paper focuses on what the management team did wrong that cause them to fail and who are the real winners from this transaction. Why management team lost When Ross Johnson proposed a levered buyout, he was sure he would win. H e thought that Or's directors would give him the deference due a chief executive, never realizing that the b road would have no choice legally or morally but to treat him as an outsider.The following factors h ighlights why management team lost. Remaining Equity: The board tried to keep the company as unbroken as poss. able to minimize the negative effect on employees. However the management team planned to keep only t e tobacco business and sell the entire food business after the acquisition. Employees' benefits: Management focused only on employees who would sat y and did not care about employees who would lose their jobs.Ross Johnson did a mistake during one of his interviews regarding potential layoff in the Atlanta headquarters by saying â€Å"those workers had port able jobs and could find employment elsewhere†. Loosing boards trust: Even though Johnson insisted that some portion in queue TTY would be divided among workers, only six names emerged besides his own. Too much for too few, this s what the directors thought, which shocked them. In the end, Ross Johnson lost the battle when he refuse d to guarantee the benefits of those same workers.Choice of bankers and lack of cla rity. Choosing only one banker whom Ross Joe hone's friend suggested was a big mistake. Ross Johnson did not have a clear overall approach and was cons sisterly following Shearers Salmon's advises. Why KIRK won Clear strategy: Recruit every significant player so that the other bidding group s would not be able to retain them and left the management-Shearers bidding group with only one available e player, Salomon Brothers, with significant access to capital market.Reading board's mind: Keeping its options open, KIRK did not disclose fully its Eng-term plans and tried consistently read the board's mind and to act based on it (for example, guar noted severance and other benefits for employees who would lose their jobs, or the announcement to Pl an to hire Paul Stitch as the chairman and CEO in order to mitigate the uncertainties regarding the business as, since he has been with company previously and showed due diligences in his position). Who are the real winner and losers?

Professionalism and ethics Essay

The episode presented in this case study give rise to Moral Sense Test directed to analyzing human moral judgments. The issue of saving a large woman to save 22 tourists behind her, driving a boat faster to save life of five people from drowning and at the same time letting one person to fall of and drown, failure to give a drug to a terminally ill person in knowledge that he may die without it and his organs may be used to safe some other three persons, and suffocating your baby with aim of averting an enemy from finding both of you and kill and other eight hiding with you presents a moral dilemma situation directed towards scrutinizing psychological mechanism basic to social moral judgment. Situation leading to moral dilemma has been capturing human attention towards how people judge certain affairs, deciding on justified and unjustified situations as well as social views on right and wrong action. Debate on moral decision has been has been a contentious issue with philosophers speculating how people have been making moral decision in the society. Scenarios presented by this paper give a situation which has for long been pondered by philosophers as well other professional on whether to sacrifice one for a greater good. Utilitarian ethical theory support option of sacrificing one to protect many. Many societies seems to value the utilitarian option but there is a considerable emotional element given that verdict involves harming a human being. Any of decision made on these scenarios results to a moral tug of war between whether to kill one person as in the case of killing huge woman to save 22 tourist, sacrificing one person to save five from drowning, sacrifice on ill person to save three and sacrificing a child to save you and others with sympathy of killing a human being. Moral theories Egoism as an ethical theory entails individual’s self is the motivation and the goal of individual’s own accomplishment. Egoism has two folds i. e. descriptive and normative. Descriptive also called positive variant, define egoism as explanation of human affairs meaning individuals are motivated by self interest and desires while normative ethics elaborates that people should be motivated. Ethical egoism an individual have no duty anyone but to him/herself. Meaning that, every person should strive satisfy his or her individual interests maximizing own welfare. According to egoism, each individual has a goal of his own†¦This diversity of goals may endanger conflict. This is not an objection to ethical egoism, however. When people have goals in conflict, each individual ought, according to egoism, to maintain his or her goal. Ethical egoism is a consistent ethical theory, in competition with other ethical theories,† (Tannsjo 2002 pp 42). From the above quote we can say that according to egoism theory you act wrongly when if you do not strive to maximize your interest. Maximizing of interest means that an individual can go to an extent of doing harm in order to protect his/her interests. The egoist is prepared to kill, not only in order to save many lives but in order to save his or her own life. Therefore, in the scenarios presented in our case study when considering egoism ethical theory means that when doing any act you should consider your interests. For example an egoist would consider saving digging a woman and making 22 tourists to perish and sacrificing woman life to save tourist will depend on different interests according to egoism theory. That is can sacrifice the whole group or to save large woman according to whom we have interest in and vice-versa. Being a subject of Moral Sense Test based on egoism moral theory I would drown person in the falling from the boat to save other five based on my interests. If I am more affiliated to the falling person, according to egoism I would let five to perish and save the one I have interest in. In case my interest is more to the five people I would work to save them making the falling person to die. In the case where am to suffocate my screaming my screaming baby to save myself and other eight hiding with me would be a better option considering egoism theory. This is due to individual interest of living taking more priority than that of the baby hence saving other eight people. Faced with scenario of sacrificing failing to give drug to a terminally ill patient knowing that he will die but his organs could be used to save other three patient considering egoism theory would mean to fall the self interest in this scenario. Saving three persons to the expense of sacrificing one terminally ill patient means that my interest for example if patient is my relative. On the other hand if I have more interest to a more terminally ill patient I would not fail to give drug making other three to die according to egoism theory of maximizing of interests. Conventional morality can be described as a morality of established local