Langston Hughes' Poem Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Langston Hughes' Poem - Essay Example In "Rivers, " Hughes claimed this legacy-vocabulary of place encompassing "downriver, " the term for all the dreaded places in the lower South to which slaves were sold off, "the riverside, " one of the relative safe havens and sites of resistance within the domain of the plantation itself, and "over Jordan, " the beckoning frontier of freedom visible from inside the bounds of enslavement and exile as it was elaborated and interpreted in the nineteenth century in the traditional Negro spirituals and in such classic fugitive slave narratives as Frederick Douglass's and Harriet Jacobs's as sites of meditation, rebellion, and recuperation. (R. Baxter Miller, 2005). By placing that inherited vocabulary of place within a wider geographic perspective, however, Hughes proposed a reconstituted imagery of place for the twentieth century, one associated with a progression across continents in a historic and prophetic language of belonging and entitlement, beyond enslavement.

The power of the American president is to persuade. Discuss in Essay

The power of the American president is to persuade. Discuss in relation to recent presidents - Essay Example This is mainly because if the public is convinced that the president is right, it will give him its full support and the members of Congress will have to follow suit because to do otherwise would mean that quite a number of them might lose their seats during elections. The American president has to be eloquent in his speeches so that he can be able not only to persuade his audience but also to pass his point through to those individuals who are against him that his is the right course and they have to support him. Over the past fifteen years, this has been the case among the men who have had the privilege of being the leaders of the most powerful nation in the world. These presidents, namely Clinton, Bush, and currently Obama, have all had to work hard to persuade the American public as well as the American allies that their intentions and actions have been in the latter’s interest. One of the most fascinating episodes where an American president was forced to be persuasive in order to save his presidency was that of President Clinton during his threatened impeachment over the Lewinsky Scandal. Bill Clinton can be considered to have been one of the most popular presidents in modern American history and it is not just because of his charisma, but also because he was also able to connect with many of the baby boomer generation, to which he belonged. This was a period where the American presidency was mired in a scandal which almost brought down the president and it is mainly because of the ability of Clinton to persuade his audience that his actions did not in any way jeopardize his presidency that he managed to remain in office for the remainder of his term (Storey 2010, p.305). When the Lewinski scandal first came to the attention of the media, it generated a lot of shock in the public and the most conservative members of the Republican Party saw it as an oppor tunity to remove a president from a rival party. However,

The History Of The Kitchen Refrigerators

The History Of The Kitchen Refrigerators Today, refrigerators have become an essential part of every kitchen (Tatum, 2010). Refrigeration is used to store meat, vegetables among other foodstuffs at low temperatures, thus inhibiting spoilage due to microbial activity. The process of essentially, manufacturing or making a refrigerator was gradual and begain in the 18th century. It culminitated with Carl von Lindens work in 1876. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) Evidence suggests that since 500 AD, man has known to produce ice by natural processes. Egyptians and Indians made ice on cold nights by setting water on earthenware pots. Later on in the 1700s, England servants in the 1700s collected ice in the winter and put into icehouses, which then provided cool storage in the summer. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) In 1748, William Cullen of the University of Glasgow developed an entirely new process that consequently lead to an artificial cooling medium being developed. (Tatum, 2010). His experiment produced ice. However; he was unable to explain what it meant. Around 1805, the Oliver Evans was involved in designing a refrigeration apparatus, but unfortunately, he didnt build one until Robert Perkins improved on his creation in 1834. (Bellis, 2010). Thomas Moore coined the word refrigerator for these machines. However, as today Perkins and Evans machines are called iceboxes. In 1844, Dr. John Gorrie, a physician, was able to construct a working unit that was based on both Evans and Perkins model. constructed. It was because of a outbreak of yellow fever that led to Gorrie creating the unit, which was used to cooling the air. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) Gorrie is credited as being the one who invented the refrigerator by many. (Bellis, 2010) However the situation began to change, when Carl von Linde (1842-1934), a German mechanical engineer published an essay on improved refrigeration techniques, in 1871. He proposed a continuous process of liquefying gases in large quantities. In 1873, he invented the first practical and portable compressor refrigeration machine. (Tatum, 2010) He obtained a patent for his refrigerator in 1877 from the German Imperial Patent Office. He made use of gases namely ammonia, sulphur dioxide and methyl chloride. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) In the 1900s, various refrigeration models were seen. Noteworthy refrigerator models included Servel, Frigidaire, Electroflux among others. (Bellis, 2010) These models of the 1900s had several advancements since designs of pioneers such as Gorrie. By 1918, automatic controls were part of some models already. (Tatum, 2010) The gases used namely ammonia, sulphur and methyl chloride were replaced by Freon in the 1920s in order to comply with safety standards. When one looks at the history, it shows that in 1918, automatic parts were already installed. This included automatic dials that aid in the operation. It was rather unfortunate that the units were not self contained as different parts were separately placed from each other. It wasnt until 1923 that self contained refrigerators began appearing. (Bellis, 2010) Ice cube trays were also introduced. (Tatum, 2010) Although many advancements were made, the modern refrigerator was put in mass production until 1946 i.e., after the World War II. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) People, in the the 1950s and 1960s were the ones that witnessed a variety of technological innovations by engineers and scientists of the day. Among them were: (i) automated defrosting and (ii) making of ice. Today, there are many features that are intertwined with the features of the olden days and includes power failure alerts, ice cabinets among others. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) To present, domestic refrigerators are present in almost every home worldwide. Due to the models created by Gorrie, Cullen, Carl von Linche among others, the refrigerator has thus become one of the machines or applicances that is integral to us every day. (Bellis, 2010 Tatum, 2010) TYPES OF REFRIGERATORS Refrigerators are classified into three types: (Suyambazhahn, 2009) Air refrigerator Vapour compression refrigerator Vapour absorption refrigerator VAPOUR COMPRESSION REFRIGERATION SYSTEM The vapour compression refrigeration system is most commonly used in refrigerators. A refrigerant is a gas with characteristics that make is suitable for refrigeration and air conditioning. R-22 is a commonly used refrigerant. This cycle works in four phases, which are described later on because it is similar to the refrigeration cycle. Figure 1 Vapour compression refrigerator (Suyambazhahn, 2009) This type has various uses such as: (Suyambazhahn, 2009) Air conditioned cinema theaters, restaurants, hospitals, residential buildings for comfort. Advanced medicines which are manufactured and preserved only in special atmospheric conditions. Preservation of food products. VAPOUR ABSORPTION REFRIGERATION SYSTEM The principle of vapour absorption was first discovered by well known scientist Michael Faraday in 1825. But this concept is applied to refrigeration during 1860s by French Scientist Ferdinand Carve. The commonly used refrigerant for vapour absorption system is ammonia, NH3. In order to change the conditions and phase of refrigerants, heat energy is utilized in vapour absorption system where as mechanical energy is utilized in vapour compression systems. In a vapour absorption system, compressor is replaced by an absorber, a pump and a generator. The vapour at the low pressure that leaves the evaporator is then moved to the absorber. The absorber contains weak ammonia solution. The vapour leaving from the evaporator is dissolved in the weak ammonia solution to form a strong solution. Cooling water is used to cool he absorber. The strong solution from the absorber is pumped to the generator. The strong solutions pressure is increase by the pump (10 bar) and is circulated through the system by pump. Figure 2 Vapour absorption refrigerator schematic (Rajadurai, 2009) COMMONLY USED REFRIGERANTS Even though there are many types of refrigerants which are used in various applications, the following types are important from the subject point of view. AMMONIA It is the most widely used refrigerant. It is mainly used as the refrigerant in cold storage plants and also in ice making plants. Its boilined point at atmospheric pressure is -33 oC and it has a high latent heat and high critical temperature which are desirable properties of ammonia as a refrigerant. Also it is less expensive. But its usage becomes secondary due to the following characteristics: (Rajadurai, 2003) It is toxic It is flammable It has an irritating odour It attacks metals like copper and brass in the presence of moisture CARBON DIOXIDE The demerits involved in the usage of ammonia can be eliminated by using carbon dioxide. It is non toxic and odourless. It has a boiling point of -77.6 oC at atmospheric pressure. But it is not so often used because of its high operating pressure that is the operating pressure of CO2 is very high as 70 bar. (Rajadurai, 2003) SULPHUR DIOXIDE It has a boiling point of -10 oC at atmospheric pressure. IT has a very low working pressure and a large latent heat with a high critical temperature. It is non flammable and on explosive. Even though there are many positive characters mentioned, the SO2 refrigerant is very toxic and it has an irritating pungent odour. Also it is very corrosive in contact with moisture. (Rajadurai, 2003) FREON 12 (or DICHLOR DI FLUOROMETHANE) It has a boiling point of -30 oC at atmospheric pressure. It is non toxic, non explosive and on flammable. It is odorless and colourless. It is non corrosive to any metal. But it is highly costlier than other types of refrigerators. But the main demerit with respect to this is type is the large amount of refrigerant that is necessary to be circulated for a given output. It is generally abbreviated as R-12 or F-12. (Rajadurai, 2003) FREON 22 (or DICHLOR MONO CHLORO METHANE) It is widely used as the refrigerant for domestic refrigerants. It has all positive points like the characters posed by Freon 12 such as non toxicity. It is colourless, odourless and non corrosive to metal. Additionally, the amount of refrigerant required is only 1.3 kg/min per tonne for refrigeration. (Rajadurai, 2003) PRINCIPLES OF OPERATION THERMODYNAMICAL CONSIDERATION THE SECOND LAW The second law of thermodynamics is described as the most fundamental law of science (Khemani, 2008). It is fundamental in the sense that it can be used to explain not only refrigerators and heat engines but highly advanced phenomena such as the big bang. It has been put aptly in the words of Classius as it is impossible for a process to occur that has the sole effect of removing a quantity of heat from an object at a lower temperature and transferring this quantity of heat to an object at a higher temperature (Mortimer, 2008). This essentially means that heat cannot flow spontaneously from a cooler to a hotter body if nothing else happens (Mortimer, 2008) i.e. there needs to be an external agency to effect the change. In