Man on a Ledge
Business World Portrayal
The cinematic movie I watched was Man on a Ledge. In this movie the business
world was portrayed in a negative light. The movie revolved around a power and money
hungry businessman that would do anything to keep his authoritative status. He lied,
cheated, and bribed his way to the top, and didn’t care who he stepped on to get there and
remain there. Through deception, corruption, and other unethical methods, he was able to
be successful in business. The movie also portrayed corrupt cops and essentially an
overall corrupt business and justice system. This portrayal of an unjust system came with
many ethical dilemmas.
Ethical Issue 1: Deception
The three main ethical dilemmas I observed in this movie were deception,
corruption, and blackballing. The first ethical issue I will discuss is deception, because
that was the main theme in which the movie revolved around. The main character was a
cop named Nick Cassady and he was arrested for stealing a 40 million dollar diamond
from a businessman named David Englander. But David set him up, and Nick was
actually innocent. David had lost a lot of money, and needed a way to stay keep his
businesses and lifestyle afloat, so he framed Nick in order to collect the insurance money
and still keep his precious stone. Nick then went away to jail and was a disgrace to his
family and fellow police officers. It was evident that David was a stage 2 in Kohlberg’s
stage scores. He was doing whatever it took to reach his goals and rewarding, or paying
1
people off, in order to do so. David also definitely displayed ethical egoism; he only
cared about how his actions affected himself, with no regard for others.
This was complete deceptiveness, which means that there was a conscious
intention to deceive, regardless of the consequences for the person being deceived. David
knew that Nick would go to jail, and his life would be ruined, and yet he still framed him.
It is also classified as complete deceptiveness because David knowingly lied to everyone,
and everything he said about that incident was false. And lastly this is an example of
complete deceptiveness because relevant facts about how the incident occurred were
concealed. Complete deception is extremely unethical, and this is evident and displayed
throughout the movie.
The issue was resolved at the end of the movie, when Nick was able to show
everyone that David still had the diamond in his possession after all, and that he was
indeed innocent. I think the issue was resolved in a good manner, I feel that innocence
should always prevail, so in the end I felt like justice was served. If I was in the situation,
I would not have had the courage to do what Nick did. In order to prove that David still
had the diamond, Nick had his brother and his brother’s girlfriend break into David’s
business and safe to steal the diamond and prove that it was in his possession the whole
time. In order for them to break in, Nick needed to form a distraction, which he made by
climbing on a ledge and acting like he was going to jump and commit suicide. I would
ultimately want to resolve the situation in a way that would prove my innocence, but
would not have those kinds of skills or resources to do so.
Ethical Issue 2: Corruption
2
The next ethical issue portrayed in the movie was corruption. The way that David
was able to get away with this massive deception, is because he had corrupt cops working
for him. David had reward power over the cops, he was in a position to reward the cops
monetarily, and since the cops value these monetary rewards, David in turn had power
over them. A twist in the movie was that one of Nick’s friend, his ex police partner,
Mike, was one of the cops responsible for setting him up. At the end of the movie Mike
was shot, and admitted to Nick that he helped fake the diamond theft, but did not know
that Nick was going to be the one that got framed. This shows that corruption can easily
spread and even if you have good intentions, corruption can negatively harm people, even
if it was not those you intended to harm.
The issue was resolved when the negotiator Nick was working with, Lydia, did
some digging to see if the story Nick had been telling her was the truth. She called
internal affairs, and they confirmed that they also suspected those cops of being corrupt.
The movie does not explicitly say how the issue was resolved, and what actually happens
to those cops, but it was my assumption that the truth would come out, and they would
pay for their wrongdoings. I think to resolve the issue, they should have shown, or told
the audience that the corrupt cops would be identified and tried for their crimes, so there
was no doubt of the outcome. I don’t like not definitively knowing what the outcome of a
movie is. The audience will always individually make their own assumptions, but will
never really know what the actual outcome would have been. If I was in that situation I
would have ensured that the corrupt cops were held accountable for their actions, and that
justice was served.
Ethical Issue 3: Blackballing
3
The last main ethical issue I will discuss is blackballing. This was displayed in the
movie in two main fashions. First, the negotiator, Lydia, was being ostracized by her
fellow officers for an incident that had recently happened. Lydia had failed to talk a
policeman down off a bridge, before he committed suicide. It was apparent from when
she stepped on the scene that the other officers did not want her there and looked down
on her. There were multiple incidences throughout the movie where she was being cast
out by her fellow co-officers. Based on her failure to save the fallen officer, she was
being rejected, almost to the point of discrimination, by her fellow police officers. I think
it is extremely unethical to boycott someone for an incident that was not under their
control. I think this is especially unethical for police officers, whose job is to be just and
fair.
The second case of blackballing in the movie was when Nick was framed, and
even though he pled his innocence, all the other officers turned their backs on him. When
the police officers found out that it was Nick on the ledge, they all had a negative
reaction. You could feel that it swayed their drive to save him. When you are appointed
the position of a police officer, it should not matter who the person in danger is, all
people deserve life, and they have a responsibility to the public to preserve that life. I
think the officer’s treatment of Nick throughout the ordeal was unethical.
Lydia’s issue was resolved by the end of the movie, when the other cops finally
saw that she was a strong negotiator and cop, and started backing her. If I were in that
situation, I never would have unfairly judged her. It was made clear in the movie that she
tried her hardest to save the fallen police officer, and although she gave it her all, there
4
was a black cloud hovering over her from the incident. When people treat other people
negatively based on circumstances that are not within their control, I think it is unethical.
Nick’s issue was resolved at the end of the movie, when everyone discovered he
was innocent, and he was brought to justice. I think the issue should have been resolved
prior to Nick having to do all of these outlandish actions. The truth should have been
discovered before Nick ever went to jail. If the truth would not have prevailed, Nick
would have had to spend 25 years in jail. I think there are many innocent people that are
currently sitting in jail, serving time that is unjust.
There were other business ethics issues throughout the movie, such as when
Nick’s brother and his girlfriend broke into David’s bank. Not only did they break in into
his business, but Nick’s brother also stole a ring out of David’s safe and gave it to his
girlfriend as an engagement ring.
What I learned
Overall I learned many things from this exercise; the main thing was that it
opened my eyes to the underlying ethical issues that are woven throughout many
cinematic movies. Typically when I watch movies, I don’t analyze them and look to
understand the ethical issues, I just sit back, relax, and enjoy the show. I do think
however, that when people watch movies the issues end up subconsciously rooted in their
thoughts. Movies are just another form of media, and what we observe does affect our
opinions and how we see things. Because movies are fanaticized and their concepts are to
the extreme, viewers may get an unrealistic portrayal of business and business ethics,
which in turn may skew how they act in ethically questionable business situations.
5
This exercise not only opened my eyes to the underlying issues and implications
of movies, but it also helped me think about how I would react in those situations. It
made me contemplate if they handled the ethical issues correctly, or how I would have
handled the situation. It also made me stop and think what the resolution really should
have been, and if the outcome was just.
6