In the news: Harry Potter goes to court

The issue of social responsibility applies not only to corporations but to individuals as well. As consumers, we have the obligation to not only respect the environment and do our part for the greater good but to also respect the hard work of professionals. Copyright infringement usually gets media attention these days due to digital piracy, or illegally downloading music or movies from unauthorized internet sites (remember when burning a CD was such a big deal?).

The most recent newsmaker regarding this issue is not a music mogul or a television writer, but a book author, J.K. Rowling. Quite possibly one of the most successful authors today, Rowling is wrapped up in a lawsuit regarding Michigan-based publisher RDR Books and an avid fan with big ideas, Steven Vander Ark. Vander Ark did what most other people do these days with something they’re passionate about: he started a website, which at first received praises from Rowling herself. She changed her tune, however, when he decided to turn his Harry Potter lexicon website into book form, charge $24.95 each and began warning others not to copy portions of his website.

"I think it's atrocious. I think it's sloppy. I think there's very little research," the author testified Monday. "This book constitutes wholesale theft of 17 years of my hard work."

There’s no doubt that J.K. Rowling’s empire is successful. Her books have been translated into 64 languages, sold more than 400 million copies while the film franchise has made $4.5 billion worldwide at the box office. This shows that the communications industry is more than just corporate ethics and ever-increasing internet technology; the book industry still remains a viable outlet for words and messages. Those messages should be protected. Even multi-billionaires deserve to get what’s rightfully their own, bringing social responsibility and ethical issues of communication back to their roots: books.

CSR Apathy

CSR has come to the forefront in establishing values and ethical principles among companies, especially within the last two decades. According to BNet Today, “corporate social responsibility (CSR) refers to business decision-making based on ethical values, compliance with legal standards, and respect for communities, their citizens and environment.” But this isn’t a post about terminology; rather, I’m bringing up the issue of apathy among consumers and stakeholders in the Unites States regarding this issue.

A company must appease key stakeholder groups in order to stay afloat, including consumers, investors, community members, and potential employees. Social performance is important, and just like any communication professional, a company must know their audience.

As consumers, you and I are not only the most visible group but also the most influential. Meaning, that if we don’t like something, we can complain, and it makes news. With this kind of power, what exactly are we doing with it? Do American consumers care about CSR, or better yet, could they even define it?

I bring up United States consumers specifically because there is indeed a discrepancy among their opinions and those of consumers in other parts of the world regarding CSR. For example, a CSR Europe study in 2000 found that in 12 countries, 70 percent of the consumers surveyed said that a company’s commitment to social responsibility is “important to them” when making a decision about buying a product or service. One fifth of those would be willing to pay more for a product they believe is socially and environmentally responsible and two-thirds of respondents believe that the responsibility of addressing pressing social issues lies increasingly with large companies. All in all, the study shows that the demonstration of greater corporate citizenship is important to European consumers.

In another 2000 study conducted in France, Germany and the United States, willingness to support responsible businesses was far greater among the French and the German consumers. However, American consumers were found to value corporate economic responsibilities…but not so much legal and ethical issues, which concerned their European counterparts.

So what does this mean? For one, it shows that CSR really hasn’t hit home in the United States like it has in Europe, therefore consumers don’t really see it as a priority. Economic issues (money is always the bottom line) plagues Americans much more than environmental, social and legal responsibility. But whose fault is this? European consumers care about CSR because European corporations and governments make it a priority; they hold themselves accountable for their customers, therefore, it’s part of the dialogue. Until Starbucks came around, I had never even considered a company to have social responsibilities beyond selling a quality product at a competitive price.

The trend is definitely catching on in the United States. And since companies like Starbucks and General Electric are doing their part in practicing sustainability and other ethical standards, shouldn’t there be a cry of outrage against pharmaceutical companies that continually fall short in practicing ethical standards? American consumers need to look to Europe’s example and abandon this problem with apathy. Figure out what’s important to you and your family and refuse to settle for anything less.