kitchen refrigerators, the closed box inside is able to be kept cool by the removal of heat from the inside of the box and deposits it to the outside. As per the second law, the heat will not move from the cold to the hot freely so it is important for it to be made to do so, this is done by using an intermediate fluid (Littlewood, 2004) which absorbed heat on the inside. This intermediate fluid is known as a refrigerant and carries the heat outside of the box whereby it it released into the air as heat as shown in Figure 3 (Littlewood, 2004). Figure 3 the flow of heat within the refrigerator a schematic (Littlewood, 2004) The fluid circulates within the pipe which passes in and out and can be found at the back of the refrigerator. It is kept by using a compressor (which uses electricity from the home) and allows it to work effectively without violating the second law of motion. (Littlewood, 2004) THE FIRST LAW Refrigerator takes in energy from a region that needs to be cooled and deposits this heat energy into some other region that is outside of the refrigerator. In order to do work, there needs to be some mechanism in place, where the work done by a compressor and its electric motor is utilized. Using the First Law of Thermodynamics we can write: (Littlewood, 2004) Figure 4 the first law of thermodynamics (Littlewood, 2004) QC QH = -W Where: Qc energy or heat of the cold system QH = energy or heat of the hot system W = work done Since work is done on the refrigerator by the compressor, the work is done is deemed negative because of sign conventions. This is part of the first law (Littlewood, 2004). The refrigerator is termed as a closed system and it possesses a constant composition: U = U + (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡V) T dV U = U + (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T) V dT U = U + (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡V) T dV + (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T) T dT dU = (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡V) T dV + (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T) V dT According to Bain (2010), there are four basic parts to any refrigerator: Compressor Heat Expansion valve Refrigerant The exchanging pipes are a coiled set of pipes that is placed strategically outside of the unit. The refrigerant as will be discussed later on is a liquid that has the ability to evaporate efficiently so that inside the refrigerator is kept cooled. (Bain, 2010) A gas can be cooled by adiabatic expansion if the process is enthalphic. The gas expands through a process barrier from one constant pressure to the next and the temperature difference in observed. Insulation of the system made the process adiabatic. The result is that a lower temperature was absorbed on the on a low pressure side and the change in the temperature is proportional to the change in pressure. (Bain, 2010)  Ã¢â‚¬Å¾T  µ  Ã¢â‚¬Å¾P Figure 5 schematic of a domestic refrigerator (Bain, 2010) Figure 6 heat transfer within a refrigerator (Popular Mechanics, 1993) When an energy |qc| is removed from a cool source at some temperature Tc, and then deposited in a warmer sink at a temperature Th, the change in entropy is: (Atkins dePaula, 2006) Atkins dePaula (2006) also indicated that the process is not spontaneous because the entropy generated in the warm sink is not enough to overcome the loss of entropy from the cold souce. And because of this more energy needs to be added to the stream that enters the warm sink to generated the entropy required by the system. They further indicated that the outcome is expressed as the coefficient of performance, c: The less the work required to achieve a given transfer, the greater the coefficient of performance and the more efficient the refrigerator (Atkins dePaula, 2004). Because |qc| is removed from the cold source, the work |w| is added to the energy stream, the energy deposited as the heat in the hot sink |qh| = |qc| + |w|. Therefore, From: We can have an expression in terms of the temperature alone, which is possible if the transfer is performed reversibly (Atkins dePaula, 2006): Where: c = thermodynamic optimum coefficient of temperature Tc = temperature of the cold sink Th = temperature of the hot sink For a refrigerator, it important that a very low coefficient of performance. For a refrigerator withdrawing heat from ice cold water (Tc = 273 K) in a typical environment (Th = 293K), c = 14. As an example, to remove 10 kJ (enough to freeze 30 g of water), requires transfer of atleast 0.71 kJ as work. (Atkins dePaula, 2006) The work to maintain a low temperature is very important when designing refrigerators. No thermal insulation is perfect, so there is always some form of energy flowing as heat into a specific sample at a rate that is proportional to the temperature difference. (Atkins and de Paula, 2006). Figure 7 (a) the flow of energy as heat from a cold sink to a hot sink is not spontaneous as described the first law. Notice that the entropy increases but it is larger for the hot sink as compared to the cold sink. (Atkins dePaula, 2006). This contributes to a decrease in the NET entropy. (b) The process becomes feasible if work is provided to add to the energy stream. Then the increase in entropy of the hot sink can be made to cancel the entropy of the hot source (Atkins dePaula, 2006) The rate at which energy leaks happen is written as: Where: A = a constant that depends on the size of the sample and details of the simulation Tc = temperature of the cold sink Th = temperature of the hot sink The minimum power, P, required to maintain the original temperature difference by pumping out that energy by heating the surroundings is: As can be seen the power increases as the square of the temperature difference (Th Tc). THE REFRIGERATION CYCLE The gas is pumped continuously at a steady pressure, the heat exchanger (which brings the required temperature) and then through a porous plug inside container that is thermally insulated. A phase change heat pump uses a liquid, as described earlier, that has a very low boiling point, which is used to move heat from an area where it is cooler to one where it is warmer. The refrigerant requires energy so that it can evaporate, which essentially allows it remove the heat from the surroundings by absorbing it. When the vapor condenses, the energy absorbed in the process is released which is also in the form of heat as might be expected. A refrigerant is a compound used in a heat cycle that undergoes a phase change from a gas to a liquid and back. Latent heat describes the amount of energy in the form of heat that is required for a material to undergo a change of phase (also known as change of state). Two latent heats are typically described. (Bambooweb, 2009)For other uses, see CFC (d isambiguation). The pump operates a cycle in which the refrigerant changes state from its liquid form to the vapour form and vice versa. This process occurs repeatedly and I known as the refrigeration cycle. In this cycle, the refrigerant condenses and heat is released in one point of the cycle. It is the boiled (or evaporated) so that it absorbs heat in another point of the cycle. The widely used refrigerant is hydro fluorocarbon (HFC) known as R-134a and CCl2F2 (dichlorodifluoromethane). Other substances such as liquid ammonia, propane or butane, are be used but because of their highly flammable nature, they are disregarded as a good refrigerant. 1930 (MCMXXX) was a common year starting on Wednesday (link is to a full 1930 calendar). (Bambooweb, 2009)For other uses, see CFC (disambiguation). In the refrigerator the fluid used (e.g. CCl2F2 ) fluid is liquefied by compression then vaporized by sudden expansion which gives a cooling effect. The compressor, in itself does not create a cooling effect directly, as might be expected. The cooling effect is fashioned when the refrigerant absorbs the heat so that it is removed and the area becomes cooler. This is accomplished with a heat exchanger. (Bambooweb, 2009)For other uses, see CFC (disambiguation). A heat exchanger is a device built for efficient heat transfer from one fluid to another, whether the fluids are separated by a solid wall so that they never mix, or the fluids are directly contacted. The refrigeration cycle can be divided in two parts: The liquefaction stage The evaporation stage LIQUEFACTION STAGE The refrigerant vapour undergoes recycling by itself into the liquid form by the extraction of heat from a vapour at a higher temperature. The refrigerant is compressed by the compressor where a low pressure and low temperature condition is created. This is accomplished by an evaporating coil. During the compression process, the vapour of the refrigerant undergoes a temperature change (as an effect of the compression process). Additionally, the work of compression to create the high temperature and pressure vapour also contributes to the temperature change experienced by the vapour. The condenser that is located where the temperature is higher (i.e. the higher temperature heat sink) collects the vapour. Heat is then removed from the refrigerant and in lieu of this it condenses to its liquid state, hence the name for the condenser. (Mortimer, 2003 ; Brain, 1994 ; Bellis, 2010) Using the Joule-Thompson coefficient: For a perfect gas  µ = 0 Cp + Cv = (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡H/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T)p (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T)p Introducing: H = U + pV = nRT into the first term: Cp Cv = (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T)p + nR (à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡U/à ¢Ã‹â€ Ã¢â‚¬Å¡T)p = nR EVAPORATION STAGE As the refrigerant leaves the condenser, the next part of the cycle begins. This is accomplished when a high temperature and high pressure liquid passes through a metering device that is found within the refrigeration. The valve allows a specific quantity of liquid coolant to pass into the evaporation chamber. Evaporation chambers are relatively low pressure and this encourages coolant evaporation. Newly evaporated coolant is drawn though the cooling coils (typically a fan is used to blow air over the coils). Thus, the evaporative process produces the cooling effect. The refrigerant then is pulled to the compressor in the suction line where it will be compressed into a high temperature, high pressure gas and sent to the external heat sinking coils. Capillary action or capillarity is the ability of a narrow tube to draw a liquid upwards against the force of gravity. (Mortimer, 2003 ; Brain, 1994 ; Bellis, 2010) A refrigerator pumps heat up a temperature gradient. The cooling efficiency of this operation depends on the amount of heat extracted from the cold temperature reservoir (the freezer compartment), , and the work needed to do so. Since a practical refrigerator operates in a cycle to provide a continuous removal of heat, for the cycle. Then, by the conservation of energy (or first law), , where is the heat ejected to the high temperature reservoir or the outside. (Mortimer, 2003 ; Brain, 1994 ; Bellis, 2010) The measure of a refrigerator performance is defined as the efficiency expressed in terms of the coefficient of performance (). Since the purpose is to extract the most heat () per unit work input (), the coefficient of performance for a refrigerator, , is expressed as their ratio: (Mortimer, 2003 ; Brain, 1994 ; Bellis, 2010) Where, the conservation relationship given above is used to express the work in terms of heat. For normal refrigerator operation, the work input is less than the heat removed, so the is greater than 1. Refrigerators are commonly referred to as heat pumps of more specifically a it is a reversible heat pump because they basically pump heat. (Mortimer, 2003 ; Brain, 1994 ; Bellis, 2010) Figure 8 A diagram of the vapor compression refrigeration cycle that is used in heat pumps. The cycle shows the following: (i) condenser, (ii) expansion valve, (iii) evaporator, (iv) compressor. (Karin, 2003) It is commonly believed that by opening a refrigerator, itll cool the kitchen. However this is entirely opposite, opening a refrigerator or freezer heats up the kitchen because the refrigeration cycle does not accept the air from the outside (Karlin 2003). The heat is referred to as the heat dissipated from the compressors work and also includes that heat that s removed from within the refrigerator as well. (Karlin, 2003) The COP (in a heating or cooling application), provided that it undergoes steady state operation, is given by the following equation: Where: ΆQcool is the heat extracted from a cold reservoir, ΆQhot is the heat delivered to a hot reservoir. ΆA is the dissipated work by the compressor. THE CARNOT ENGINE The Carnot refrigerator is the maximum limit to the COP (efficiency) of a refrigerator system. Although we cannot make the carnot refrigerator, it tells us the maxium or best performance that can be garnered from a real refrigerator. The carnot refrigerator is sort of ideal in its design. As described earlier by Atkins dePaula (2006) with the Carnot engine, the COPc of a Carnot refrigerator depends (i) the temperature of the region that needs to be kept cool which has a characteristic temperature, TC and the temperature of the region where the heat needs to be transferred to, having a characteristic temperature, TH. It is equal to: (Littlewood, 2004) EFFICIENCY The efficiency of a refrigerator is described by a special coefficient known as a coefficient of performance and is defined in terms of the following parameters: SUMMARY OF THERMODYNAMICS OF A REFRIGERATOR AFTER ONE CYCLE Change in internal energy = 0 Change in heat is > 0 Total work > 0 Total volume change = 0 Change in Gibbs free energy = 0 Entropy change of the system = 0 Entropy change of the universe > 0

