What Is The Difference Between Hugh Hefner And Scott Flanders

It has been 44 years since photos of nude women have been legally seen throughout the media, and it is now common to walk into a convenient store and see numerous adult magazines tucked up on the back shelf of the stand. Many see it as just another way society has exploited women, while others argue that it is simply a way of free artistic expression. The most prevalent achievement from women’s nudity has been the infamous Hugh Hefner, the creator and mastermind behind the world famous Playboy Magazine. The company itself has gained a worth of nearly 500 million dollars (Forbes, 2011). Regardless of its success, the company has had its fair amount of negative media attention as well as legal trouble.
One reason Hugh Hefner and Scott Flanders
From 2007-2010, Playboy Enterprises began showing losses in their income statement (WSJ, 2013). As well, as discussed before, they began facing multiple lawsuits and felt like the chain of command was becoming too decentralized. As a result, Hugh Hefner has acquired reached a deal to acquire the shares of the company that he doesn’t already own, and go private after 40 years of being a publicly traded company. Scott Flanders, the CEO, plans on reducing the staff by nearly 75%, re-centralize its headquarters, and shrink down to a more profitable company. However, many employees have complied well with the change. Some current and former employees claim, “the restructuring pain extends beyond the cost cuts, and that Mr. Flanders has created a difficult work environment, requiring employees to file regular reports to him detailing their conflicts with other employees in the company, and sometimes doling out verbal abuse.” (WSJ, 2013). What we see here is a classic example of interpersonal justice. In addition to judging the fairness of decision outcomes and processes, Playboy employees were considering how authorities treat them as the procedures are implemented. We can also see that the actions of this dramatic change created a little abusive supervision, such as an employee complaining about authority “ doling out verbal
The Playboy Philosophy is a personal view on such things including personal freedom, economic freedom, and political freedom, which rolls over to the culture of Playboy Enterprises. However, during the late 70’s and 80’s, our Country’s moral compass often times pointed in a different direction than Hefner’s. The company was often being attacked by the Catholic Church for acts such as “ destroying the morality of the Western world”. As well, many civil rights activists argued that the magazine simply exploited women as sexual objects for juvenile men. Hefner however believed that he was among the many other great minds in the 20th century that sought after free loving patriotism. In a way, Hefner had quite a bit of moral awareness, and recognized the many moral issues that existed in the industry he was in. His ethical code however was just looser than many others at the time. Hefner simply perceived the magnitude of consequences relatively small in the big scheme of things. What many critiques often harp on is his moral judgment. Keep in mind, when Mr. Hefner founded the company, he was a young man ambitious to get attention from the media anyway he could. What’s interesting however, is that as Hefner and the company matured, their moral development never aged nor became more sophisticated. This contrasts Kohlberg’s theory