Author:
Hess David,Dunfee Thomas W.
Abstract
ABSTRACT:In the recent case of Nike v. Kasky both sides argued that their standard for distinguishing commercial speech from political speech would create the better policy for ensuring accurate and complete disclosure of social information by corporations. Using insights from information economics, we argue that neither standard will achieve the policy goal of optimal truthful disclosure. Instead, we argue that the appropriate standard is one of optimal truthful disclosure—balancing the value of speech against the costs of misinformation. Specifically, we argue that an SEC-sanctioned safe harbor available under a closely supervised system for social reporting will bring about optimal truthful disclosure. The scheme is intended to enhance stakeholder confidence in corporate social and political commentary, while at the same time encouraging corporations to provide accurate information in a fair playing field of public debate.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Philosophy,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference53 articles.
1. Reflexive environmental law;Orts;Northwestern University Law Review,,1995
2. Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource-based views
3. External transparency or internal capture? The role of third-party statements in adding value to corporate environmental reports1
4. Liptak A. 2003. Nike move ends case over firms’ free speech. New York Times, September 13: A8.
5. Cowe R. 2003. A magnifying glass on businesses’ impact. Financial Times, October 30: 14.
Cited by
50 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献