practice or a part of morality that directs people day to day life. â€Å"Conventional morality defines responsibilities, gives direction to action, helps to organize social life. It establishes expectations and thereby give guidance for personal development† (DeMarco 1994 pp. 24). This means that it is a fixed pattern of individual or a professional governing a particular role, giving boundaries of action, dependencies as well as patterns of authority. That is society or individuals have moral responsibility based on conventions and violations of conventions mean individual actions are immoral. In the three scenarios presented in case study in this context conventional morality theory would looking at different laid down standard in trying to save different dilemmas. Incase of saving a five from drowning to the expense of saving the one falling and vise versa would depend on morals raid down. If my society moral dictates that saving many would be the most moral, according to conventional morality I would strive to save the five and let the falling person to die even if it is my relative since these are set convention and must be followed. In case it is refusing to give terminally ill patient drug making his to die and use his organ to save the three will depend on convention set by the hospital and act according to them. Suffocating my baby so that I can save myself and other eight persons from attacks of an enemy would depend on set societal convention which may favor suffocating my baby or letting all to die all together. For example if conventions dictates that I should strive to save many, suffocating of my baby may be an option and this would be morally upright according to conventional theory of morality. Moral dilemmas have presented various arguments making some of philosophers to argue that â€Å"†¦doing the right is whatever produce the greatest balance over evil†¦This view has been called ‘utilitarianism’ or ‘consequentialism. ’ ‘Utilitarianism’ tends to be associated with the view that ‘good’ means a balance of pleasure over pain†¦or perhaps some more sophisticated ‘happiness’†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Hallquist, 2008 para. 5). According to Hallquist (2008), when applying utilitarianism theory of morality to moral dilemma where you have an option of killing one person to save many, an individual is requires to kill one and save many. This situation presents a greater evil or prevents a greater evil according to Utilitarianism theory of morality. There have been options when you can consider killing many and save one for example if killing the five would prevent a deadly riot would allow for saving one person instead. According to utilitarianism, killing someone harvest organ to save the five individuals would be a better evil. This means that the case presented in the case study in the context of this paper about refusing to give drug to terminally ill patient letting him to die and using his organ to heal other persons would be a better choice according to utilitarianism. Letting the falling person to die and save and saving five droning persons would be the better evil instead of saving one and letting five to die. Suffocating a my screaming baby according to utilitarianism theory of morality would be a better evil than letting myself and eight people accompanying me to die. Theory of duty ethics also called deontological morality theory view morality through probing the nature of actions and will of agents instead of results achieved i. e. looking at input instead of the outcomes. Incase of killing one person to save many for example a situation where the doctor would sacrifice life of one person and use his organ to save five, duty of ethics opposes this. â€Å"†¦the agent should not kill the one person because if he does that he will produce worse state of affairs, as seen from his position. That he should not kill is the result that deontologist endorse as well† (Kamm 1993 pp. 5). According to duty ethic correctness of an accomplishment is not simply reliant on exploiting the good, if that accomplishment goes in opposition to what is consider moral. This means that the scenarios where am require not to give drug and to let terminally ill person to die and save three from his organ would be immoral from duty ethics. This is because by refusing to give drug is immoral no matter the good it can contribute of saving three persons. Letting the falling from the boat to save the five persons from drowning is immoral according to duty of ethics. On the issue of suffocating my baby it may be immoral to do that because in the first place is illegal to do that hence letting the worst to strike. Virtue of ethics emphasizes that; morality should be guided by character rather than established rules or procedures. This theory is greatly dependent on wisdom to direct an individual to do what he/she feel is moral. Virtue of ethics encompasses trait like honesty and generosity in performance of a moral duty. In the case of moral dilemma of killing on person to save many will be judged from what the person in this situation feel is morally upright. Moral principles The above analysis of the moral theory do not give define solution and are inadequate when giving solution to various situations for example moral dilemma episodes. Seven moral principles give an alternative in trying to get solution on moral decision. Moral principles define the right and wrong accepted an individual or a society to a certain situation or are universal rules that guide an individuals or a society on what to do. That is, they are standard for good behavior in the society. Moral decision making process is the process in which an individual tries to implement a balance of the seven moral principles in a given situation. The seven moral principles are; Respect, Non-Malevolence, Benevolence, Integrity, Justice, Utility and Double Effect. The lists of moral principle incorporate many cultures to serve purpose of morality. According to the principles of morality a moral action should be guide by the application of the most appropriate principle(s). Principle of respect calls for treating everybody with respect together with application of dignity and importance of a person(s) not matter the diversity. Non-malevolence principle calls for avoiding harming people or even causing pain to them. Benevolence principle tries to promote well-being of others. That is it emphasize on responding in the needs of other. This should be consistent to promoting spiritual and cultural belief and values. Principle of integrity advocates for maintaining personal standards for example in the professional environment. In application to the episode of killing one to save many, moral principle provides with a range choice in coming with appropriate action. Conclusion Application of moral theory and moral principles should be directed by the intention of being morally upright in the social operation. There intention is to guide person and society at large to have a common way of handling their affairs for common good. Moral theories and principles are motivated greatly by the social need toward an upright society. Social life presents different circumstances in life and hence many moral theories and principle geared toward giving moral solution to different social circumstances.