Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Order Description

Research and Analytical Paper ? Requirements
The paper will be a research and analytical endeavor of the legal, ethical, and social responsibility ramifications of Anheuser-Busch InBev’s deceptive advertising of Beck’s branded beer. More information can be found here:https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/becks-lawsuit-settlement/. The paper will be 15 double-spaced pages in text length, not including cover page or Appendices.

The paper must be written according to APA style; and be carefully and currently referenced. Appropriate references are critical. This is a research paper in addition to an analytical paper, and thus at least 6 different sources, including books and textbooks, must be used, though at the graduate level preference should be given to published journal articles. Other sources may be organizational websites, government websites, or other reputable Internet sources. Since a requirement of the paper is that the topic be a ?current? one, so too should be the references. Be sure to try to use published journal articles or books as sources, and not less-reliable Internet websites. Reference the paper very carefully and appropriately. A company?s website may be used, but do so sparingly, and remember that what a company has on its own website may be positively biased in its favor.

Appearance, punctuation, grammar, neatness, and spelling count. This must be a professional looking paper at the graduate level. Paper should have an introduction, body, conclusion, and reference section; paper should also have appropriate headings and sub-headings in the body of the paper as noted in the paper requirements below. A Table of Contents must be included which lists each heading as well as the beginning page number for that section. Write transition sentences between sections so that the reader knows where the writer is proceeding and why. Transition sentences also help to integrate a paper and enhance its ?flow.?

Note that this is a research and analytical paper. Analyses based on the law, ethics, and social responsibility, and reasoning to conclusions based on legal, ethical, and social responsibility principles, are required, and are expected, at the graduate level. The paper must be substantive, principled-based, logical, and well reasoned at the graduate level. Avoid all personal pronouns, such as ?I? and ?We?; rather use ?The author.? Avoid any personal opinions except in the overall Conclusion to the paper.

Paper Format, Outline, (including Utilitarian Ethical Model) and Grading Rubric:

Title to Paper: Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Abstract (very brief summary of paper)

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

A. Purposes of Paper
? Analytical paper – ?3 value? analysis of law, ethics, and social responsibility
? Current, controversial, and narrowly focused topic involving business directly or indirectly
? Significance of topic
B. Background Information regarding topic

II. Legal Section

A. Introduction to Legal Section
B. Statement of Relevant Legal Principles and Rules of Law
C. Application of Law to Topic and Legal Analysis
D. Legal Conclusion (and transition to Ethics Section)

III. Ethics Section

A. Utilitarian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction (brief) to ethics as a branch of philosophy
? Introduction and brief explanation of Utilitarian theory
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 7 for discussion of Utilitarianism
? Stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of Utilitarianism – Utilitarian analysis as per required model (See required Utilitarian model below)
? Moral conclusion pursuant to Utilitarian model

B. Kantian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction and brief explanation of Kantian ethics
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 8 for discussion of Kantian ethics
? Statement of Kant?s Ethics Principle ? The Categorical Imperative
? Application of the Three Tests of the Categorical Imperative to topic (Universal ?Law? Test; Kingdom of Ends Test; Agent-Receiver Test)
? Kantian Moral Conclusion

C. Additional Ethical Analysis
? Selection by student(s) of additional third ethical theory for analysis
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Part I for suggested ethical theories
? Statement of ethical theory and key ethical principles
? Application of ethical theory and principles to topic and ethical analysis
? Moral Conclusion pursuant to additional third ethical theory
? Overall Conclusion to Ethics section as a whole (and transition to Social Responsibility section)

IV. Social Responsibility Section

A. Introduction to Social Responsibility section
B. Definition of term ?Social Responsibility? and formulation of definitional-principle
C. Application of Social Responsibility definitional-principle to topic
D. Social Responsibility recommendations
E. Social Responsibility Conclusion

V. Conclusion

A. Restatement of Major ?3 Value? Conclusions
B. Overall Conclusions, Personal Opinions, Recommendations, and Predictions

