Page 64 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 64 of 234 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
58
admission of guilt. The only benefit the company receives is a return to normal business. In light of the total losses companies suffer at the hands of vipers, evidently the reinstatement of their product’s name in the eyes of their consumers is more valuable than money. According to Business Line, “who is blamed for a company’s loss of reputation? Executives assign 58 per cent of the blame to CEO’s when it comes to a company’s loss of reputation after a crisis.”173 Since most chief executive officers likely prefer to remain employed by the company, the restoration of reputation and product name is paramount.
The extent of monetary damages to private companies who are the targets of vipers is momentous. Coors reported a decline in sales of sixteen percent equating to up to a million dollars in losses. Pepsi reported a forty million dollar loss in just one week. Wendy’s losses of one million dollars per day equated to a total loss of more than thirty one million dollars.174
As a way to recoup their losses, I offer to post-hoax private companies an additional suggestion. While the vipers may be prohibited from profiting from their scheme, the company is not.175 It could be perceived as outlandish, but perhaps the company should consider writing its own book. They could hire a ghostwriter, provide the author with information and access to the employees and stores involved,
173 Anon, “CEO’s to Blame for a CO’s Reputation Loss,” Business Line, Financial Times Information Limited, March 7, 2007.
174 McDonald’s and Cracker Barrel losses were not contained in available literature, and Taco Bell did not report a financial loss because the viper’s plan was so poor, the hoax was uncovered too quickly.
175 The law currently does not prohibit vipers from benefiting from their hoax, but as discussed, most companies require this concession as part of a plea bargain. I hope this research spurs the legislature to take action against hoaxers and that any statutory change will include a prohibition on benefiting financially from any hoax, not just monetary hoaxes.
Object Description
| Title | An argument for the criminal hoax |
| Author | Pellegrini, Laura A. |
| Author email | user1963@yahoo.com; teachpolsci@yahoo.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Political Science |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-20 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-13 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Renteln, Alison Dundes |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Wong, Janelle S. Newland, Chester A. |
| Abstract | Hoaxes are part of the fabric of history. While many provide humor and lighthearted joy, the criminal hoax does not. To date, researchers have included aspects of the criminal hoax in larger academic works. This is an original typology that sets forth the criminal hoax as a distinct part of the larger field of law and public policy. This work provides newly created definitions including four distinct categories of hoaxes: the monetary hoax, the attention getter hoax, the hate crime hoax and the racial hoax. It further illustrates these types with actual detailed accounts of hoaxes and provides insights to each one. It makes policy recommendations concerning the four categories of needs: 1. legislative action, 2. a nationwide statistical database of hoax events, 3. media involvement, and 4. law enforcement training and action to deal with criminal hoaxes. Finally, it recommends further research to identify the causes and motivations of vipers. The ultimate goal of this project is to find ways to eliminate criminal hoaxes. |
| Keyword | criminal hoax; hoax categories |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1659 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Pellegrini, Laura A. |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Pellegrini-2397 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Pellegrini-2397.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 64 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 58 admission of guilt. The only benefit the company receives is a return to normal business. In light of the total losses companies suffer at the hands of vipers, evidently the reinstatement of their product’s name in the eyes of their consumers is more valuable than money. According to Business Line, “who is blamed for a company’s loss of reputation? Executives assign 58 per cent of the blame to CEO’s when it comes to a company’s loss of reputation after a crisis.”173 Since most chief executive officers likely prefer to remain employed by the company, the restoration of reputation and product name is paramount. The extent of monetary damages to private companies who are the targets of vipers is momentous. Coors reported a decline in sales of sixteen percent equating to up to a million dollars in losses. Pepsi reported a forty million dollar loss in just one week. Wendy’s losses of one million dollars per day equated to a total loss of more than thirty one million dollars.174 As a way to recoup their losses, I offer to post-hoax private companies an additional suggestion. While the vipers may be prohibited from profiting from their scheme, the company is not.175 It could be perceived as outlandish, but perhaps the company should consider writing its own book. They could hire a ghostwriter, provide the author with information and access to the employees and stores involved, 173 Anon, “CEO’s to Blame for a CO’s Reputation Loss,” Business Line, Financial Times Information Limited, March 7, 2007. 174 McDonald’s and Cracker Barrel losses were not contained in available literature, and Taco Bell did not report a financial loss because the viper’s plan was so poor, the hoax was uncovered too quickly. 175 The law currently does not prohibit vipers from benefiting from their hoax, but as discussed, most companies require this concession as part of a plea bargain. I hope this research spurs the legislature to take action against hoaxers and that any statutory change will include a prohibition on benefiting financially from any hoax, not just monetary hoaxes. |
