Question

question 1
5 pts
betty bought a jar of facial cream with natural ingredients for $50 online from beauty today inc., a company that promises a youthful wrinkle - free skin for those who buy the cream and use it twice a day. betty used the cream as directed but didnt see any difference in her skin. which of the following statements is not an ethical explanation of bettys situation?
just because something is legal does not mean that it is ethical.
laws address the lowest common denominator of socially acceptable behavior.
customers should not assume that all product labels are accurate.
law is not a perfect mechanism for ensuring good corporate behavior.

Explanation:

• The first option links legality and ethics, which is irrelevant to Betty's unmet product promise issue.
• The second option focuses on laws as a minimum social standard, which does not relate to Betty's situation with a false product claim.
• The third option directly addresses that consumers should not trust product labels as accurate, which matches Betty's experience of a cream failing to deliver its promised effect.
• The fourth option discusses law and corporate behavior, which is not connected to Betty's individual consumer issue with a product's unfulfilled promise.

We need to identify the statement that is NOT an ethical explanation for Betty's situation, so the options that do not address her consumer experience with the false product claim are the incorrect (non-ethical explanation) ones, and the correct answer is the one unrelated to her scenario.

Answer:

A. Just because something is legal does not mean that it is ethical.
B. Laws address the lowest common denominator of socially acceptable behavior.
D. Law is not a perfect mechanism for ensuring good corporate behavior.