Corporations Are People

Emotions can make even the best lose their sense of reasoning

My favorite marketing guru, Seth Godin, writing in disgust from an unfortunate experience by a customer with an insurance company, rants,

if someone in your neighborhood used this approach, treating others this way, if a human with a face and a house and a reputation did it, they'd have to move away in shame. If a local businessperson did this, no one in town would ever do business there again.

Corporations (even though it's possible that individuals working there might mean well) play a different game all too often. They bet on short memories and the healing power of marketing dollars, commercials and discounts. Employees are pushed to focus on bureaucratic policies and quarterly numbers, not a realization that individuals, not corporations, are responsible for what they do…

Corporations don't have to act like this. It's people who can make them stop. Corporations aren't people, people are people.

I sympathize with the tragic case presented by Mr. Godin. But personal tragedies should not be mixed up with ethical principles.

It’s is true that there will always be unscrupulous corporations. But CROOKED or IMMORAL behaviors or actions are NOT exclusive to corporations, they apply to PEOPLE—individuals or even communities (e.g. hate groups)—and most especially this applies to GOVERMENTs who wields coercive power over the community.

Corporations are no other than juridical or legal entity comprising sets of individuals.

Yet one unfortunate experience does not justify a sweeping condemnation of the rest. This represents a fallacy of composition.

Otherwise markets become zero-sum games which tilts the balance according to Mr. Godin’s accusations to producers or service providers at the expense of consumers. This is patently false.

In a market economy, corporations essentially do NOT force ‘people’ to buy their products or services. Mr. Godin admits to this, “If a local businessperson did this, no one in town would ever do business there again.”

But why should this be different elsewhere?

Only governments forces people to avail of their services. On many occasions these may come along with political arrangements with privileged private or semi-private owned corporations (e.g. public private partnerships, monopolies, subsidies and etc).

Corporations under such politically directed setting then would focus “on bureaucratic policies” or meeting political goals rather than servicing the consumers. The incentives guiding profit based private enterprises and public institutions are different.

In a market environment if corporations do not fulfill on their promises, then consumers can vote with their wallets and or file legal suits or countersuits against them.

Markets basically do not reward greed or “the power of marketing dollars” as the consumers are kings—unless inhibited by politics

Apparently, social media pressure (yes the free markets) seems to have forced the alleged corporate non-people antagonist to a settlement with the aggrieved. So the supposed villain has some people aspects too.

The idea of corporations as not representing the individual or the people looks like a Janus faced populist self-contradicting argument riding on people’s emotions in order to get “likes”.

Yet assuming Mr. Godin’s censure is true, this implies that since he possibly owns corporations (e.g. Seth Godin Productions Inc and Squidoo) then his denouncement could also mean that he must be similarly liable for “Corporations aren't people, people are people”

Ever heard of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black?