Ethical consumerism, I have my doubts …

Comment on Guillaume Cornette’s opinion:

I disagree when Guillaume says that if Nike pays more respect to the human rights and produces ethically, people would be willing to pay a little bit more for Nike’s products.
First of all, Nike has made a pretty bad name during the past few years. And the well-known rule that negative information concerning trade practices has a greater impact on consumers than positive information, makes it even more difficult for Nike. Making the public realize Nike has developed itself into a more ethical brand, takes many years.
In many surveys of consumers' attitude, it is mostly proven that people claim they would reward companies for their positive ethical actions, but I think that in reality less people would in fact do so. Personally, I think that surveys don’t reflect actual behavior correctly.
Furthermore, in this case the media plays a major role. If the media had not criticized Nike for its unacceptable behavior, Nike would not have been facing so many social implications of business ethics and less consumers would have chosen to shop more ethically.   
In addition you could ask yourself how many people are able to pay a bit more. 
Finally, we must not forget the individual differences between consumers.

How many people really search for an ethical-proven symbol at the back of a product?
Isn't it mainly the price that makes people choose what they shall buy?
In a nutshell, I figure that the degree a company’s ethical commitment does not have a direct positive impact on consumers’ perception.

This does not mean I believe Nike should not pay respect to human rights and act ethically. On the contrary, I think child labour and other corporate discriminations must be punished severely. There should be more laws to prevent unethical conditions and more international commitment is necessary.

Kenn Crombé