Comments on: Marriott, Again

By: Julie M. Smith

Julie M. Smith — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:39:23 +0000

OK then. If anyone has anything new to say, email me and I’ll consider re-opening comments.

By: L

Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:34:51 +0000

Sorry for commenting in the comment section of a blog about my opinion on the topic at hand. I suppose I’m the ignorant one for misinterpreting the word comment.

By: Brad Kramer

Brad Kramer — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:31:42 +0000

Well, the enlightenment was appreciated nonetheless. I can’t say how helpful it was for someone to finally get us all back on track by suggesting that “CEOs and Directors of Boards have a moral obligation to make to make money for their shareholders.” I think I can speak for us all in saying that I feel just a bit less ignorant about the functioning of society.

By: L

Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:27:15 +0000

No, that was my reasoning for not reading all 131 comments, but thanks for paying attention.

By: Brad Kramer

Brad Kramer — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:24:11 +0000

“Eventually it gets boring to read comments of people who are ignorant about the functioning of society.”

And your basis for this claim is, uh, *not* reading our comments?

Seriously, though, thanks for enlightening us knuckle-draggers on the finer points corporate law and fiduciary duty.

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:15:50 +0000

Even if, arguendo, there were some nutbar caselaw suggesting a fiduciary duty for corporate hotel chains to provide porn, Marriott should resign rather than perform such a task. It’s not like he’s an indentured porn-mongerer.

Julie, refreshing to see that, a year later, there are so many novel approaches to the Marriott issue! What exactly have we learned in that time?

By: L

Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:15:47 +0000

Actually Julie M. Smith, I was commenting on the post, which is in fact the purpose of a comment section. So no, I did not read all of the 131 comments. Eventually it gets boring to read comments of people who are ignorant about the functioning of society.

By: Brad Kramer

Brad Kramer — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:07:56 +0000

If I accepted a position as CEO of a publicly traded company that runs brothels in Nevada, would my fiduciary duty to the company’s shareholders shield me from judgments of the morality of the nature of my business enterprise?

By: Brad Kramer

Brad Kramer — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:59:13 +0000

“Well, Bishop, yes — I have made a habit of watching pornographic movies recreationally during my business trips. But in my defense, I only stay at Marriott hotels. That means that 1) all the porn I watch lives up to the Marriott Porn Standards, and 2) there’s a fair chance that some of the revenue my habit has generated for the company made its way into the construction of the temple just built Kiev.”

“Well, Elder Marriott, I am aware that technically watching pornography is not in harmony with accepting a full-time position on BYU’s faculty, but…”

By: Brad Kramer

Brad Kramer — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:50:50 +0000

Gary,
Read the relevant quotations from #24. It’s impossible to argue with a straight face that profiting off of the distribution is not in direct violation of the teachings of the Church — not just teachings declaring pornography itself immoral but teachings declaring the distribution of pornography immoral. Instead you have to argue that the “conflicting duty” of making money no matter the social cost or moral implications, uh, counterbalances against this moral duty. Marriott is not just some CEO who happens to also be LDS when he worships. He has made his moral, upstanding, Mormon identity an integral component of his professional identity and brand as the figurehead of MarriottCorp. Even if you want to use the more innocuous language of “conflicting duties” to characterize this situation, I’ll repeat the question (sorry Julie to repeat myself) with which I closed comment #94:

Are you *seriously* arguing that the professional imperative to make money for the company or even to remain CEO of MC is sufficiently strong to outweigh his moral imperative not just as a Mormon but as an extremely public, well-known Mormon and *Church Leader* to not sell this smut? I am making no judgments as to Elder Marriott’s overall character — I understand that none of us are perfect and that righteousness and worthiness are complicated questions; but this is indefensible. Period.