References
? Research sources (six minimum; current; primary sources or ?strong? secondary)
? APA style for sources and citations
.
The Utilitarian Ethical Model
In order to determine the morality of an action, practice, rule, or law pursuant to the stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of the ethical theory of Utilitarianism:
1. Accurately and narrowly state the action to be evaluated (e.g., Is it moral for a particular company or organization to…?);
2. Identify all people and groups who are directly and indirectly affected by the action (including the company’s or organization?s constituent groups or “stakeholders” as well as society as a whole);
3. Specify for each stakeholder group directly and indirectly affected all the reasonably foreseeable good – pleasurable and bad – painful consequences of the action, as far as into the future as appears appropriate, and consider the various predictable outcomes, good and bad, and the likelihood of their occurring;
4. For each stakeholder group, including society as a whole, measure and weigh the total good consequences against the bad consequences, and determine which predominates for each stakeholder group;
5. Quantify the good and bad consequences for each stakeholder group on a numerical scale (-5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 +1, +2, +3, +4, +5) representing units and extremes of pleasure and pain;
6. Sum up all the good and bad consequences assigned to the stakeholder groups;
7. If the action results in an overall positive number, it produces more good than bad, and is a morally right action; and if the action results in an overall negative number, it produces more bad than good, and is morally wrong; based on this model of the Utilitarian ethical theory.

Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Order Description

Research and Analytical Paper ? Requirements
The paper will be a research and analytical endeavor of the legal, ethical, and social responsibility ramifications of Anheuser-Busch InBev’s deceptive advertising of Beck’s branded beer. More information can be found here:https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/becks-lawsuit-settlement/. The paper will be 15 double-spaced pages in text length, not including cover page or Appendices.

The paper must be written according to APA style; and be carefully and currently referenced. Appropriate references are critical. This is a research paper in addition to an analytical paper, and thus at least 6 different sources, including books and textbooks, must be used, though at the graduate level preference should be given to published journal articles. Other sources may be organizational websites, government websites, or other reputable Internet sources. Since a requirement of the paper is that the topic be a ?current? one, so too should be the references. Be sure to try to use published journal articles or books as sources, and not less-reliable Internet websites. Reference the paper very carefully and appropriately. A company?s website may be used, but do so sparingly, and remember that what a company has on its own website may be positively biased in its favor.

Appearance, punctuation, grammar, neatness, and spelling count. This must be a professional looking paper at the graduate level. Paper should have an introduction, body, conclusion, and reference section; paper should also have appropriate headings and sub-headings in the body of the paper as noted in the paper requirements below. A Table of Contents must be included which lists each heading as well as the beginning page number for that section. Write transition sentences between sections so that the reader knows where the writer is proceeding and why. Transition sentences also help to integrate a paper and enhance its ?flow.?

Note that this is a research and analytical paper. Analyses based on the law, ethics, and social responsibility, and reasoning to conclusions based on legal, ethical, and social responsibility principles, are required, and are expected, at the graduate level. The paper must be substantive, principled-based, logical, and well reasoned at the graduate level. Avoid all personal pronouns, such as ?I? and ?We?; rather use ?The author.? Avoid any personal opinions except in the overall Conclusion to the paper.

Paper Format, Outline, (including Utilitarian Ethical Model) and Grading Rubric:

Title to Paper: Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Abstract (very brief summary of paper)

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

A. Purposes of Paper
? Analytical paper – ?3 value? analysis of law, ethics, and social responsibility
? Current, controversial, and narrowly focused topic involving business directly or indirectly
? Significance of topic
B. Background Information regarding topic

II. Legal Section

A. Introduction to Legal Section
B. Statement of Relevant Legal Principles and Rules of Law
C. Application of Law to Topic and Legal Analysis
D. Legal Conclusion (and transition to Ethics Section)

III. Ethics Section

A. Utilitarian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction (brief) to ethics as a branch of philosophy
? Introduction and brief explanation of Utilitarian theory
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 7 for discussion of Utilitarianism
? Stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of Utilitarianism – Utilitarian analysis as per required model (See required Utilitarian model below)
? Moral conclusion pursuant to Utilitarian model

