Whose problem is it?
In the two days since HEXUS.channel revealed that Evesham Technology has apparently been selling PCs, despite openly admitting that it was in liquidation, the silence has been deafening.
As observed at the time, many of the institutions put in place to protect creditors and would-be creditors seem to have little interest in this situation.
Unless there is some other definition of liquidation that we’re not aware of, it must surely be a matter of concern when a company can openly admit to be being in liquidation and yet still be willing to proceed with a commercial transaction without any reference to this status.
As scandals like Enron have shown, you can only expect everyone to play by the rules if they know that they will be held accountable for not doing so.
The repercussions for breaking the rules must not only be severe enough to act as a deterrent, they must also be seen to be ruthlessly enforced.
Failure to do so not only lets the transgressors off the hook but emboldens others to follow in their footsteps.
So when a situation like this fails to get the attention of even the local press, let alone the national media or consumer affairs institutions, you have to wonder what it takes to create a bit of outrage.
Some culpability has to also be placed at the door of the commercial arm of the media. Journalists who allow their published work to be overtly influenced by commercial considerations soon get found out and their credibility suffers as a result. For this reason the advertising and editorial functions are usually kept strictly separate … and long may that continue.
However, is that enough? If a publication continues to run the advertisements of a company it knows to be in trouble, is it not letting down its readers just as much as if it had written about that company?
Surely the honest and ethical thing to do is to not represent such a company at all unless you are as confident as possible that your readers will not be adversely affected by dealing with them.
Just a thought.