Tolerance in the Middle Ages :: essays research papers

The issue of toleration has and always will be a strong and influential topic among peoples of all ethnic and culture backgrounds. The same is true for the issue of religious toleration, in the case being between the Jews and the Christians in Medieval Europe. It is argued between R. Menahem ha-meir and Katz that the word toleration is not simply an explanation of the times, but rather a false impression of the truth. The truth in this case being, that the Jews and Christians wanted isolation and separatism from each other while at the same time being able to co-exist together in their respective societies.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  By looking at the Katz text, it is plain to see that his main argument on the topic of religious toleration is that these two groups of people in this time period did indeed desire separation and exclusiveness from each other. The problem that stemmed from this isolation was the difficulty in making everyday life work for both religious groups while at the same time keeping them apart from one another as much as possible. Furthermore, we see the struggle defined by Katz which describes the Jews and the difficulty they faced in translating their ancient texts to every day life scenarios. Much of what was written in the Aggadah and the Halakha was not always applicable to these past every day situations, so we begin to see a redefining and stretching of the sayings in the ancient text and the politics of the time in order to better suit the people and not disrupt the economy, society, etc. For example, we see the Jews now being able to represent themselves in court because of the new technicality which allows the oath to be taken. It is now allowed because the Christian taking the oath is swearing on a ?composite? God and more technically, a piece of paper which the Jews do not recognize as true authority (The Gospels). This shows how the social realities had changed and how the Jews had adapted to the situations by not getting rid of the text, but by instead articulating the text while maintaining exclusiveness.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  On the other hand, R. Menahem ha-meir says in his article that toleration needs to be understood contextually, as in Katz?s work, however he also stresses that the need for the isolation and separation should be looked at strictly in its historical environment along with the already specific religious assumptions that the Christians and Jews have towards one another.

Csr and Consumer

The impact of perceived CSR initiatives on consumer’s buying behaviour: An empirical study Abu Bashar, Assistant Professor, Institute of Management Studies, Dehradun. ABSTRACT Although research into CSR and consumer behavior is still relatively young, there exists a growing interest in studying the links between CSR and marketing. The Indian consumers are now well aware that, in pursuing their business endeavors, companies now have to show more responsibility towards society and the environment where they are operating and at the same time do managers increasingly see CSR as a marketing tool to help create a competitive advantage.But what is the actual impact of companies’ engagement in CSR on consumer behavior? The consumers are getting more aware of the corporation involved in corporate social responsibility (CSR) through better education and the increased influence of the media. The companies up to a certain extent has already been realized that their socially respon sible behaviour have a direct impact on the consumer buying behaviour. In this research paper effort has been employed to investigate that how consumers are considering corporation’s CSR initiatives at the time of deciding on their purchase decision of products and services.For measuring CSR economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic variables have been considered from Carroll's definition. A random stratified sample of 250 respondents have been considered, the data have been collected with the help of structured questionnaire. After the data collection appropriate statistical data analysis was performed in the software program SPSS. Results confirm a positive relationship between perceived CSR activities and consumer buying behaviour. Keywords: corporate social responsibility, consumer behaviour, Philanthropy, Consumer buying behaviour. 1. IntroductionMultinational corporations first introduced the term stakeholder in the late 1960’s. Stakeholders were described as th ose who were in any way affected by the corporations’ activities. Soon thereafter, the term â€Å"corporate social responsibility† came into common use. The goal of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is to take responsibility for all the company’s actions and to have a positive impact on its environment, communities, employees, consumers and all other stakeholders (Freeman et al. , 2010). The European Commission (2011) defines CSR as â€Å"the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society†.More specifically, the responsibility of corporations includes the integration of social, environmental and ethical issues as well as human rights and consumer concerns, into their business operations and core strategy in close collaboration with their stakeholders. In research literature, CSR is defined as â€Å"a business organization’s configuration of principles of social responsibility, processes of social responsiveness, and policies, progr ams, and observable outcomes as they relate to the firm’s societal relationships† (Wood, 1991:693).In their opinion, the free market in that sense contributes to society by realizing this prosperity and therefore does not have any other obligations in that matter. However, on the other side of the spectrum the free market is viewed as inhibiting human freedom (e. g. through child labor) and as the root cause of economic and cultural imperialism in many developing countries. CSR is also seen as a way to attempt to be one step ahead of governmental interference, in order to avoid any kind of legislative restrictions or reprimands.Additionally, CSR is regarded as being used merely as a marketing tool, which introduces concerns about hypocrisy. As with many ethical issues, a great amount of organizations operate in the broad space in between these extremes, and the topic remains subject to continuous discussion (Friedman, 1970). One of the most important stakeholder groups is the consumer, and as Creyer and Ross (1997) confirmed; customers do indeed expect socially responsible behavior from companies. More interestingly, customers are willing to reward this behavior.It is no surprise that a steadily growing group of consumers pro-actively look for companies with ‘sustainable’ products and production methods. This new type of consumer is subject to an increasing amount of research by social and economic scientists, and characterized as ‘sophisticated’ and ‘environmentally and socially conscious’ (Forster, 2007). Corporations that do not equip themselves with CSR activities will often be left behind with the increasing global competition and borderless markets, and international corporations with sound CSR activities grow stronger (Altman, 2007).As the education level increases, consumers are made more aware of the need for pro social corporate behaviour. A lot of work has been done in Western countries to identify an organization’s behaviour regarding consumer purchasing decisions. However, not many studies have been conducted in emerging markets, such as India. CSR activities should enhance a corporation's image. This paper aims to examine the influence of perceived CSR initiatives on the buying behaviour of Indian consumers.We are interested in exploring whether consumers in India consider organisations' CSR issues before associating themselves with organisations’ products and services. Apart from that, this study also aims to identify the awareness level of Indian consumers towards CSR. The results of this study will also be useful for business organisations in understanding the consumers' priority for the CSR activities that they should be engaging in, and it will contribute to the existing literature. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows.The next section will discuss the literature review. The third section will explain on the methodology used. The findings and discussion will be presented in the fourth section and will be followed by conclusions and implications in the final section. 2. Scope of the study The scope of the study has been limited to CSR initiatives of corporate and consumer buying behaviour only. The study has been confined to Delhi & NCR region as this area has greater number of top notch corporations 3. Objectives 1. To study and analyze the current CSR practices being employed by corporations in India. . To find out the level of awareness of consumer about CSR 3. To find out the relation and impact of corporation’s CSR initiatives on consumer buying decisions 4. Research Methodology The study is based on descriptive research design. A structured questionnaire has been designed, to know the level of awareness and impact of corporation’s CSR initiatives on their buying decisions. The questionnaire consists of three major sections. The first section gathers information on consumers’ awareness towar ds corporate social responsibility (CSR).This section covers some general questions to obtain the respondent's understanding of the term CSR, which indicates the ability of the respondent to complete the rest of the questionnaire. The respondents who indicated having no knowledge in CSR were not included in the data analysis. Second section covers questions on consumer buying behaviour towards CSR initiatives by the business organisations. The statements were divided into four subsections based on Carroll's pyramid of CSR, which include economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities.While third section designed to gather demographic information of the respondents such as gender, age, education level and monthly income level. Section A and Section C were designed using nominal scales, whereas Section B was designed using a five-point Likert scale ranging from â€Å"1† for â€Å"strongly disagree† to â€Å"5† for â€Å"strongly agree†. Cronbach 's Alpha coefficient was used to evaluate the reliability of the measures. The Cronbach's Alpha coefficient for the four independent variables and one dependent variable was 0. 