B. Kantian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction and brief explanation of Kantian ethics
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 8 for discussion of Kantian ethics
? Statement of Kant?s Ethics Principle ? The Categorical Imperative
? Application of the Three Tests of the Categorical Imperative to topic (Universal ?Law? Test; Kingdom of Ends Test; Agent-Receiver Test)
? Kantian Moral Conclusion

C. Additional Ethical Analysis
? Selection by student(s) of additional third ethical theory for analysis
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Part I for suggested ethical theories
? Statement of ethical theory and key ethical principles
? Application of ethical theory and principles to topic and ethical analysis
? Moral Conclusion pursuant to additional third ethical theory
? Overall Conclusion to Ethics section as a whole (and transition to Social Responsibility section)

IV. Social Responsibility Section

A. Introduction to Social Responsibility section
B. Definition of term ?Social Responsibility? and formulation of definitional-principle
C. Application of Social Responsibility definitional-principle to topic
D. Social Responsibility recommendations
E. Social Responsibility Conclusion

V. Conclusion

A. Restatement of Major ?3 Value? Conclusions
B. Overall Conclusions, Personal Opinions, Recommendations, and Predictions

References
? Research sources (six minimum; current; primary sources or ?strong? secondary)
? APA style for sources and citations
.
The Utilitarian Ethical Model
In order to determine the morality of an action, practice, rule, or law pursuant to the stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of the ethical theory of Utilitarianism:
1. Accurately and narrowly state the action to be evaluated (e.g., Is it moral for a particular company or organization to…?);
2. Identify all people and groups who are directly and indirectly affected by the action (including the company’s or organization?s constituent groups or “stakeholders” as well as society as a whole);
3. Specify for each stakeholder group directly and indirectly affected all the reasonably foreseeable good – pleasurable and bad – painful consequences of the action, as far as into the future as appears appropriate, and consider the various predictable outcomes, good and bad, and the likelihood of their occurring;
4. For each stakeholder group, including society as a whole, measure and weigh the total good consequences against the bad consequences, and determine which predominates for each stakeholder group;
5. Quantify the good and bad consequences for each stakeholder group on a numerical scale (-5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 +1, +2, +3, +4, +5) representing units and extremes of pleasure and pain;
6. Sum up all the good and bad consequences assigned to the stakeholder groups;
7. If the action results in an overall positive number, it produces more good than bad, and is a morally right action; and if the action results in an overall negative number, it produces more bad than good, and is morally wrong; based on this model of the Utilitarian ethical theory.

Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Order Description

Research and Analytical Paper ? Requirements
The paper will be a research and analytical endeavor of the legal, ethical, and social responsibility ramifications of Anheuser-Busch InBev’s deceptive advertising of Beck’s branded beer. More information can be found here:https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/becks-lawsuit-settlement/. The paper will be 15 double-spaced pages in text length, not including cover page or Appendices.

The paper must be written according to APA style; and be carefully and currently referenced. Appropriate references are critical. This is a research paper in addition to an analytical paper, and thus at least 6 different sources, including books and textbooks, must be used, though at the graduate level preference should be given to published journal articles. Other sources may be organizational websites, government websites, or other reputable Internet sources. Since a requirement of the paper is that the topic be a ?current? one, so too should be the references. Be sure to try to use published journal articles or books as sources, and not less-reliable Internet websites. Reference the paper very carefully and appropriately. A company?s website may be used, but do so sparingly, and remember that what a company has on its own website may be positively biased in its favor.

Appearance, punctuation, grammar, neatness, and spelling count. This must be a professional looking paper at the graduate level. Paper should have an introduction, body, conclusion, and reference section; paper should also have appropriate headings and sub-headings in the body of the paper as noted in the paper requirements below. A Table of Contents must be included which lists each heading as well as the beginning page number for that section. Write transition sentences between sections so that the reader knows where the writer is proceeding and why. Transition sentences also help to integrate a paper and enhance its ?flow.?

