The paper "Big Fat Liability in Focus on the Concepts of Paternalism and Autonomy " is a wonderful example of an assignment on business. Paternalism and autonomy are vivid in the Big Fat Liability case. Paternalism involves withholding information such as the true form of an individual so as to benefit them (Conly 10). For the case of the Big Fat Liability, information on consumer health by the McDonalds Company touches on autonomy and paternalism is concerned (Sebok 1). The company focuses on processed meat, French fries, and salt.
This is straightforward information that does not necessarily need to be advertised. In this case, paternalism may not apply much in this case. The company has made it clear on its current changes; thus, presenting the clients with clear information on the health prospects of the company (Sebok 1). Autonomy, on the other hand, involves free operation with minimal government interference (Conly 16). The government did not interfere with the Big Fat Liability case as it argued that the obese teenage girls were not forced to eat at McDonald's and that they could easily see the contents of the food presented to them (Sebok 1).
Autonomy applies more in this case as opposed to paternalism since no information was withheld from the customer. Marketing is not just the psychological exploitation of customers. Flint writes that "successful" marketing schemes involve a coalition between agencies and retailers (6). This means that retailers can drive the retail market and even become excellent shoppers even without manipulation of their psychology. A good example is the clients of Walmart that have exciting and collaborative shoppers with minimal manipulation of their psychology (Flint 6).