Question

HELP PLEASE

Answer 1

Answer:

There is a useful way to establish pros and cons for a certain subject

Explanation:

When faced with an exercise like this one, which I find very interesting, one should try to play devil's advocate around the main angles of the situation. The main question is the ethics regarding information.

On the one side, one could claim that there is a cognitive limit in each of us that is, by far, exceeded by the amount of information available in a segmented hyper-specialized society. Therefore, there is a grey area regarding the ethics of being held accountable for estimating the amount of information the targeted individual manages.

On the other side, one could oppose the first claim by stating the fact that the market operates on the basis of common trust. Therefore, speculating and profiting on the lack of awareness on the consumer's side is, not only unethical, but it is harmful to the system as a whole.

Answer 2

okay so

One... when it comes to advertising and selling a product Marketers will try to target those who are not informed and with that it isn't ethical because with holding information is called omitting and which basically a form of lying. And lying is not an ethical thing.

Two...With holding certain information from a customer can be at risk to them. What if the product the marketer is selling such as a medication has negative side effects that the customer isn't made aware of and they end up going to the hospital for the side effect. It would not be very good ethics to with hold such important information especially knowing that someone's health could be at risk

For a counterclaim you could say that even though it could get you a sell it can come back to bite you in the but when they get a lawsuit handed to them. for withholding information and endangering the health of someone.

i hope that this helps some...