Stephanie Gan

CST 373

4/11/17

The Ethics of the Volkswagen Emission Scandal

INTRODUCTION

My name is Stephanie Gan; Im currently in the CSIT Online program and a student in

the CST 373 class, Ethics and Current Issues in Communication and Technology. In the

following pages, I will be discussing the ethical issues and implications of the Volkswagen

emissions scandal that silently took place for nearly a decade. This issue not only has an

environmental impact, but has also cemented itself as a cautionary tale to both consumers and

manufacturers. At first glance, the Volkswagen scandal may not seem to have much overlap with

my programs area of study, Computer Science. A little investigation into the topic yields more

connections to our major than one would think. The major automobile manufacturer

programmed the cars to let out an acceptable measure of emissions during testing. When an

emissions test was not detected, the engine control switched back to good fuel economy, high

NOx emissions mode. The decision to implement this system was made sometime prior to 2010,

and it exhibits the companys self-serving side. In this case, Volkswagen opted to promote the

appeal of fuel efficiency over implementing emissions control systems that function no matter

the circumstance.

Extremely important to study, the emissions scandal can be seen easily in the computer

science field in different flavors. Marketing a program as more than compliant while

programming a detection system to make sure the product knows when its being tested can

border on unethical by itself. The control systems shift in mode to higher efficiency and into the
line of unacceptable while detecting that it is not being tested is harmful in any environment.

This case is relevant to not only our line of study, but to any field that exhibits rules, guidelines,

and the upselling of efficiency.

HISTORY

Diesel engines grew in popularity under the appeal of better fuel economy. Despite

costing more than their gasoline counterparts, the ability to travel greater distances per gallon can

be an enticing idea. Its claimed that diesel engines are around 20 to 40 percent more fuel

efficient than gasoline engines. However, the automobiles that use diesel fuel have their own

share of problems. The emissions are particularly problematic, specifically the emission of

Nitrous Oxides (NOx).

The urge to cover up a products defects comes well before the Volkswagen scandal.

Case in point, the Chevrolet engine mount recall from the 1960s was unaddressed to the public

despite the company receiving numerous reports about accidents and injuries. According to an

article on Autos Cheat Sheet, In 1969, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration

received a report of defective Chevrolet engine mounts that could set off a potentially deadly

chain reaction. When it took the issue to General Motors, the corporation replied that it had

already received 172 reports of failed motor mounts, with 63 accidents and 18 injuries.

General Motors (GM) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTS) both

kept quiet about the issue. It wasnt until three years later when they laid the issue out to the

public. The engine mount in 1965 to 1969 Chevys could collapse and ultimately cause

unintended acceleration of the vehicle while potentially twisting the automatic transmissions out

of place. Upon investigation, it was revealed that these same engine mounts were used in their
cars since the late 1950s. This led to GMs recall announcement on December 5th, 1971. Similar

to Dieselgate, the issue was known but not addressed until later. As discussed on

Autosafety.org, there was an ironic side to the recall. () on over 95% of the vehicles recalled,

GM did not replace the defective mounts themselves, but rather installed a bracket and cable to

restrict engine movement if a mount broke. By avoiding replacement of engine mounts on all

6.68 million cars, GM managed to cut its recall costs considerably; the cable and bracket

assembly cost about $1 per car, far less than the $50 cost of new motor mounts. By avoiding the

fix to the actual defective part, they could save money. The arguably unethical side to their

solution was the nature of the fix itself which was basically a safety net in expectation of the

engine mount failure. The company expecting their own product to fail links directly back to

Volkswagens expectation of their product emitting too many harmful chemicals. Instead of

attempting to remedy the problem, they opted to install the defeat device that would detect

when the car was in a testing environment.

Automobile recall looks like a big deal, but do consumers feel the same way? PR

Newswire wrote that, According to the survey, both the number of recalls issued and the

seriousness of the safety defect influence future purchase decisions () 44% of respondents

agreed that regardless of problem severity, the more an automaker issued recalls, the less likely

they would be to purchase one of their new or used vehicles down the road, while 33% were

neutral and or 23% disagreed. The survey numbers dont reflect the statistics that followed.

There had been only mild evidence at the time that suggested that GMs prices were being

affected by the recalls. Even the prices for Chevrolet's used cars were steadily growing over the

competition. This could in part be due to the media sensation that is produced by massive online

sharing of news and scandalous updates. Funnily enough, the rapid spread of information could
be causing consumers to becoming more desensitized to what is deemed as noise. As John

Mendel, executive vice president of American Honda put it, Its becoming increasingly difficult

to get customers to come in to get the recalls done, there is definitely recall fatigue.

