The corporate communication should be a manifestation of the organization’s responsibility towards society. Let us analyze Nike example regarding the same.
Nike has been attacked by NGOs constantly for its attitude for its manufacturing units overseas. Nike claims itself to be a marketing firm rather than a manufacturing one. It entirely out sources its manufacturing and contracts the work across the globe. However more than once it has been embarrassed by the attacks on its overseas operations. In the year 1996, there was a child labor issue when a major story in the Life magazine featured a photograph of a very young Pakistani boy sewing a Nike Soccer ball. In response the co announced that it will raise the minimum age of the factory workers. In the 1970s most Nike shoes were made in Taiwan and South Korea. When the labor in these countries started to organize themselves for better wages and working conditions the company shifted its activities to Indonesia, China and also Vietnam. It is analyzed that Nike preferred these countries due to their poor enforcement of labor laws and also cheap labor availability. However in October 2000, the BBC exposed Nike factory in Cambodia which broke its own strict code of conduct and rules. Post this, Nike promised to remove all underage workers from its factories and assured to pay for their education till the age of 16. In 1997, Nike was exposed for its hazardous conditions in south-east Asian factories where the labor was subjected to toxic material and fumes. All this while Nike tried to avoid responsibility for factory conditions by saying that they are “just buyers”, but the anti-sweatshop movement has refused to accept the excuse. The movement also forced Nike to take responsibility for the workers who make their products. The company incorporated CSR into its overall business strategy, which was necessary for its survival. The question arises that did Nike have to wait for the