59. The survey was conducted in Delhi & NCR; responses of 250 respondents were collected. We targeted respondents who are seems to be conscious buyer and hence the sampling technique is non-probability convenience sampling. For visual representation of finding and results bar charts, pie charts and tables etc. ahs been used. 5. Review of literature During the 21th century, the focus of the environmental aspect of CSR grew even stronger and society’s increased interest regarding environmental issues put new light on CSR.Hence, even higher pressure was put on corporations and their initiatives for support of the environment. This can be seen in the European Commission’s CSR-report from 2002, in which CSR is described to have a close relationship between companies and societies to tackle both socia l and environmental concerns: â€Å"CSR is a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis.In their latest definition, the European Commission (2011) explains CSR as â€Å"the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts on society†. Another trend emerging in the 21th century was the focus of CSR from a consumer perspective. The fact that corporations started to work and participate actively in projects regarding CSR predictably woke up an interest also among consumers. Researchers were then eager to find out whether CSR activities had any influence on consumers or not, and if so, in what way and to what extent. In 2001, Mohr et al. tudied the relationship between CSR and consumers’ buying behavior. The results of the study showed that the majority of the respondents were in general positively disposed towards social responsible firms and moreo ver expected firms to be highly active within CSR. Furthermore, the results revealed that a small majority of the respondents did not really think about basing their purchase behavior on CSR or did it only sometimes, even if CSR as a buying criterion didn’t play much of a role in the decision processes or purchase behavior.However, 39% of the respondents were basing some or much of their purchasing on CSR (Mohr et al. , 2001). In 2005, Becker-Olsen and Hill contributed with two studies investigating the role of perceived fit (e. g. Similarity between corporate mission and social initiative), perceived corporate motive (other-centered versus profit-centered), and timing of an announcement (reactive versus proactive) on consumers’ responses to corporate social initiatives. The aim of the study was to explore the impact of perceived CSR on consumer behavior.The results of the study demonstrated that an overwhelming majority of the respondents believed that firms should en gage in social initiatives and 76% thought that those initiatives would benefit the firms. About half of the respondents stated that they would boycott firms that acted irresponsibly, if reasonable alternatives were available (Becker-Olsen & Hill, 2005). Finally, another relatively new trend within CSR developed in the 21th century is to view and utilize the whole concept as a competitive advantage.In 2006, the marketing and strategy guru Michael Porter wrote an article together with Mark R. Kramer, in which they introduced a framework that organizations can use to identify the impact they have on society, determine which effects to address and then suggest effective ways to do so. The authors propose that when looking at CSR from a strategically perspective it can become a source of remarkable social progress, since corporations apply their resources, expertise, and insights to activities that benefit society as a whole (Porter & Kramer, 2006).In carrying out their economic respons ibility, corporations are expected work within the framework of laws and regulations as a partial fulfillment of the â€Å"social contract† between corporations and society. Carroll (1991) stated that it is important for legal responsibility to be performed in a manner that is consistent with the expectations of governments and laws complying with the various federal, state and local regulations. A successful corporation should be recognised as one that fulfils its legal obligations.Conchius (2006), on the other hand, stated that legal responsibility includes abiding by consumer and product laws, environmental laws and employment laws while also adhering to laws and regulations governing competition in the marketplace. However, legal responsibilities do not embrace the full range of behaviours expected of corporations by society. Laws are important, but they are often inadequate. First, they cannot possibly address all of the issues or areas that a corporation may face.Second , laws often lag behind more recent concepts of what is considered right behaviour, and third, laws may represent the personal interests and political motivations of legislators (Carroll, 1998). Although economic and legal responsibilities represent ethical standards concerning fairness and justice, ethical responsibility encompasses those activities and practices expected or prohibited by society that expand beyond the limitations of legal responsibilities.Ethical responsibility embodies those standards and expectations that reflect a concern for what consumers, employees, shareholders, and the community regard as fair, just, or in keeping with the respect or protection of stakeholders' moral rights (Carroll, 1979). According to Carroll (1991), business performance can be determined by the corporation's consistency in promoting moral and ethical standards. If a corporation practises good corporate citizenship, the activities of the corporation are trusted.Ethical responsibility als o recognises that corporate integrity and ethical behaviour should go beyond the requirements of laws and regulations. Balancing economic, legal and ethical responsibilities is important. If the corporation does something that is appropriately economic and legal, it must also be appropriately ethical. Philanthropic responsibility refers to corporate actions that are in response to society's expectations of good corporate citizens. Corporate philanthropy is likely to enhance the image of corporations especially those that have high public visibility.Corporate philanthropy should also increase employee loyalty and improve customer ties. Philanthropic activities include business contributions in terms of financial resources or executive time, such as contributions to the arts, education, or communities. The distinguishing characteristic between philanthropic and ethical responsibilities is that philanthropic responsibilities are not expected in an ethical or moral sense. Philanthropy i s located at the most voluntary and discretionary dimension of corporate responsibility and has not always been linked to profits or the ethical culture of the firm (Ferrell, 2004).Although society wishes corporations to be philanthropic, it is voluntary on the part of corporations (Carroll, 1991). According to Fombrun, Gardberg and Barnett (2000), the case for philanthropy comes from two different sources; strategic philanthropists argue that, although philanthropy may not generate direct economic returns, it will enhance the firm's long-term competitive position through intangible gains in reputation, legitimacy or employee loyalty. Consumer Behaviour towards CSR This paper aims to examine consumers' buying behaviour as a result of corporate CSR initiatives.We are interested in examining that whether the purchase decisions of the products and services of consumers in India are based on corporation's CSR initiatives or not. In addition, we also seek to identify which type of CSR co mponent based on Carroll's pyramid of CSR will have significant impact on consumers' buying behaviour. Several studies have suggested that there is a positive relationship between a corporation's CSR activities and consumers' attitudes towards that corporation and its products (Brown & Dacin, 1997; Creyer Ross, 1997; Ellen, Webb, & Mohr, 2000).Mohr, Webb and Harris (2001) examined and their finding indicated a significant relationship between CSR and consumer responses. Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) research on reaction of consumers to CSR shows that CSR will directly affect consumers' intentions to purchase corporation's products. As cited in Pomering and Dolnicar (2008), marketplace polls reported that consumers expect corporations to provide information about what they do, and they will support those corporations that pursue CSR initiatives.Environics International Ltd. (Environics, 1999) conducted a survey regarding consumer responses towards corporate social responsibility. The r esult of the survey indicated that Australians have the highest CSR consumer expectations from businesses. A total of 86% of US respondents in the survey of Cone Inc. (2004) said that corporations should provide information on how they support social issues. 6. Research Results and Discussions Table 1: Gender of respondents | |Gender | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Model |R |R Square |Adjusted R Square |Std. Error of the Estimate | |CSR-CB |. 573a |. 329 |. 315 |. 36483 | |a. Predictors 🙠 Constants) CSR: corporate social responsibility components which include ethical, economic, philanthropic, | |legal. CB-Consumer Behaviour | The R square (coefficient of determination) is a portion of the total variation in the dependent variable that is explained by the variation in the independent variables. According to the model summary, R square is equal to 0. 329, which is less than 1.This indicates that there is a weak linear relationship between CSR activities and consumers' bu ying behaviour. Approximately 32. 7% of variance in all the CSR components can significantly explain consumers' buying behaviour. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) has been preformed to test whether there is a statistical significant linear relationship between the combination of the four CSR components (Economic, legal, Ethical and philanthropic) and consumers' buying behaviour exists or not. According to Table 9, the p-value is . 000, indicating that the four CSR components significantly influence consumers' buying behaviour. Table 9: ANOVA of Multiple Regressions ANOVAb | |Model |Sum of Squares| |bDependent Variable (CB): consumer behaviour | | | | A coefficient table is very much helpful in explaining the relationship between the four CSR components and consumers' buying behaviour. Based on the calculated significances in Significance (Sig. ) column of Table 10, the p-value for each CSR component is less than 0. 05, which indicates that all the CSR components have a statisticall y significant relationship with consumers' buying behaviour. Table 10: Coefficients of Multiple Regressions Coefficientsa | |Model |Unstandardized Coefficients |Standardized |t |Sig. | | | |Coefficients | | | | |B |Std. Error |Beta | | In Table 10, the unstandardised beta coefficient is used for the values of the numbers in the linear regression equation.Theory explains that a higher beta value indicates a greater impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. The independent variable (CSR components) can be ranked according to the magnitude of the beta coefficient to determine which component has the most significant impact on consumers' buying behaviour. The regression model relates Y (the dependent variable) to a function of X (the independent variable) and ? (the unknown parameter). It is formulated as Y ? f(X, ? ). The multiple regression analyses performed in this study are modeled as follows: Yi = ? 1xi1 + ? 2xi2 + ? 3xi3 + ? 4xi4 Therefore, the multiple re gressions line equation for this current study is: Consumer Behaviour = 1. 286 + 0. 59 Economic Responsibility + 0. 168 Philanthropic Responsibility + 0. 166 Ethical Responsibility + 0. 112 Legal Responsibility. The results explicitly defines that the economic responsibility attribute has the most significant impact on consumers' buying behaviour, as it has the highest beta value, followed by philanthropic responsibility, ethical responsibility and, finally, legal responsibility. Indian consumers seem to view CSR priority differently from other nations. Economic responsibility was still the basic utmost priority preferred. However, they ranked philanthropic responsibility as the second most important responsibility compared with legal responsibility.It is not surprising that Indian consumers see corporations' philanthropic responsibility as being more important than their legal responsibility. Consumers want corporations to contribute their money, facilities and employees' time to h umanitarian programs or purposes. Indians have been known as one of the most generous nations in the world. For example, the country's rate of donation and participation in helping the victims of natural disasters in the world has always been very encouraging. In addition, we have always heard that the generous Indians have made financial pledges and contributions to help those in need, they be orphaned children, the poor, accident victims and so on.Although the Indian consumers themselves have been very generous, the expectation for business institutions to do the same is unquestionable. As for complying with rules and regulations, it is not surprising that Indian consumers ranked legal responsibility last compared with Carroll's pyramid, which suggested that legal responsibility is the next most important responsibility Compared with those in developed nations, Indians regard rules lightly, to a certain extent, as we have always heard from the news about how Indians bend and ignor e stipulated rules and regulations. Among the most common examples are the bending of traffic rules and regulations promoting environmental protection. 7. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONSFor academicians, this research makes a contribution to the understanding the underlying dynamics of the role of corporate social responsibility in consumers' buying behaviour. The result of this study indicates that all of the CSR components have a significant relationship with consumers' buying behaviour. However, the limitations of this study must also be considered. The major limitation relates to the sample. With only 250 usable respondents, this sample size might limit the external validity of the findings. Managers should note that this research supports previous results reported in the literature, suggesting that a substantial, viable and identifiable consumer group exists that considers a company's level of social responsibility in its purchase decisions.Manufacturers and retailers have an oppor tunity to appeal to this group while simultaneously meeting their business objectives and make contributions to society. The type of CSR activities that should be engaged by the corporations should preferably be based on the priority indicated in the finding of this study, where the economic responsibility attribute has the most significant impact on consumers' buying behaviour, followed by philanthropic responsibility, ethical responsibility and finally, legal responsibility. However, companies that promote themselves as socially responsible need to be prepared to deal with criticisms of any irresponsible behaviour they are seen as committing, as information travels within seconds in this information technology era.In contrast, companies who disregard expectations concerning social responsibly may risk consumer boycotts as a result of the strengthening of consumers' awareness and rights in today's market scenario. 8. References Ali, I. , Rehman, U. K. , Yilmaz, K. A. , Nazir, S. & Ali, F. J. 2010. Effects of CSR on ConsumerRetention. African Journal of Business Management. Vol. 4, pp. 475-485. Altman, W. (2007/2008, January). Working for the greater good? Engineering Management. Retrieved 27 July 2010, from www. theiet. org/management Anderson, E. W. , Fornell, C. , & Mazvancheryl, S. K. 2004. Customer Satisfaction and Shareholder Value. Journal of Marketing. Vol. 68, No. , pp. 172–185. Argandona, A. (1998). The stakeholder theory and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(9/10), 1093–1102. Ashforth, B. & Mael, F. 1989. Social Identity Theory and the Organization. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 20-39. Aupperle, E. K. , Carroll, B. A. & Hatfield, D. J. , 1985. An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability. The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 446-463. Baldinger, A. & Rubinson, J. 1997. The jeopardy in double jeopardy. Journal of Advertising Rese arch. Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 37-49. Bandyopadhyay, S. & Martell, M. 2007.Does attitudinal loyalty influence behavioural loyalty? A theoretical and empirical study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. Vol. 14, pp. 35-44. Bayus, B. 1985. Word of Mouth: The Indirect Effects of Marketing Efforts. Journal of Advertising Research. Vol. 25, pp. 31–39. Becker-Olsen, K. L. , Cudmore, B. A. & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 59, No. 1, pp. 46–53. Bendapudi, N. & Berry, L. L. 1997. Customers’ motivations for maintaining relationships with service providers. Journal of Retailing. Vol. 73, No. 1, pp. 15-37. Bhattacharya, C. & Sen, S. , 2003.Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers' Relationships with Companies. Journal of Marketing. Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 76-88. Black, L. D. (2001, March). Towards understanding corporate social responsibility in Australia. Paper presented at the Conference on Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved 10 July 2007, from http://www. aph. gov. au. Brown, T. J. , & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68–84. Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505. Carroll, A. B. (1998). The four faces of corporate citizenship.Business & Society Review, 100/101, 1–7. Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–118. Conchius, T. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Dutch SME: motivations and CSR stakeholder. Final thesis, Maastricht University, Netherlands. Retrieved from http://www. basisboekmvo. nl/images/mvo-scriptie/ 4%20Timo%20Cochius. pdf Cochran, P. L. (2007). The evolution o f corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 50, 449–454. Cone Inc. (2004). Cone corporate citizenship study. Retrieved from http://www. coneinc. com. Creyer, E. H. , & Ross, W. T. (1997).The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: Do consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), 421–432. Dahl, D. W. , & Lavack, A. M. (1995). Cause-related marketing: Impact of size of corporate donation and size of cause-related promotion on consumer perceptions and participation. Donaldson, T. , & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 64–91. Ellen, P. S. , Webb, D. J. , & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate social responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157. Folkes, V. S. Kamin, M. A. 1999. Effects of Information About Firmsâ₠¬â„¢ Ethical and Unethical Actions on Consumers’ Attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology. Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 243-259. Forster, T. (2007). Die grunen Yuppies. Werben, (51), 45 Freeman, R. E. , Harrison, S. J. , Wicks, C. A. , Parmar, L. B. & De Colle, S. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press: UK. Friedman, M. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. The New York Times Magazine. September, 13th. Garbarino, E. & Johnson, M. S. 1999. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships.Journal of Marketing. Vol. 63, No. 2, pp. 70-87. Gronroos, C. 1983. Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector. Marketing News. Vol. 17, No. 19, pp. 215-222. Grunert, G. K. 2005. Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics. Vol 32, No. 3, pp. 369–391. Gurhan-Canli, Z. & Batra, R. 2004. When Corporate Image Affects Product E valuations: The Moderating Role of Perceived Risk. Journal of Marketing Research. Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 197-205. Gustafsson, A. , Johnson, M. D. & Roos, I. 2005. The Effects of Customer Satisfaction, Relationship Commitment Dimensions, and Triggers on Customer Retention.Journal of Marketing. Vol. 69, pp. 210-218. Hair Jr. , F. J. , Babin, B. , Money, H. A. & Samouel, P. 2003. Essentials of Business Research Methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc: USA. Herr, P. M. , Kardes, F. R. , & Kim, J. 1991. Effects of Word-of-Mouth and Product- Attribute Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 17, pp. 454–462. Henning-Thurau, T. , Gwinner, K. & Gremler, D. 2002. Understanding relationship marketing outcomes: An integration of relational benefits and relationship quality. Journal of Service Research. Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 230-247. Lafferty, B. , Barbara, A. , & Ronald, E. G. (1999).Corporate credibility's role in consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions when a high versus a low credibility endorser is used in the ad. Journal of Business Research, 44(2), 109–116. Maignan, I. , & Farrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19. McAlister, D. T. , Ferrell, O. C. , & Ferrell, L. (2003). Business & society: A strategic approach to corporate citizenship. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflir Company. Mitchell, R. K. , Agle, B. R. , & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–887. Mohr, L. A. , & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), 121–147. Pirsch, J. , Gupta, S. , & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70, 125–140. Pomering, A. , & Dolnicar, S. (2006). The limitations of consumer response to CSR: An empirical test of Smith's proposed antecedents (ANZMAC 2006), Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, 4–6 December 2006. Pomering, A. , & Dolnicar, S. (2006).Customers' sensitivity to different measures of corporate social responsibility in the Australian banking sector, Brisbane, Queensland, 4–6 December 2006. Post, F. R. (2003). A response to the social responsibility of corporate management: A classical critique. Mid-American Journal of Business, 18(1), 25–35. Roscoe, J. T. (1975). Fundamental research statistics for the behavioural sciences. (2nd ed. ) New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston. Saleh, M. (2009). Corporate social responsibility disclosure in an emerging market: A longitudinal analysis approach. International Business Research, 2(1), 131–141. Savage, G . T. , Nix, T. W. , Whitehead, C. J. , & Blair, J. D. (1991).Strategies for assessing and managing organisational stakeholder. Academy of Management Executive, 5(2), 61–75. Schwartz, M. S. , & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530. Sen, S. , & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(May), 225–243. Visser, W. (2005). Revisiting Carroll's CSR pyramid: An African perspective. In M. Huniche & E. R. Pedersen (Eds. ), Corporate citizenship in developing countries: New partnership perspectives (pp. 29–56). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

Case Briefing and Problem Solving

Issue Spotters Delta Tools, Inc. , markets a product that under some circumstances is capable of seriously injuring consumers. Does Delta owe an ethical duty to remove this product from the market, even if the injuries result only from misuse? Why or why not? I think Delta Tools, Inc. doesn't owe an ethical duty to remove the product from the market unless the company doesn't warn its customers of the danger they can meet upon misuse of the product. If the company takes all the measures to warn their customers of the danger of the product once it's misused, customers have knowledge of the risk and voluntarily assume it.For example, the use of any antibiotics with the alcohol can lead to many harmful processes and activities. Nevertheless, pharmaceutical companies don't remove these products from the market because of that. It's a customer's responsibility to use the product properly. Case problems 8–1 Business Ethics. Jason Trevor owns a commercial bakery in Blakely, Georgia, that produces a variety of goods sold in grocery stores. Trevor is required by law to perform internal tests on food produced at his plant to check for contamination.Three times in 2008, the tests of food products that contained peanut butter were positive for salmonella contamination. Trevor was not required to report the results to U. S. Food and Drug Administration officials, however, so he did not. Instead, Trevor instructed his employees to simply repeat the tests until the outcome was negative. Therefore, the products that had originally tested positive for salmonella were eventually shipped out to retailers. Five people who ate Trevor's baked goods in 2008 became seriously ill, and one person died from salmonella.Even though Trevor's conduct was legal, was it unethical for him to sell goods that had once tested positive for salmonella? If Trevor had followed the six basic guidelines for making ethical business decisions, would he still have sold the contaminated goods? Why or why not? The issue in this case problem is whether Trevor's actions were unethical. In my opinion it was unethical for Jason Trevor to sell goods that had once tested positive for salmonella. Salmonella is a bacterium that can cause many illnesses.Two basic ethical approaches