Note that this is a research and analytical paper. Analyses based on the law, ethics, and social responsibility, and reasoning to conclusions based on legal, ethical, and social responsibility principles, are required, and are expected, at the graduate level. The paper must be substantive, principled-based, logical, and well reasoned at the graduate level. Avoid all personal pronouns, such as ?I? and ?We?; rather use ?The author.? Avoid any personal opinions except in the overall Conclusion to the paper.

Paper Format, Outline, (including Utilitarian Ethical Model) and Grading Rubric:

Title to Paper: Integrating Values – The Legality, Morality, and Social Responsibility of Deceptive Advertising by Anheuser-Busch InBev

Abstract (very brief summary of paper)

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

A. Purposes of Paper
? Analytical paper – ?3 value? analysis of law, ethics, and social responsibility
? Current, controversial, and narrowly focused topic involving business directly or indirectly
? Significance of topic
B. Background Information regarding topic

II. Legal Section

A. Introduction to Legal Section
B. Statement of Relevant Legal Principles and Rules of Law
C. Application of Law to Topic and Legal Analysis
D. Legal Conclusion (and transition to Ethics Section)

III. Ethics Section

A. Utilitarian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction (brief) to ethics as a branch of philosophy
? Introduction and brief explanation of Utilitarian theory
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 7 for discussion of Utilitarianism
? Stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of Utilitarianism – Utilitarian analysis as per required model (See required Utilitarian model below)
? Moral conclusion pursuant to Utilitarian model

B. Kantian Ethical Analysis
? Introduction and brief explanation of Kantian ethics
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Chapter 8 for discussion of Kantian ethics
? Statement of Kant?s Ethics Principle ? The Categorical Imperative
? Application of the Three Tests of the Categorical Imperative to topic (Universal ?Law? Test; Kingdom of Ends Test; Agent-Receiver Test)
? Kantian Moral Conclusion

C. Additional Ethical Analysis
? Selection by student(s) of additional third ethical theory for analysis
? See Cavico and Mujtaba Business Ethics text Part I for suggested ethical theories
? Statement of ethical theory and key ethical principles
? Application of ethical theory and principles to topic and ethical analysis
? Moral Conclusion pursuant to additional third ethical theory
? Overall Conclusion to Ethics section as a whole (and transition to Social Responsibility section)

IV. Social Responsibility Section

A. Introduction to Social Responsibility section
B. Definition of term ?Social Responsibility? and formulation of definitional-principle
C. Application of Social Responsibility definitional-principle to topic
D. Social Responsibility recommendations
E. Social Responsibility Conclusion

V. Conclusion

A. Restatement of Major ?3 Value? Conclusions
B. Overall Conclusions, Personal Opinions, Recommendations, and Predictions

References
? Research sources (six minimum; current; primary sources or ?strong? secondary)
? APA style for sources and citations
.
The Utilitarian Ethical Model
In order to determine the morality of an action, practice, rule, or law pursuant to the stakeholder, pleasure v. pain, numerical model of the ethical theory of Utilitarianism:
1. Accurately and narrowly state the action to be evaluated (e.g., Is it moral for a particular company or organization to…?);
2. Identify all people and groups who are directly and indirectly affected by the action (including the company’s or organization?s constituent groups or “stakeholders” as well as society as a whole);
3. Specify for each stakeholder group directly and indirectly affected all the reasonably foreseeable good – pleasurable and bad – painful consequences of the action, as far as into the future as appears appropriate, and consider the various predictable outcomes, good and bad, and the likelihood of their occurring;
4. For each stakeholder group, including society as a whole, measure and weigh the total good consequences against the bad consequences, and determine which predominates for each stakeholder group;
5. Quantify the good and bad consequences for each stakeholder group on a numerical scale (-5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 +1, +2, +3, +4, +5) representing units and extremes of pleasure and pain;
6. Sum up all the good and bad consequences assigned to the stakeholder groups;
7. If the action results in an overall positive number, it produces more good than bad, and is a morally right action; and if the action results in an overall negative number, it produces more bad than good, and is morally wrong; based on this model of the Utilitarian ethical theory.