Money, shoes and lies

Nike doesn't have a great track record in public relations. It has been repeatedly accused of operating sweatshops overseas where employees receive less than a living wage, are forced to work overtime and are subject to abuse. According to money.cnn.com, during a nine month period ending Feb. 28, Nike made $7.71 billion in revenue. Without question, Nike draws the line between pure capitalism and pure greed.\nWhen allegations of its improper labor practices surfaced on CBS' "48 Hours" and through various other media outlets, Nike responded with a public relations campaign designed to curb public distrust in the company by claiming that the company treated its overseas employees well and in accordance with local laws. Marc Kasky, a California resident, brought suit, claiming Nike intentionally misled the public in order to improve business.\nNike claims its public relations campaign is non-commercial speech and therefore protected under the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court, currently hearing the case on appeal, has generally provided less protection to commercial than non-commercial speech. Kasky claims Nike's speech is commercial and was intended to boost sales, as would advertising.\nThe Supreme Court of California decided for Kasky. An opinion for the court stated: "As the United States Supreme Court has explained, false and misleading speech has no constitutional value in itself and is protected only in circumstances and to the extent necessary to give breathing room for the free debate of public issues."\nThe fact that Nike lied is almost a non-issue. In one statement issued by Nike, the company said it allowed all workers to unionize, but in China, workers can't unionize. \nThe First Amendment was designed to protect speech that is true, or at least has the semblance of truth, not for huge corporations to intentionally mislead the public.\nThe justices' majority opinion continued: "… when a business enterprise, to promote and defend its sales and profits, makes factual representations about its own products or its own operations, it must speak truthfully."\nNike has the money to pay and treat its employees justly. Until it does, the American people have a right to fair and accurate information regarding worker conditions. Choosing not to buy Nike products because of its labor practices is a personal choice. To try to win over people that would do so with intentional misinformation violates the principles (business or otherwise) of this country.\nA dissent written for the Supreme Court of California states that Nike has a right, along with its critics, to engage in an open debate on the issues. However, the debate is hardly a fair one, considering Nike's economic superiority to would-be protesters. \nWith billions of dollars in its corporate pocket, Nike needs to do more to make working environments better and provide for its employees. To stoop so low as to lie in order to garner more sales is wrong and should be punished as the law permits.\n--Jason Gaddis for the Editorial Board