can be applied to this case. Firstly, Trevor should've thought about his customers from the religious position. He could've foreseen that products positive tested on salmonella would harm people inevitably. Secondly, he had to consider the outcome of this sale. He didn't think about the consequences that can follow. He acted negligent by letting his employees ship the products to the retailers. If Trevor followed the six basic guidelines for making ethical business decisions he would not have sold the contaminated goods to the public.Having five people seriously ill and one person died because of the contaminated products harms the name of the brand associated with this incident. Thus, company loses its custom ers and, as a result, part of the revenues. I think Trevor also should feel guilty about what happened to those people meaning that on the Conscience step, which is the 4th guideline, he would've reconsidered his actions and probably changed his mind. I guess he would've not been happy to be interviewed about the actions he was about to take.And the next step, which is Promises to his customers, would've made him doubt his decisions because of the trust of the customers that he held in his hands. And I am sure Trevor's hero would not have acted the way that can harm people. Thus, Trevor would not have sold the contaminated goods had he followed the basic guidelines for making ethical business decisions. Brody v. Transitional Hospitals Corporation United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 280 F. 3d 997 (9th Cir. 2002). http://caselaw. findlaw. com/us-9th-circuit/1019105. html FACTS Jules Brody and Joyce T.Crawford filed a class action complaint against Transitional Hospitals Cor poration (THC) and its officers on August 28, 1997 accusing THC of unlawful insider trading after THC bought 800,000 shares of its stock between February 26 and February 28 without first disclosing that Vencor and other parties had expressed interest in THC. In addition, Brody and Crawford claimed that THC, in its March 19 and April 24 press releases, materially misled them about THC's intention to sell the company. The district court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the claims. The plaintiffs appealed to the US Court of Appeal, Ninth Circuit.ISSUE Are Brody and Crawford the proper plaintiffs to sue THC for damages for violation of the statute and rule? regarding the insider trading? DECISION No. US Court of Appeal, Ninth circuit, affirmed the district court's decision to dismiss Brody and Crawford's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. REASON The Court noted that plaintiffs did not meet a contemporaneous trading requirement, a judicially -created standing requirement, which specified in Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3 that the plaintiffs must have traded in a company's stock at about the same time as the alleged insider.In addition, the Court decided that the plaintiffs' complaint must specify the reason or reasons why the statements made by THC in its press releases were misleading. Brody and Crawford argued that in order for statement not to be misleading, â€Å"once disclosure is made, there is a duty to make it complete and accurate†, for which the Court found no support in the case law. The case law? only prohibits misleading and untrue statements, not statements that are incomplete. FOOTNOTES: ? Sections 10(b), 14(e), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U. S. C.  §Ã‚ § 78j (b), 78n (e), and 78t (a), and Rules 10b-5 and 14e 3, 17 C.F. R.  §Ã‚ § 240. 10b-5 and 240. 14e-3, promulgated thereunder by the Securities Exchange Commission (â€Å"SEC†) ? Rule 10b-5 and Section 14(e) Full case: BRODY v. TRAN SITIONAL HOSPITALS CORPORATION Jules BRODY; Joyce T. Crawford, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. TRANSITIONAL HOSPITALS CORPORATION; Wendy L. Simpson; Richard L. Conte, Defendants-Appellees. No.? 99-15672. Argued and Submitted July 11, 2001. — February 07, 2002 Before: HALL, WARDLAW and BERZON, Circuit Judges. Jeffrey S. Abraham, New York, NY, for the plaintiffs-appellants. Mark R. McDonald, Morrison & Foerster, Los Angeles, CA, for the defendants-appellees.In this case we address several securities fraud issues, centering on whether a plaintiff must have traded at about the same time as the insider it allege violated securities laws. ? Jules Brody and Joyce T. Crawford brought suit against Transitional Hospital Corporation (â€Å"THC† or â€Å"the company†) and its officers claiming violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (â€Å"Exchange Act†) and state law because the defendants both traded in reliance on inside information and released misleading public information. ? The district court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Brody and Crawford now appeal the district court's order on several grounds. BACKGROUND In determining whether the complaint states a claim upon which relief could be granted, we assume the facts alleged in the complaint to be true. ?Ronconi v. Larkin, 253 F. 3d 423, 427 (9th Cir. 2001). ? The facts alleged in the complaint are as follows: THC was a Nevada corporation that delivered long-term acute care services through hospitals and satellite facilities across the United States. ? In August 1996, the company announced its plan to buy back from time to time on the open market up to $25 million in company stock. Two months later, THC expanded the repurchase plan to $75 million. On February 24, 1997, Vencor, Inc. submitted to THC's board of directors a written offer to acquire the company for $11. 50 per share. ? THC did not disclose this offer publicly. ? Between February 26 and February 28, THC purchased 800,000 shares of its own stock at an average price of $9. 25 per share. ? This $7. 4 million buy-back was in addition to another $21. 1 million that THC had spent purchasing its stock in the three month period that ended on February 28, 1997. The plaintiffs do not allege that the total repurchase exceeded $75 million. THC issued a press release on March 19, 1997, detailing the progress and extent of its stock repurchase program. ? The press release did not mention Vencor or any other party's interest in acquiring THC. The plaintiffs argue that because of this omission, the March press release was misleading. On April 1, 1997, Vencor increased its offer to purchase THC to $13 per share. ? In the next few weeks, THC also received offers from two other competing bidders. ? On April 24, after receiving all hree offers, THC issued another press release, stating that the company had â€Å"received expressions of interest from certain parties who have i ndicated an interest in acquiring† it. ? The same document also stated that THC had hired â€Å"financial advisers to advise the company in connection with a possible sale. † ? The plaintiffs argue that this press release was also misleading; because it did not state that substantial due diligence had already taken place, that THC had received competing offers exceeding $13 per share, or that a THC board meeting would take place two days later to consider these offers.At the board meeting, the THC board voted to negotiate a merger agreement with Select Medical Corporation (â€Å"Select†). ? On May 4, THC publicly announced that it and Select had entered into a definitive merger agreement and that Select would purchase THC at $14. 55 per share. ? Vencor thereupon threatened a hostile takeover. ? To fend off that maneuver, THC ultimately agreed, on June 12, to a takeover by Vencor rather than Select, at $16 per share. Brody and Crawford sold shares at times that sa ndwich the April 24 press release. ? Two days before that press release was issued, Crawford sold 500 shares at $8. 75 per share. ? Brody sold 3,000 shares of THC stock at $10. 50 per share on April 24, just after the press release was made public. ? The plaintiffs argue that had they not been misled by THC, they would have held onto their shares, and benefitted from their subsequent increase in value. Brody and Crawford filed a class action complaint against THC and its officers on August 28, 1997. ? In addition to alleging violations of Nevada state law, Brody and Crawford alleged violations of Sections 10(b), 14(e), and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U. S. C.  §Ã‚ §? 78j(b), 78n(e), and 78t(a), and Rules 10b-5 and 14e 3, 17 C.F. R.  §Ã‚ §? 240. 10b-5 and 240. 14e-3, promulgated thereunder by the Securities Exchange Commission (â€Å"SEC†). ? These claims focus on two aspects of THC's course of action: Brody and Crawford accuse the company of illegal insider trading beca use THC repurchased 800,000 shares of its stock between February 26 and February 28 without first disclosing that Vencor and other parties had expressed interest in THC. In addition, Brody and Crawford claim that THC, in its March 19 and April 24 press releases, materially misled them about THC's progress toward its eventual merger.The district court dismissed all of Brody and Crawford's claims. ? In so doing, the district court held that Brody and Crawford are not proper parties to assert any insider trading claims, as Brody and Crawford did not trade contemporaneously with THC. In addition, the district court decided that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under Rule 10b-5 or any other law based on materially misleading information, as the press releases were not misleading under the applicable standards. The plaintiffs appeal these aspects of the district court's dismissal. We review de novo the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure Rule 12(b)(6). ?Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F. 3d 734, 737 (9th Cir. 2001). DISCUSSION A.? Insider Trading As they pertain to insider trading, Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3 make it illegal in some circumstances for those possessing inside information about a company to trade in that company's securities unless they first disclose the information. See, e. g. , United States v. Smith, 155 F. 3d 1051, 1063-64 (9th Cir. 998). ? This type of prohibition is known as an â€Å"abstain or disclose† rule, because it requires insiders either to abstain from trading or to disclose the inside information that they possess. The district court dismissed the insider trading claims, holding that the named plaintiffs could not assert them because they did not trade contemporaneously with THC. On appeal, Brody and Crawford argue that nothing in the applicable securities laws requires investors to have traded contemporaneously with insiders in order t o maintain a suit for insider trading. In addition, they argue that even if such a requirement exists, they in fact did trade contemporaneously with THC. 1.? Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 Neither section 10(b)1 nor Rule 10b-52 contain an express right of action for private parties. ? The Supreme Court has held, however, that proper plaintiffs may sue for damages for violation of the statute and rule. ? See Superintendent of Ins. v. Bankers Life and Cas. Co. , 404 U. S. 6, 13 n. 9, 92 S. Ct. 165, 30 L. Ed. 2d 128 (1971). Because neither the statute nor the rule contains an express right of action, they also do not delineate who is a proper plaintiff. ? In the absence of explicit Congressional guidance, courts have developed various â€Å"standing† limitations, primarily on policy bases. 3 For example, in Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores, 421 U. S. 723, 95 S. Ct. 1917, 44 L. Ed. 2d 539 (1975), the Supreme Court held that to bring an insider trading claim under Rule 10b-5, a plaintiff must have traded in the same stock or other securities as the insider trader. The contemporaneous trading requirement, at issue in this case, is another judicially-created standing requirement, specifying that to bring an insider trading claim, the plaintiff must have traded in a company's stock at about the same time as the alleged insider. ?In Neubronner v. Milken, 6 F. 3d 666, 669 (9th Cir. 1993), the Ninth Circuit adopted a contemporaneous trading requirement for Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 actions. ? See also In re Worlds of Wonder Sec. Litig. , 35 F. 3d 1407, 1427 (9th Cir. 1994). Neubronner explained that two reasons animate this rule: First, â€Å"noncontemporaneous traders do not require the protection of the ‘disclose or abstain’ rule because they do not suffer the disadvantage of trading with someone who has superior access to information. † ? 