MEDIA VIEWS

Dieselgate was a hot topic on social media. With how simple it is to share tidbits of news,

its no shock that the social media outburst was not optimal for Volkswagen. Even worse still,

when Volkswagen published a link to their apology video on Twitter, they let the comments pile

up without swift response. According to the website Aberdeen Essentials, The day that

Volkswagen issued the apology video, 72.5% of all messages on social media talking about

Volkswagen were negative. The delayed, limited response clearly contributed to the negative

sentiment, as people directing messages to the companys official Twitter account had not

received any replies.

With the ease at which people can spread opinions, theres no doubt that the resentment

towards Volkswagen multiplied across many outlets. When it comes to real-time media

management, Volkswagen made a fatal mistake by not responding quickly. Because of this,

individuals packaged the story in a bad light for the company.

As far as dedicated news sources go, with a quick google search, one can see that many

of them highlight the implementation of their defeat device to recognize when the vehicle is in

a testing environment. It would appear that most sources that reported about the scandal view the

situation in a negative light; after all, it was certainly unethical. However, some have reported the

same information but with additional conclusions about the company. One article on the BBC

news website titled How Badly Has the Volkswagen Diesel Scandal Hurt Volkswagen
reported, While most industry experts agree that Volkswagen will weather the storm, the

company that emerges will be different. They have already announced a new corporate focus,

with as many as 30 all-electric cars to enter their product portfolio by 2025 (...) The electric

models are expected to represent between 20 and 25 percent of their sales, according to

Volkswagen CEO Matthias Mueller. This article, dated October of 2016, is a more recent

source and draws its focus from the outrage caused by the unethical behavior of Volkswagen and

instead discusses the long-term repercussions.

Published even later still from the same news source, BBC, the tone is different when

looking back at the scandal. Written January of 2017, Theo Leggett of BBC News wrote, Not

everyone was happy about this, it seems. Engineers "raised objections to the propriety of the

defeat device" in late 2006. In response, a manager decided that production should continue, still

using the device. He also instructed those in attendance, in sum and substance, not to get

caught.

In contrast, the coverage that broke out from around the initial reveal of the scandal

differed drastically. Written in December of 2015, from the same news source again (BBC), the

tone is much sharper. The author brings up the circumstances of not knowing exactly how the

defeat device works as well as how Europe needs to tighten its reigns on environmental laws.

This 'defeat device' sounds like a sophisticated piece of kit. Full details of how it worked are

sketchy, although the EPA has said that the engines had computer software that could sense test

scenarios by monitoring speed, engine operation, air pressure and even the position of the

steering wheel. () The result? The engines emitted nitrogen oxide pollutants up to 40 times

above what is allowed in the US.

 There is a lot of bias, and it appears that it slipped through the cracks rampantly closer to

the time of reveal. A common thread throughout the sources that are easily accessible is that

Volkswagen was in the wrong. Interestingly enough, the opinion on how Volkswagen would

ultimately be effected in the long run changed as time went on.

OTHER VIEWS

The media wasnt the only force concerned with this issue. The majority of

manufacturers were also aware of the potentially damaging reputation that VW had earned

through their unethical practice. Volkswagen AG bears the responsibility for its emissions-

cheating scandal and not suppliers or diesel technology, according to the head of Robert Bosch

GmbH, the worlds biggest maker of auto parts, posted on Bloomberg.

Other manufacturers, even if creating the auto parts as opposed to the cars themselves,

have this viewpoint due to the fact that news spreads quickly. When news spreads quickly, its

easy for consumers to form a nearly uniform opinion by bouncing echoing ideas off of each

other. One distinct example is the outrage that followed the VW twitter apology post. The

publics response was overwhelmingly negative, feeding off of the collective negativity of the

online community. According to the Harvard Business Review website, the lesson learned for

Volkswagens public apology should be along these lines: The biggest takeaway is that

managers should immediately focus on recovery strategies following an incident, and aim to

neutralize the negative sentiment surrounding the brand. In this way, managers can accelerate the

shift in conversation from the incident itself and limit the potential damage.

ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES
 Egoism played a huge part in Volkswagens scandal. As worded in the Ethical

Frameworks document in our course, Egoism or self-interest ethics assumes that individuals

and businesses have an obligation to guide their conduct by a rational calculation of ones own

interests. For business, it follows that value creation or profit maximization is paramount to the

firm. As Volkswagen is a business, it is natural that they were guided by self-interest and profit

of the company. In addition to pure self-interest, they covered up a defect in their product. To

sell more units and gain and maintain a good reputation among consumers, they needed to be

able to market their product as not only fuel efficient, but relatively environmentally safe as well.

