Jessica saw an advertisement in the newspaper in which a company was selling its product in the local supermarket for $99, thus offering a discount of $25. Jessica considered it a good offer and bought the product. Later, Jessica came to know that the company sells the same product to direct consumers for $90. Which right was violated by this deceptive advertisement?
A.
right to choose
B.
right to redress
C.
right to be heard
D.
right to information
E.
right to safety

(select all that apply) examples of email use that could be considered unethical include denying receiving an e-mail requesting that you work late forwarding a chain letter asking for donations to a good cause sending a quick message to your friend about last weekend sending your boss the monthly sales figures in an attachment setting up a meeting with your co-worker sharing a funny joke with other employees

Determine if the following statements are true or false. an increase in government spending can crowd out private investment. an improvement in the budget balance increases the demand for financial capital. an increase in private consumption may crowd out private investment. lower interest rates can lead to private investment being crowded out. a trade balance in sur+ increases the supply of financial capital. if private savings is equal to private investment, then there is neither a budget sur+ nor a budget deficit.

David burdick is the ceo of acme bubblegum, a successful public company. as one of the cofounders of the company, burdick has enjoyed speaking and writing about the success of acme bubblegum for several years. typically, he speaks at conferences or directly to the press, but recently, he has been blogging about his firm anonymously. specifically, he defended a recent advertising campaign that was unpopular among consumers and pointedly attacked one of acme bubblegum’s competitors. burdick deeply enjoys his anonymous blogging and believes that none of his readers actually know that he works for acme bubblegum.should burdick be allowed to praise his company’s performance anonymously online? should he be allowed to attack his competitors without disclosing his relationship with the company? how would you feel if the ceo of a company at which you shopped was secretly writing criticisms of his or her competition? how would you feel if you knew a writer for your favorite blog was actually closely involved in a company that the blog discussed? 1. define the ethical issue? 2. who are the primary stakeholders? 3. what are the possible alternatives? 4. how could you evaluate the ethical implications of the alternative actions (use appropriate decision rules)? 5. what action would you recommend and why?