6 F. 3d at 669-70 (quoting Wilson v. Comtech Telecommunications Corp. , 648 F. 2d 88, 94 95 (2d Ci r. 1981)). ? Second, the contemporaneous trading requirement puts reasonable limits on Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5's reach; without such a limitation, an insider defendant could be liable to a very large number of parties. Id. at 670. Brody and Crawford offer two reasons why the contemporaneous trading rule adopted in Neubronner should not here apply. ? First, they argue that the rule does not make sense, as a matter of statutory interpretation. ? In other words, they request that we declare that Neubronner's interpretation of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 was incorrect. ? Although the decision in Neubronner is not beyond debate, we do not consider the question further, as a Ninth Circuit panel may not overrule a prior Ninth Circuit decision. ?Hart v. Massanari, 266 F. 3d 1155, 1171 (9th Cir. 2001).Brody and Crawford attempt to avoid this precedential barrier by claiming that Neubronner's implementation of the contemporaneous rule was dictum, and therefore not binding on us. ? It wa s not. ?Neubronner explicitly described its ruling regarding the contemporaneous trading requirement as a â€Å"holding. † ? 6 F. 3d at 670. ? In addition, the determination was a necessary predicate for the case's ultimate conclusion that contemporaneous trading must be pleaded with particularity. ? Id. at 673. Brody and Crawford's second submission in avoidance of Neubronner is that United States v. O'Hagan, 521 U. S. 642, 117 S. Ct. 2199, 138 L.Ed. 2d 724 (1997), overruled Neubronner. ? That assertion is simply wrong. ? O'Hagan, which was a criminal case, addressed neither the contemporaneous trading requirement in private actions nor any other standing rule. ? Instead, by approving of an expansive concept of who qualifies as an insider under Section 10(b), the Supreme Court in O'Hagan clarified that more defendants may be liable under Section 10(b) than some courts have previously thought. ? Id. at 650, 117 S. Ct. 2199. ? In so doing, the Supreme Court did not alter pre-e xisting notions concerning whom insiders harm when they trade based on privileged information. Brody and Crawford next argue that even if the Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 contemporaneous trading requirements remain, the court should define contemporaneous trades as trades that take place within six months of one another. ? Under this definition, Brody and Crawford would have standing, as they sold their stock just under two months after they allege THC bought the large block of stock in February. [3]? In Neubronner, this court did not decide the length of the contemporaneous trading period for insider trading violations under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, 6 F. d at 670, nor has this court decided the question since. ? Because the two-month time period presented by the facts of this case exceeds any possible delineation of a contemporaneous trading period, it is not necessary in this case either to define the exact contours of the period. ? We simply note that a contemporaneous tradi ng period of two months would gut the contemporaneous trading rule's premise-that there is a need to filter out plaintiffs who could not possibly have traded with the insider, given the manner in which public trades are transacted. 2.?Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3 Brody and Crawford also argue that the district court erred in dismissing their claims under Section 14(e)4 and Rule 14e-35 by holding that insider trading actions brought under Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3 must also conform to a contemporaneous trading requirement. ? In making this argument, the plaintiffs urge that we hold for them on two matters of first impression: (1) whether a private right of action exists under Rule 14e-3; and (2) if a private right of action does exist, whether it contains a contemporaneous standing requirement. We can assume, without deciding, that a private right of action exists under Rule 14e-3, for we see no reason why the same contemporaneous trading rule that applies under Rule 10b-5 would n ot apply in such an action. ?As noted, this court has definitively adopted a contemporaneous trading requirement under Rule 10b-5. ? Although Rule 14e-3 differs in some respects from Rule 10b-5, (and was adopted in order to plug some holes the SEC perceived in Rule 10b-5),6 its core, like the core of Rule 10b-5, is an â€Å"abstain or disclose† requirement. And, as is true of the â€Å"abstain or disclose† requirement of Rule 10b-5, the similar requirement of Rule 14e-3 is designed to prevent the disadvantage that inheres in trading with an insider with superior access to information. ?45 Fed. Reg. 60411-12 (1980). ? So we would have to have some excellent reason to adopt a different standing rule under Rule 14e 3 from the one we use under Rule 10b-5. ? We are convinced that there is no basis for drawing such a distinction. The best candidate appellants have advanced as a basis for differentiating the standing requirement under the two Rules is Plaine v. McCabe, 797 F. d 713 (9th Cir. 1986). ?Plaine held that a plaintiff suing under Section 14(e) need not have traded at all, let alone contemporaneously. ? Id. at 718. The fulcrum of Plaine was a distinction suggested by Piper v. Chris-Craft Indus. , Inc. , 430 U. S. 1, 38-39, 97 S. Ct. 926, 51 L. Ed. 2d 124 (1977), between the types of shareholder protections contained in Sections 10(b) and 14(e): Piper noted that while Section 10(b) was enacted to protect only individuals who actually traded in stocks, Section 14(e) can be understood as protecting not only those who buy or sell stocks but also shareholders who decide not to trade. 430 U. S. at 38-39, 97 S. Ct. 926. ? Because Rule 14e-3 was promulgated under Section 14(e), the argument that a plaintiff who alleges insider trading under Section 14(e) or Rule 14e-3 need not worry about the contemporaneous trading requirement-because he need not have traded at all-has some initial plausibility. On a closer examination, however, Plaine does not speak to the issue at hand. Rather, Plaine focused only on non-insider trading claims brought under Section 14(e), and did not consider the standing requirements for an insider trading claim brought under Rule 14e-3. Section 14(e) broadly prohibits â€Å"fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative acts or practices, in connection with any tender offer;† it does not contain any specific reference to insider trading. ? Rule 14e-3, on the other hand, focuses on one type of behavior, insider trading, whose prohibition is thought to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative acts. ? See O'Hagan, 521 U. S. at 672-73, 117 S. Ct. 2199. ? In accordance with its specific, prophylactic focus, Rule 14e-3 applies to a different set of behaviors than does Section 14(e): Section 14(e) centers on the actual tender offer, whereas Rule 14e-3 regulates illegal insider trading that takes place while a tender offer is under consideration. ? As appellants' brief states, â€Å"[a]ll the elements of a Sec tion 14(e)/Rule 14e-3 insider trading violation are supplied by the language of Rule 14e-3. A comparison of the facts in Plaine with the facts in this case illustrates the difference between the Section 14(e) claim considered in Plaine and the Rule 14e-3 claim considered here. ? Plaine held shares in a company subject to a tender offer. ? She complained that false information in proxy materials had induced other shareholders to tender their shares. ? Because so many other shareholders tendered their shares, the merger went through at a price Plaine viewed as inadequate. Although Plaine did not tender her shares, the court ruled that she alleged injury occurring as a result of fraudulent activity in connection with a tender offer and had standing to assert her claim. ?797 F. 2d at 717. ? Plaine did not, however, allege insider trading, and therefore could not have made out a claim under Rule 14e-3. Brody and Crawford, on the other hand, did allege insider trading but did not allege t hat THC manipulated the tender offer process through the use of false information or by any other means. ? As such, the facts in the current case present a very different situation than that presented in Plaine. The circumstances do, however, bear a much closer resemblance to those in Neubronner, a Rule 10b-5 case centering around accusations of insider trading in violation of an abstain-or-disclose requirement. ? See Neubronner, 6 F. 3d at 667. Despite the similarities of the issues here and in Neubronner and between Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3, as applied to insider trading allegations, Brody and Crawford emphasize the differences between the Rules. ? Unlike Rule 10b-5, Rule 14e-3 does not require proof that a person traded on information obtained in violation of a duty owed to the source of the inside information. Instead, Rule 14e-3(a) creates a duty for a person with inside information to abstain or disclose â€Å"without regard to whether the trader owes a pre-existing fiduciary du ty to respect the confidentiality of the information. † ? O'Hagan, 521 U. S. at 669, 117 S. Ct. 2199 (quoting United States v. Chestman, 947 F. 2d 551, 557 (2d Cir. 1991) (en banc)). ? Although Rule 14e-3 thus expands the notion of who is an insider, it does not follow that the Rule also expands the class of shareholders who may complain when an insider trades without disclosing insider information. As a result, the fact that Rule 10b-5 and Rule 14e-3 are not identical does not lead to the conclusion that one has a contemporaneous trading requirement and the other does not. More importantly, perhaps, in this case, the allegation is that THC traded in its own stock on the basis of inside information. ? Such allegations would state a â€Å"†¦Ã¢â‚¬Ëœtraditional’ or ‘classical’ theory of insider trading liability [under] Rule 10b-5 based on ‘a relationship of trust and confidence between the shareholders of a corporation and those insiders who have obtained information by reason of their position with that corporation. †¦Ã¢â‚¬  ? O'Hagan, 521 U. S. at 651-652, 117 S. Ct. 2199 (quoting Chiarella, 445 U. S. at 228, 100 S. Ct. 1108). ? As such, this case is one that could be-and indeed, was-brought under both Rule 10b-5 and Rule 14e-3, and as to which any differences between the two rules regarding the necessary relationship between the insider and the source of information is not relevant. Brody and Crawford note another reason that, they argue, suggests an expansive reading of Rule 14e-3 is appropriate. In O'Hagan, the Supreme Court ruled that the SEC is permitted to promulgate rules under Section 14(e), such as Rule 14e-3, that prohibit acts not themselves fraudulent under the common law if the rules are reasonably designed to prevent acts that are. ?521 U. S. at 671-73, 117 S. Ct. 2199. ? This authority derives from the prophylactic rule-making power granted to the SEC by Section 14(e), a power that has no parallel in S ection 10(b). ?Id.That the SEC had more power to protect investors when it promulgated Rule 14e-3 than it did when it promulgated Rule 10b-5 does not mean, however, that the SEC exercised that power so as to protect noncontemporaneous traders under Rule 14e-3. ? And, in fact, what evidence there is demonstrates that the SEC did not intend to protect investors who could not have possibly traded with the insiders. In O'Hagan, the Supreme Court quoted at length from and afforded deference to the SEC's explanation of why it promulgated Rule 14e-3. Part of the Federal Register excerpt quoted in O'Hagan stated: The Commission has previously expressed and continues to have serious concerns about trading by persons in possession of material, nonpublic information relating to a tender offer. ? This practice results in unfair disparities in market information and market disruption. ? Security holders who purchase from or sell to such persons are effectively denied the benefits of disclosure a nd the substantive protections of the [legislation that includes Section 14(e)]. 