Social group relativism, or the view that we assess what is proper conduct by

understanding what our social group expects of us, also applies. The company was expected to

produce and distribute a vehicle that would pass emissions tests while also being fuel-efficient as

a diesel machine was expected to be. By creating and implementing the program to detect when

the vehicle was being tested, they were able to control the mode that the automobile would run

in, well after the distribution.

The last ethical framework that will be discussed is the deontology. Is this action or

decision right, good or bad?, we raise the question of whether this is something we are willing

to do, irrespective of the number of others who may do it. The decision may have been good

economically for the company, but it was downright bad for the environment. As far as being

good, bad, or right for the consumer, it certainly wasnt right as they lied about their product and

kept quiet about it for years. This is an ethical framework that I believe programmers should

consider every time they release a product. Good for the company doesnt necessarily equate to

being right for the consumer or the overall culture of programming, regardless of how many

other programmers or institutions carry out a specific practice.

 FUTURE CHALLENGES

I think that this issue will not be as prominent in the future in the sense that

manufacturers will be much more careful about the way that they implement features. This is not

to say that cheating the system in the way that VW did will not exist, but later, it will be much

more difficult to get away with manipulating results of tests.

As social media becomes more popular in our everyday lives, it will not only be more

difficult for companies to get away with unethical behavior, but it will be incredibly challenging

for them to live it down. If it were a smaller company without an established brand, reputation,

and economic status, its hard to tell if they would have come out of a scandal like this still in-

tact. According to Michael Diamond of USA Today, Business owners are trying to find their

footing in the age of social media, where one misstep an airline that loses a passenger's

luggage, a restaurant that mixes up an order, a doctor whose patients face lengthy waits can

reach millions and spell doom. Business owners, employees in charge of PR, anybody with a

product to sell and a reputation to protect, must become fast and effective at handing online

press.

MY REFLECTIONS

I think that Volkswagen did what they thought was best for their company. It was

unethical and it should not have been done in the first place, even with the pressure of having to

put out a product that could pass the emissions test while staying relevant in terms of fuel

economy. As I delved deeper into the issue and how it affected not only their consumers, but

their entire industry, I came to realize that when big companies are caught doing something
unethical, they cant simply backpedal and expect to receive a pass. In todays world, everybody

is under scrutiny, especially big name companies.

As far as social and political changes are concerned, I realize that it isnt only computer

software that needs an ethical code to follow. With the myriad of products that become

integrated with programming, basically making products smarter and able to make choices

based on stimuli, the ethical boundaries must constantly be re-evaluated to determine what is

acceptable and what isnt. The dieselgate scandal was entirely unethical and even worse was that

the program worked as intended.

 Sources

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-volkswagen-scandal-anniversary-1002-biz-

20160929-story.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-27/vw-bears-blame-for-diesel-cheating-

scandal-supplier-bosch-says

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/best-cars-blog/2016/10/how-badly-has-the-vw-scandal-hurt-

vw

https://econsultancy.com/blog/66972-social-media-and-crisis-management-a-volkswagen-case-

study/

http://www.aberdeenessentials.com/cmo-essentials/social-strategy-for-scandal-lessons-from-

volkswagen/

http://self.gutenberg.org/article/whebn0047896187/volkswagen%20emissions%20scandal

http://www.dw.com/en/eu-report-blames-dieselgate-on-widespread-political-negligence/a-

37755807

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2015/01/10/viral-power-negative-social-media-

bad-for-business/21570851/

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/19/revealed-how-vw-designed-the-greatest-

scandal-in-automotive-history.html

http://blog.caranddriver.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-vw-diesel-emissions-

scandal/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewdepaula/2013/04/30/ownership-of-diesel-cars-up-but-still-

a-fraction-of-market/#1570c6a11dc9
https://www.nettinc.com/information/emissions-faq/what-are-diesel-emissions

http://news.berkeley.edu/2012/10/22/diesel-vs-gas-contributing-to-smog/

https://www.cars.com/articles/vw-diesel-crisis-timeline-of-events-1420681251993/

http://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/11-of-historys-most-infamous-automotive-

scandals.html/?a=viewall

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/consumer-reaction-to-vehicle-recalls-

271997551.html

http://www.autosafety.org/chevrolet-motor-mounts/

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/04/the-truth-about-car-recalls/index.htm