IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v17y2007i01p5-32_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Kasky-Nike Threat to Corporate Social Reporting: Implementing a Standard of Optimal Truthful Disclosure as a Solution

Author

Listed:
  • Hess, David
  • Dunfee, Thomas W.

Abstract

In the recent case of Nike v. Kasky both sides argued that their standard for distinguishing commercial speech from political speech would create the better policy for ensuring accurate and complete disclosure of social information by corporations. Using insights from information economics, we argue that neither standard will achieve the policy goal of optimal truthful disclosure. Instead, we argue that the appropriate standard is one of optimal truthful disclosure—balancing the value of speech against the costs of misinformation. Specifically, we argue that an SEC-sanctioned safe harbor available under a closely supervised system for social reporting will bring about optimal truthful disclosure. The scheme is intended to enhance stakeholder confidence in corporate social and political commentary, while at the same time encouraging corporations to provide accurate information in a fair playing field of public debate.

Suggested Citation

  • Hess, David & Dunfee, Thomas W., 2007. "The Kasky-Nike Threat to Corporate Social Reporting: Implementing a Standard of Optimal Truthful Disclosure as a Solution," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 5-32, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:17:y:2007:i:01:p:5-32_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00002189/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adaeze Okoye, 2009. "Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 613-627, November.
    2. Jayati Sarkar & Subrata Sarkar, 2015. "Corporate social responsibility in India - An Effort to bridge the welfare gap," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2015-023, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    3. Stefania Veltri & Francesco De Luca & Ho‐Tan‐Phat Phan, 2020. "Do investors value companies' mandatory nonfinancial risk disclosure? An empirical analysis of the Italian context after the EU Directive," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2226-2237, September.
    4. Eenkhoorn, P. & Graafland, J.J., 2010. "Lying in Business : Insights from Hannah Arendt’s ‘Lying in Politics’," Discussion Paper 2010-75, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    5. Giorgio Mion & Cristian R. Loza Adaui, 2019. "Mandatory Nonfinancial Disclosure and Its Consequences on the Sustainability Reporting Quality of Italian and German Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-28, August.
    6. Antonino Vaccaro & Alejo Sison, 2011. "Transparency in Business: The Perspective of Catholic Social Teaching and the “Caritas in Veritate”," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(1), pages 17-27, March.
    7. João Neves & Antonino Vaccaro, 2013. "Corporate Transparency: A Perspective from Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 113(4), pages 639-648, April.
    8. Andrea Venturelli & Fabio Caputo & Simona Cosma & Rossella Leopizzi & Simone Pizzi, 2017. "Directive 2014/95/EU: Are Italian Companies Already Compliant?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Jayati Sarkar & Subrata Sarkar, 2015. "Corporate Social Responsibility in India—An Effort to Bridge the Welfare Gap," Review of Market Integration, India Development Foundation, vol. 7(1), pages 1-36, April.
    10. Fabio Caputo & Rossella Leopizzi & Simone Pizzi & Virginia Milone, 2019. "The Non-Financial Reporting Harmonization in Europe: Evolutionary Pathways Related to the Transposition of the Directive 95/2014/EU within the Italian Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    11. Michał Jurek, 2014. "The genesis and evolution of CSR self-regulation with special refer-ence to the case of financial institutions," Working papers wpaper70, Financialisation, Economy, Society & Sustainable Development (FESSUD) Project.
    12. Sherwood, Charles, 2022. "A lie is a lie: the ethics of lying in business negotiations," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113331, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Sebastian Utz, 2019. "Corporate scandals and the reliability of ESG assessments: evidence from an international sample," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 483-511, April.
    14. Simona Cosma & Rossella Leopizzi & Simone Pizzi & Mario Turco, 2021. "The stakeholder engagement in the European banks: Regulation versus governance. What changes after the NF directive?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 1091-1103, May.
    15. Carol A. Adams & Glen Whelan, 2009. "Conceptualising future change in corporate sustainability reporting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(1), pages 118-143, January.
    16. Michela Cordazzo & Laura Bini & Giuseppe Marzo, 2020. "Does the EU Directive on non‐financial information influence the value relevance of ESG disclosure? Italian evidence," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3470-3483, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:17:y:2007:i:01:p:5-32_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.