Lipstick Product Ethical Analysis - Research Paper Example

Lipstick Product Ethical Analysis Businesses play a crucial role in every human’s life since employment is offered which then offers the much-needed livelihood. Many businesses are started in order to meet a certain need of the society besides making profit for the owner. Beauty products have recently had a surging demand which has seen more companies venture into this industry. Lipstick is one of the beauty products that have become a phenomenon in the 21st century. While it is indisputable to state businesses are vital to humans, sometimes the production of some goods raises some ethical issues which often go either unnoticed or simply ignored. Since the primary objective of a business is seen as profit-making, these issues are hardly considered despite their harmfulness to either health of environment. For that reason, this paper intends to investigate one of the lipstick products, Maybelline to be precise, and offer recommendations on ways to change the process if need be. Product investigation Maybelline, like any other product, undergoes a series of stages before it has been disposed including extraction, production, distribution, consumption and eventually disposal. First, the extraction process of Maybelline, just like other lipsticks, starts with the gathering of the necessary materials before the mixing process is initiated. Some of the materials used in the extraction process include the oils, emollients, pigments and waxes. Emollients are responsible for the texture and color that Maybelline comes with. Once the gathering of these materials has taken place, the next stage entails the production of the complete product. Here, all the ingredients are ground before undergoing a heating process after which the already-heated waxes are usually added to the mix. Then, lanolin and other oils are added as per the specifications to the mix. Once this is done, different metal molds are used where this liquid is poured. The last two steps see the chilling and cooling of the lipsticks in a bid to harden them, and a second heating occurs with an aim to create a shiny appearance whilst removing any imperfections (Monnot et al. p.253). While there are claims that Maybelline is lead-free, there has been no concrete evidence to prove this claim. In fact, it had been noted that many of the red lipsticks contain a significant amount of lead with a US consumer group reporting that 60% of the lipsticks that were tested in 2007 had higher levels of lead than the ones allowed (Lemaire p.2265). Also, Maybelline lipstick was among the top ten lipsticks containing a considerable amount of lead as US Food and Drug Administration noted (Elboghdaday, par.2). Regarding the workers who make the Maybelline there has been no claims or allegations of mistreatment or underpayments. Once the entire production is completed, the final stage involves packaging of the lipstick before advertisement and subsequent distribution commences. Before the sale or advertisement takes place, the government agencies responsible with inspecting and approving consumer products has to assess the safety of the product. Upon approval by the agencies, the company, L’Oréal USA, employs different tactics in the marketing of the Maybelline. Since lipsticks are mainly used by women, many of the advertisements depict beautiful women using the product. The advertisements trends employed include television, magazines and the social media. Distribution happens in a number of ways including agents who acquire resell rights and direct sales through their sales departments. Additionally, the company allows consumers from other countries to order online through its website. As is the case with other products, disposal poses a threat to a couple of areas of concern to humans including health or environment. Maybelline is no exception, and its products threaten both the environment and health of humans. However, in a bid to mitigate these effects, the firm allows its consumers to send back the lipstick containers. While this sounds noble, it has financial implications on the consumers’ part because the latter caters for the shipping cost. Besides, this shipping is only acceptable where the containers are five or more, meaning the others are dumped anywhere. Worse still, there is no guarantee that consumers will send back the containers, and this creates a platform for pollution of environment. On the other hand, the government seems silent on this issue yet its implications are dire. While it is easy to downplay the effects that emanate from this lack of clear recycle program for the Maybelline, its implication is far worse than merely thought. First, as noted earlier, many of the lipsticks were found to contain a significant amount of lead. That is to say, the communities where the eventual disposal of these containers takes place are exposed to unimaginable risks. If the dumping takes place near water sources consumed by the local communities, it will threaten the health of such communities. Secondly, with many governments seeming reluctant to address the concerns of the lead presence in the lipsticks, it means the environment could be destroyed. Consequently, both the livelihoods and the future of people will be at risk, yet preventive steps could be taken to stop or reduce these steps. Values assessment As indicated earlier on, the major reasons business owners start a business is to realize profitability whilst meeting a need. However, when profit-making becomes the only driving force for doing business, some ethical issues are normally overlooked. It is not uncommon to find health and environment-related issues being overlooked in order to maximize on the profitability. Often, this occurs in all the stages of a product. At extraction of some ingredients used in the lipstick production, a number of health issues are overlooked. First, emollients or simply moisturizers pose health concerns which have not adequately been addressed. For instance, it has been reported that moisturizers pose a risk of bacterial contamination. In addition, the safety concerns of the ingredients of emollients have been ignored. It has been reported that certain moisturizers increase chances of skin cancer and irritation in different people (Penzer p.276). Despite of these findings, there is no mention of the process used by the L’Oréal USA in ensuring the moisturizers used are not harmful to the consumers. In light of the above, one can clearly notice that the company, like others, is more bent on maximizing profits than primarily focusing on the health of the consumers. Even though not all emollients have harmful chemical agents, L’Oréal