The problem with this topic is that the company, posing as one that creates news on the student loan case, wanted to promote itself. Several references to LendEDU were found in Drew Cloud’s articles (Ingber, 2018). Because the primary readers of these articles are students, they are easily manipulated. People with debt who cannot pay it off need reliable information and support. It is worth mentioning that the dilemma is the behavior of Nate Matherson, the company’s CEO. It is very difficult for the public to know if a particular piece of information on websites is accurate, especially regarding an activity like Drew Cloud’s blog. Statistics have been provided on his behalf, which is very difficult to verify. The article extensively exposes the conflict of interest during the Drew Cloud story. The director, though apologetic, does not consider himself to be at fault. A concept such as ethical orientation emerges from this.
The norm of truthfulness is closely connected with non-compliance with the norm of truthfulness, which implies the presence of lying or deception. However, it must be remembered that lying and deception are possible only if the liar understands that he or she is lying and distinguishes between the real situation and the situation he or she is proposing. Thus, the subject of deception should be capable of distinguishing two positions – real and imaginary. Thus, orientation to the norm of truthfulness and its violation. The value equivalents may be honesty, sincerity, and fidelity to one’s word.
One of the most influential in business ethics is the theory of utilitarianism; it is related to the problem of the article. The most effective criteria may be the degree of correspondence between the way of action and existing laws and the degree of usefulness and harmfulness of the activity. An action is ethically legitimate if the total beneficial effect of that action exceeds any other action that might have been taken in place of the former. One of the main shortcomings of this doctrine is its incompatibility with the two moral categories of right and justice. This means that in some cases, certain actions are morally justified from a practical point of view, even though they are, in fact, unjust and result in a violation of human rights.
LendEDU acted contrary to morality and benefited from it, but in the end, they were left at a loss because of the scandals. Thus, the principle of utilitarianism assumes that it is possible to quantify the benefits produced by actions, sum them up, and calculate the difference between the number of benefits and the number of negative results, and thus determine which action will produce the maximum net profit or the absolute minimum cost.
A way out of this situation could be monetary compensation from LendEDU. Nate Matherson should acknowledge that the firm’s activities were aimed at promoting his firm. The consequence of this situation is the popularization of refinancing, although this process is a solution for many debtors. Because of Drew Cloud’s influence on his readers, the articles may have encouraged them to abuse their debts. Other companies may take the example of LendEDU and use the same publicity move, which is a negative consequence. There have been some updates since this argument. For example, the company was still obliged to pay the FTC compensation of 350 thousand dollars (Quinn, 2020). Many complaints were written about LendEDU, and it was revealed that its employees wrote many positive reviews of the company. The company’s transparency is highly questionable.
References
Ingber, S. (2018). ‘Student loan report’ admits its founder and editor is fake. NPR. Web.
Quinn, H. (2020). Two years after the Drew Cloud Controversy, Lendedu ordered to pay FTC $350,000. Technical.ly. Web.