Critical Review and Analysis Paper: The Insider Film (Movie Review Sample)

CRITICAL ANALYSIS: THE INSIDER FILM
Name
Course
Date
Critical Analysis: The Insider Film
Introduction
The film The Insider produced in 1999 details the ethical dilemmas, controversy, and suspense that surrounded the Brown & Williamson Corporation, Lowell Bergman, and Jeffrey Wigand. The film premises on a true story relating to a 1994 CBS news show called the 60 Minutes. The plot of the film fashions Dr. Jeffrey Wigand played by Russell Crowe at crossroads with his employer company Browns & Williamson, which was the third largest tobacco company in the United States. Dr. Wigand was relieved his duties at the company as the Vice President of Research and Development shortly after pointing out the unethical practice by the company in stimulating tobacco addiction among its customers through using Coumarin that causes cancer. The CEO of the company, Thomas Sandefur alleged the reason behind the sacking was poor communication skills. Moreover, Sandefur demanded that Wigand observe his confidentiality clause by keeping in secrecy the information underscoring the addictive nature of nicotine as well as other practices of the company. The plot of the film takes a twist when Lowell Bergman, the producer of the 60 Minutes played by Al Pacino discovers that Wigand has a compelling story to tell the American society and opts to interview him on the show. However, the tobacco corporations gang up against the show as well as the CBS Corporation with a threat of a lawsuit if the company aired the information that had a confidentiality clause. The essence of the film is to portray the ethical perspective of large tobacco corporations as centering on profits maximization at the expense of societal health. For this reason, the paper purposes to analyze the film The Insider based on utilitarianism, Kantian and Rawlsian perspectives to confirm the stance assumed by Dr. Jeffrey Wigand. Moreover, the paper validates the reality that corporations only aim at profit maximization at the expense of human safety.
The fundamental moral principle of utilitarianism is the principle of utility or greatest happiness principle. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism that focuses on the consequences of an action for the society. Founded on the classical utilitarian theory, the analysis of the moral principle of utilitarianism bases the moral perspective of an action. In the film The Insider, the central character Wigand faces a dilemma that attracts his moral uprightness on the issue concerning the Brown & Williamson, a tobacco company engaging in unethical practices because of their drive to maximize profits. The information harbored by Wigand had the ability to destroy the credibility and ethical uprightness of the Brown & Williamson Company to the eyes of its stakeholders particularly the public and its clientele. Exposing the information meant that Wigand risked not only the financial well-being of his family especially the medical benefits but also the safety of the family. For this reason, Wigand faced a crucial balancing act of the welfare of his family, breaching his confidentiality clause with the Brown & Williamson Corporation and doing the moral right to the American public. Based on the principle of utilitarianism, which underscores the benefits of an action for the general good of the public, Wigand opted to be on the 60 Minutes television show on the CBS Inc, which only aired months afterward. The acceptance to be on the show is after, Bergman, the producer of the show readily convinces Wigand.
The twists and the turns that characterize the CBS Inc to refuse to air the original interview only airing it after other media houses authenticates the concern of conflict of interests in the modern ever-incestuous corporations. In the contemporary corporation world, large corporations engaging in unethical practices have alliances and marriages with other corporations with the objective of protecting their disreputable practices. For instance, in the film The Insider the CBS Inc was willing not to air the Wigand interview that would expose the corrupt practices of Brown & Williamson because of the fear of legal addressing by the Brown & Williamson, in addition to, the fear of failure for its acquisition by the Westinghouse. In this instance, it is even sickening that most of the CBS Inc employees were not aware of the ties that the CBS had with Brown & Williamson, for instance, Bergman who demanded the airing of the interview. This case reveals the concerns of ethics versus economics in the operations of large corporations. The Brown & Williamson Corporations before the sacking of Wigand had an excellent opportunity to implement the suggestions of Wigand, which would entail not including Coumarin in its products to safeguard the health of its customers. This was not the case because the Brown & Williamson Corporation saw the implementing of this action would dent its profit maximization capacity, which correlated with the increased number of cigarette users addicted to its products. Moreover, the CBS Inc initial refusal to air the show on the revelations by Wigand attributed to the consequences that would be eminent if the company aired the show. For this reason, the decision by Wigand to uphold the moral uprightness to breach his confidentiality clause after sacking for the public good was sound.
Based on the Kantian perspective, Immanuel Kant alleged that the primary morality principle is a standard of rationality dubbed categorical imperative (CI). The categorical imperative principle acknowledged the path that human actions had to follow in spite of inclinations and natural desires. The principle concluded that all immoral actions are irrational based on the reality that the actions violated the categorical principle. The perspective comes into question in the film The Insider apparently from the decision by Bergman convincing Wigand to breach his confidentiality clause to the Brown & Williamson Company. According to Immanuel Kant, an action was immoral if it violated the categorical imperative, which is an absolute moral requirement binding a person’s circumstances without being dependent on purpose. By Bergman encouraging Wigand to violate his confidentiality clause, the action from both the stance of Wigand and Bergman was morally unsound in spite of the intended purpose for breaching this clause. The action of Wigand accusing his former boss of two offenses, which was first, perjury apparent from Thomas Sandefur acknowledging with other tobacco company CEO’s of their lack of belief that nicotine was addictive. The denial was contrary to the facts presented by Wigand as the Vice President of Research and Development of the company. The second accusation was alleging that the Brown & Williamson Corporation aborted the quest for safer cigarettes by sacking him for raising the alarm for the company using cancer-causing flavor called Coumarin, which was also addictive. The action by Sandefur colluding with other managers of tobacco companies in misleading the Congress also authenticates the question of ethics versus economics. The large companies had first-hand data on the adverse implications of nicotine as well as Coumarin but opted to stay quite with their focus on profits at the expense of their customer health.
In the presentation of Rawlsian justice, Rawls alleged that it was essential for the society to distinguish between justice as a virtue of specified actions or persons and social justice. The claim attributes to the fact that the definition aims at applying at the justice of the basic structure, which Rawls deemed to be the most critical case of justice. The assertion was because it served in many instances as the foundation for delivering other sorts of explicit accounts of justice. In the case of the film The Insider, the perspective is evident on the right of the Brown & Williamson to privacy versus the right of the American society to be subject to the truth on the issue of nicotine being addictive and Coumarin being a carcinogenic compound. In the film The Insider, the Brown & Williamson Corporation secrecy on the use of Coumarin made certain that the company continues making profits because of its capacity to stimulate the addictive effect of nicotine, which resulted in more clients being dependant on their products. However, the breach of this secrecy would lead to the public being made aware of the harmful effects of this compound, which resulted in the public good. For this reason, according to the Rawlsian theory of justice, the decision by Wigand to breach his confidentiality clause on the private practices of Brown & Williamson was for the great benefit of the entire American populace particularly the cigarette users. The basis of the decision was for the benefit of the least advantaged in the issue of the right of Brown & Williamson privacy versus the right of the society to be aware of the health impact of cigarettes they consumed. In comparison to the Brown & Williamson, the public was the least advantag...