Ethical Dilemma: Nugabest Philippines False Advertising Recently, Nugabest Philippines (G.T.B. Best Trading Inc.

), a company that manufactures and sells beds, has been accused of false advertisements and misrepresentation of their products which influenced the minds of their customers. They said that their beds have a healing effect even to those with acute illnesses like hemorrhoid/hemia, urinary tract inspection, menstrual problem, infertility, ovarian cyst and myoma, weak lungs and asthma, prostate enlargement arthritis and joint pain. They even claimed and advertised through flyers and brochures the effects of their products as evidenced by a boost of immune system and the like (aligns spine, controls blood sugar, etc.). Also as part of their marketing strategy, Nugabest offers free trials but with a waiver of non-liability. With these, the sales of the said company spurred beyond expectations. However, the Department of Health (DOH) disproved the claims of Nugabest having no scientific basis. In fact, DOH has made a legal step by issuing cease and desist order to stop their deceptive and mendacious advertisements. In spite of this action by the DOH, the company had turned a blind eye to such accusations. With regard to the customers, their reactions and complaints are yet to be heard. Vis--vis to the narrative above, there is a moral dilemma. The dilemma lies on the choice of the company to earn more profit to sustain their business or to be socially responsible. Truly, one of the hardest things to do for a company that is not well established is to compete with a sole advantage against the companies in the same industry. This is reflected through the desperate act of Nugabest to mislead their patron buyers in order to increase its market share but then they failed to consider the interest of the customer. Conversely, if they would be truthful, their product would be just a mere massage bed with no magical powers that attract customers and this would result to an investment prone to risk. Based on the issue above, it is important to reiterate that Nugabest is a company trying to be more than average through false advertising. In response, the Department

of Health ordered to discontinue the wrongful and unethical act. The target markets of Nugabest are the sick and those hopeful for full recovery. They are the ones affected by the dissemination of wrong information because instead of undergoing proper treatment, a patient would be duped into believing that the use of the beds would be enough to cure their illnesses. Nugabest is also affected because their acts could backfire and cause them their reputation and the patronage of their customers. To address this concern, the company can have the following options: Prove that the claims are true through innovation and research. Respond to the order of the Department of Health, end the fraudulent marketing strategy and continue to market the massage beds. Change the name and continue to do the same with the use of similar or different products. Regarding the first option, the common good is the foundation to which this option is anchored. This is because in proving the claims to be true through innovation and research both of the parties are benefited and no one is unjustly enriched to the expense of another. Likewise, justice and fairness can also be its guide. So, the principle of equality is an imperative. What is expected by the customers should be furnished in the kind and quality claimed. In the second option, justice and fairness is the supporting guide. According to the Consumer Act of the Philippines R.A. 7394, the State shall protect consumers from the trade malpractices and from substandard or hazardous product. So, there is really a need to stop the false advertising and insure the welfare of the customers. The rights of the customers to information should also be respected. In the last option, the only thing that has been given importance is the right of the company to engage in free enterprise through changing its name and continue the business. Through fervent deliberation, majority of the group recommend the application of option two, which is responding to the Department of Health by stopping their fraudulent

method of enticing their customers. After this, they would just continue to market their products as truthful as possible and at the same time try to gain back their reputation.

Para ni siya sa double checking na info earl: However, things could not work out as planned for this is not a full-proof option and it is possible that the customers could lose their confidence and patronage in the company. This worst case scenario could lead to the bankruptcy of Nugabest. On the other hand, if the company is optimistic, it might be able to surpass this obstacle and come to a new start. Before any conclusion, first, it is ensured that the arguments presented above are rational and consistent. Best options are provided to guarantee the rationality of the decision to be made. From the options presented, the most appropriate best course of action is determined, supported by the arguments clinging on it. It is free from contradicting arguments that could pull away from the consistency of this deliberation. There is a strong stand on the decision being made that the option is a moral thing to do. Second, it is ensured that as presented above, arguments are valid that conclusions do logically follow the premises and sound that the premises are undoubtedly true and the reasons are unquestionably valid. Third, choosing the particular option could make the business clean the dirt on its name, come to a new start, possibly regain the income earned before, and boost the business up again. On the other hand, the worst case scenario that could possibly happen is the bankruptcy of the company because of the decreasing number of customers due to the loss of their trust and confidence. In this decision, the company will be worry-free of losing again their customers. If ever there will be, then the option will not be the cause but other matters. Finally, the decision is certainly enabling. The decision would not prevent the company from performing more fruitfully, efficiently, and effectively. The decision is the moral thing to do. This decision will help the company to act what it should be acting and show the world their potentialities on helping and improving the lives of the people.

Thus, their marketing strategy (advertisement) is good for the business but its not the right thing to do.