21 U. S. at 674, 117 S. Ct. 2199 (quoting 45 Fed. Reg. 60412 (1980)). This quotation evinces a particular concern for those who â€Å"purchase from or sell to† insiders, and suggests that these shareholders, and not others who trade later, are the intended beneficiaries of Rule 14e-3. ? The contemporaneous trading requirement, designed to limit the class of potential plaintiffs to only those who could have possibly traded with the insider, is therefore precisely congruent with the SEC's expressed purpose in promulgating Rule 14e-3.In sum, Rule 10b-5 and Rule 14e-3 contain similar insider trading prohibitions, triggered by similar concerns. ? While Rule 14e-3 focuses on the tender offer context, the background history and language of Rule 14e-3 indicate that the Rule does not alter the premise that a shareholder must have traded with an insider or have traded at about the same time as an insider t o be harmed by the insider's trading. ? We conclude that there is no principled distinction between Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3 as regards the need for a contemporaneous trading allegation.We therefore extend the contemporaneous trading requirement to insider trading actions brought under Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3 actions. ? Because Brody and Crawford traded nearly two months after they allege THC traded, they did not trade contemporaneously with THC. The district court was correct in dismissing their Rule 14e-3 insider trading claims. B.? Misrepresentation We next consider a different set of concerns addressed by the securities laws: Rule 10b-5 and Section 14(e)'s explicit prohibition against the making of untrue or misleading statements. The plaintiffs do not maintain that either press release issued by THC was untrue. ? They do argue, though, that THC violated the prohibitions against making misleading statements when it issued the two press releases here at issue. ? In order to sur vive a motion to dismiss under the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (â€Å"PSLRA†), the plaintiffs' complaint must specify the reason or reasons why the statements made by THC were misleading. ?15 U. S. C.  §? 78u-4(b) (1); see also Ronconi, 253 F. 3d at 429.As an initial matter, Brody and Crawford correctly assert that a statement that is literally true can be misleading and thus actionable under the securities laws. ? See In re GlenFed Sec. Litig. , 42 F. 3d 1541, 1551 (9th Cir. 1994). ? But they err when they argue that in order for a statement not to be misleading, â€Å"once a disclosure is made, there is a duty to make it complete and accurate. † This proposition has no support in the case law. ?Rule 10b-5 and Section 14(e) in terms prohibit only misleading and untrue statements, not statements that are incomplete.Similarly, the primary case upon which Brody and Crawford rely for their innovative completeness rule su pports only a rule requiring that parties not mislead. ? Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg, 501 U. S. 1083, 1098 n. 7, 111 S. Ct. 2749, 115 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1991). ? Often, a statement will not mislead even if it is incomplete or does not include all relevant facts. 8 ? Further, a completeness rule such as Brody and Crawford suggest could implicate nearly all public statements potentially affecting securities sales or tender offers. No matter how detailed and accurate disclosure statements are, there are likely to be additional details that could have been disclosed but were not. ? To be actionable under the securities laws, an omission must be misleading; in other words it must affirmatively create an impression of a state of affairs that differs in a material way from the one that actually exists. ? See McCormick v. The Fund American Cos. , 26 F. 3d 869, 880 (9th Cir. 1994).We conclude that neither Rule 10b-5 nor Section 14(e) contains a freestanding completeness requirement; th e requirement is that any public statements companies make that could affect security sales or tender offers not be misleading or untrue. ? Thus, in order to survive a motion to dismiss under the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (â€Å"PSLRA†), the plaintiffs' complaint must specify the reason or reasons why the statements made by THC were misleading or untrue, not simply why the statements were incomplete. 15 U. S. C.  §? 78u-4(b) (1); see also Ronconi, 253 F. 3d at 429. ?Brody and Crawford's allegations do not comport with this requirement. ? They allege, first, that the press release issued on March 19 was misleading because it provided information about THC's stock repurchase program but did not contain information regarding THC's possible takeover. ? Although Brody and Crawford specify what information THC omitted, they do not indicate why the statement THC made was misleading. ? If the press elease had affirmatively intimat ed that no merger was imminent, it may well have been misleading. ? The actual press release, however, neither stated nor implied anything regarding a merger. ?Brody and Crawford also claim that THC's second press release, issued on April 24, was misleading. ? Again, the plaintiffs do not argue that the press release was untrue. ? Instead, they argue that it was misleading because it stated generally that THC had received â€Å"expressions of interest† from potential acquirers, when in fact it had received actual proposals from three different parties. Importantly, the complaint does not provide an explanation as to why this general statement was misleading, nor is it self-evident that it was. A proposal is certainly an â€Å"expression of interest. † ? Moreover, the press release did not simply state that there had been vague â€Å"expressions of interest;† it went on to state that the â€Å"expressions† were â€Å"from certain parties who have indicate d an interest in acquiring either the entire company or in acquiring the company, with the company's shareholders retaining their pro rata interests in Behavioral Healthcare Corporation [a THC subsidiary]. ? This specificity concerning the nature of the parties' proposals certainly suggests that something more than preliminary inquiries had taken place. Further, the press release additionally stated that the â€Å"Board of Directors has engaged financial advisors to advise the company in connection with a possible sale. † ? This additional information again suggested proposals that were concrete enough to be taken seriously. ? And the reference to multiple parties contained in the press release suggests an ongoing auction for THC was taking place with at least two participants.In short, the press release did not give the impression that THC had not received actual proposals from three parties or otherwise mislead readers about the stage of the negotiations. ? Instead, althoug h the press release did not provide all the information that THC possessed about its possible sale, the information THC did provide-and the reasonable inferences one could draw from that information-were entirely consistent with the more detailed explanation of the merger process that Brody and Crawford argue the press release should have included. Put another way, Brody, if he read the press release, would have been on notice, before he sold his shares, of the distinct possibility that the value of the shares would increase in the near future because of a takeover contest. 9 [11] Because Brody and Crawford have not alleged facts indicating that THC's April 24 press release was misleading, the district court properly dismissed that aspect of the plaintiffs' complaint. CONCLUSION Brody and Crawford have not met the contemporaneous trading requirements necessary to have standing in the insider trading claims they assert. Additionally, they have failed properly to allege misrepresentat ion against THC. As a result, we affirm the district court's decision to dismiss Brody and Crawford's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. AFFIRMED FOOTNOTES 1. ?Section 10, in relevant part, states: It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce or of the mails, or of any facility of any national securities exchange-?..... b)? To use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange or any security not so registered, or any securities-based swap agreement (as defined in section 206B of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act), any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of such rules and regulations as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors. 2. Rule 10b-5 states: It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirec tly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange,(a)? To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,(b)? To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or(c)?To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. 3. ?These â€Å"standing† limitations are not, of course of the constitutional variety, grounded in Article III of the Constitution, but simply delineate the scope of the implied cause of action. 4. ?Section 14(e) states: It shall be unlawful for any person to make any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to tate any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading, or to engage in any fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative acts or practices, in connection with any tender offer or request or invitation for tenders, or any solicitation of security holders in opposition to or in favor of any such offer, request, or invitation. ? The Commission shall, for the purposes of this subsection, by rules and regulations define, and prescribe means reasonably designed to prevent, such acts and practices as are fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative. . ?Rule 14e-3(a) states:(a)? If any person has taken a substantial step or steps to commence, or has commenced, a tender offer (the â€Å"offering person†), it shall constitute a fraudulent, deceptive or manipulative act or practice within the meaning of section 14(e) of the Act for any other person who is in possession of material information relating to such tender offer which information he knows or has reason to know is non public and which he knows or has reason to know has been acquired directly or indirectly from:(1)? The offering person,(2)? The issuer of the securities sought or to be sought by such tender offer, or(3)?Any officer, director, partner or employee or any other person acting on behalf of the offering person or such issuer, to purchase or sell or cause to be purchased or sold any of such securities or any securities convertible into or exchangeable for any such securities or any option or right to obtain or to dispose of any of the foregoing securities, unless within a reasonable time prior to any purchase or sale such information and its source are publicly disclosed by press release or otherwise. 6. ?Chiarella v. United States, 445 U. S. 222, 100 S. Ct. 1108, 63 L. Ed. d 348 (1980), considered, but did not decide, the viability of a misappropriation theory of liability under Rule 10b-5. ?445 U. S. at 235-37, 100 S. Ct. 1108. ?(A misappropriation theory extends liability to some parti es who trade in a company's securities on the basis of confidential information but who have no special relationship with the company's shareholders. ) Following Chiarella, the SEC promulgated Rule 14e-3, which clearly creates liability for insiders who trade in connection with a tender offer and do not disclose the inside information, regardless of their relationship to the shareholders or the source of the information. Then in 1997, the Supreme Court decided O'Hagan, answering the question left open by Chiarella and deciding that Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 do create liability under a misappropriation theory. ?521 U. S. at 650, 117 S. Ct. 2199. ? The upshot is that Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3 largely overlap with regard to the scope of insider trader liability, although they differ in some respects not here pertinent. ? See p. 1004, infra. 7. As we discuss below, in O'Hagan the Supreme Court approved Rule 14e-3 as a prophylactic rule designed to prevent core violations of Section 14(e) . ? See p. 1004, infra. 8. ?For example, if a company reports that its sales have risen from one year to the next, that statement is not misleading even though it does not include a detailed breakdown of the company's region by region or month by month sales. 9. ?We note that Crawford sold his shares before the April 24 press release, so he could not have been influenced in his trading by the release. BERZON, Circuit Judge.