USA, the maker of Maybelline, has not clearly indicated which one it uses. The other ingredients have certain degrees of harm that could be extended to the workers and consumers, and again, there is no mention of the measures employed to reduce this impact. While it is factual the firm offers employment to a number of employees, it is clear that it values profits more than anything else. Notwithstanding the above admonition, it is worth pointing out that company’s production process caters for the employees’ health. During the mixing and grounding process, all employees have protective gloves and masks to minimize the effects of these chemicals. Similarly, the packaging stage is carried out with employees having all the necessary garments to ensure their safety. Besides, the location of assembly, guarantees both their safety and security (L’Oréal USA n.p.). Therefore, in the process of packaging, one can conclude that the firm concerned with the health affairs of its employees. Also, it is important to understand that the priority of values seem to escape almost every other player in the process besides the company. For instance, once the production has taken place, the packaging is done by employees who can hardly question the ingredients of the product. In fact, the assembly and even the making of the lipstick are carried out by the employees whose major concern is earning the wages. Therefore, one can see that while the company is mainly interested in the profit resulting in the eventual sale of the product, the employees’ only value is the salary they get. Whereas one could contest the possibility of employees questioning the process, the fact that no one reports or boycotts the process implies they are not primarily concerned about their safety or others’. The government agency responsible for evaluating the products follows suit in relaxing the laws because their focus too is on the taxes the firm pays. In the study where lead was found on the lipstick, the allowed quantity had been surpassed. Surprisingly, the products had been approved as fit for the humans despite this discovery. Clearly, agencies’ value seem not ensuring consumers are safe while using such products. Instead, it is the preservation of such companies that guarantee the payment of taxes to the government meaning there will little influence on the agency’s part. The trend is repeated at the advertisement where the media houses hardly care to look at the ingredients of the product. Blindly, they allow the advertisement of these products because their business also relies on the revenues from these advertisements. Instead of questioning the safety of the products, though not their primary responsibility, the media go ahead to offer a platform for the thriving of potentially harmful products. Sadly, the most important stakeholder in this process, the consumer, acts similarly. Contrary to what one would expect where the consumers would practice diligence before purchase of such products, the opposite happens. Naively, consumers are attracted to the advertisement appearing on TVs and other places with no concern of the health concerns posed by the product. Upon the sale of the product by the company and subsequent consumption by the consumers, another important value is not given pre-eminence: recycling. Even though the firm allows consumers to send the containers back once the lipstick is exhausted, the process is not comprehensive as earlier explained. This observation underlines the fact that all along, the primary focus for all the respective stakeholders- the firm, consumer and the government- is not safety but satisfaction. This assertion is informed by the government’s lack of stiff interest on how recycling ought to take place, the firm’s lack of clear recycle guidelines and consumers’ commitment of the same. From the above analysis, one can clearly see that two major ethical issues are being overlooked: health and environmental. The health concerns arise from the ingredients used in the production of the lipstick since some materials have some traces of lead. Environment ethical issues re ignored by all parties because there is no guideline by the company and zero enforcement by the government. As a result of these lapses, one realizes the social sins practiced by all the relevant parties consumers included. For instance, all the parties commit the sin of pleasure without conscience because each is concerned with what makes them happy regardless of the consequences to others. Commerce without morality is practiced by the company and the media houses while the government is guilty of politics without principle. Overall, the lipstick is seen as the product of intrinsic value hence commodification. Commodification entails the classification of a product previously not considered as such as one (Murtola p.835). Possibilities for change In conclusion, all is not lost in this case, and this section will offer recommendations on ways to improve the process. First, the gathering of the materials ought to be improved where more analysis is conducted on the materials used. In order to ascertain their safety, the government’s agencies such as Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) could be involved. In the gathering section, all employees ought to be fully protected by wearing protective gear. When advertising the media ought to ensure that all the information presented in the packaging is factual. Strict inspection of the product before it is released for consumption has to be conducted by the relevant government agencies. Upon purchase by the consumer the latter needs to investigate the side effects evident on their skins if any. These measures will prevent further health ramifications if conducted diligently. Other groups such as churches and other social groups could assist in the disposal process by either burning or burying the containers. Work cited ElBoghdady, Dina. 400 Lipsticks Found To Contain Lead, FDA Says. Washington Post. N.p., 2012. Web. 22 May 2015. Lorealparisusa. Cleansers & Makeup Removers - Wash Away Impurities - Loreal Paris. Web. 22 May 2015. Lemaire, R.. Determination of Lead In Lipstick By Direct Solid Sampling High- Resolution Continuum Source Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry: Comparison of Two Digestion Methods. Analytical Letters 46.14 (2013): 2265-2268. Monnot, Andrew D. et al. An Exposure and Health Risk Assessment Of Lead (Pb) In Lipstick. Food and Chemical Toxicology 80 (2015): 253-254. Murtola, A.-M. Experience, Commodification, Biopolitics. Critical Sociology 40.6 (2014): 835-836. Penzer, Rebecca. Prescribing Emollients For Dry Skin Conditions. Nurse Prescribing 11.6 (2013): 276-277. Read More