-NIKE-SPEECH OR ADV - Case Study Example

Summary of an article: Advertising or Free Speech? The Case of Nike and Human Rights Nike is a growing company that offers its products for the global audience. Company’s style and brand is widely recognized for several reasons: Nike is an active sponsor and participant of various sports’ events around the world and uses dynamic advertising campaigns. Nike was also the first company that started using offshore factories and contractors in third world countries. The company was involved in various offshore labor scandals in the past.

Nike’s labor practices around the world have attracted attention of various labor and human rights NGOs, as well as the general public. Different student organizations were calling to ban Nike’s goods on campus due to severe labor conditions on their factories. Under this pressure the company had to increase its compliance personnel. Nevertheless scandals of the past are still haunting the company nowadays. Nike’s brand and reputation has suffered severely. In 2002 Nike was involved in a law suit scandal.

The company was accused in intentional denial of its involvement in severe labor practices in third world countries. Nike tried to defend itself through various advertising campaigns and public statements. The plaintiff believed that those statements were not true and were simply driven by advertising interests. Nike allegedly violated California’s statute by providing the audience with misleading information. Nike tried to present it as a free speech, which should be protected under the First Amendment.

However the Court agreed with the plaintiff that these public statements were of advertising nature. It was agreed that Nike’s “commercial speaker” tried to improve its reputation by addressing messages to a “commercial audience.” The court ruled out the case of free speech but recognized those statements as a commercial speech. The Court also concluded that companies have to use factual grounds in promoting their services and reputation. In case this decision is sustained, MNCs would find themselves in a very troublesome position to defend their interests.

Cases of human rights violations would be raised to the level of company’s advertising activities and declarations.