Blog Written By Attorney Jean S. Martin

Back in the early 1980’s, pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson faced, what then was, the crisis of its life.  Seven people died after taking Tylenol capsules, which had been intentionally tampered with and contaminated with cyanide, after the product reached the shelves. Johnson & Johnson moved quickly to remove all products from the shelves, approximately 31 million bottles, while undertaking massive advertising to warn consumers to avoid using the product.  Johnson & Johnson’s honesty and efforts painted a picture of a corporation which cared about consumers and promoted safety above profits.  Since then, Johnson & Johnson has been heralded as setting the “gold standard” for corporate response in the wake of a disaster.

 Almost 30 years later, consumers are left wondering what happened to that caring and honest corporation and why is Johnson & Johnson breaking every rule of corporate responsibility that it previously established.  The current crisis once again involves over-the-counter medications, but the similarities stop there.  First, in 1982, the products were tampered with after they reached the market; Johnson & Johnson was not responsible for the deadly contamination.  Fast forward to present day and, since 2009, Johnson & Johnson has faced four recalls of products due to manufacturing problems and quality standards not being met. In the Tylenol crisis, Johnson & Johnson acted quickly to remove all Tylenol capsules from the shelves within a couple of weeks of the first death.  This time, Johnson and Johnson waited 18 months after initial complaints before it took any action.  The candor that Johnson and Johnson demonstrated in 1982 set the bar of excellence in corporate ethics.  Unfortunately 30 years later, there are allegations that, instead of being open and honest with the public (and the FDA) about the problems with their product, Johnson & Johnson hired contractors to buy defective pediatric medicines from stores.  This “phantom recall” got the product off the shelves without Johnson & Johnson notifying consumers or the FDA.

 When I compare Johnson & Johnson’s heroic actions in 1982 to their dastardly behavior today, my first thoughts are of the split personality of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. How is it possible that a corporation like Johnson & Johnson would display such a vast contrast in moral behavior? But the larger question may be why consumers do not seem to care.  Thirty years ago, consumers appreciated the responsibility that Johnson & Johnson took for a problem that it did not create and greatly valued the integrity with which the company approached the entire situation.  In the end, consumers rewarded the company handsomely by remaining fiercely loyal to the brand.  Presently, in a crisis of its own making, Johnson & Johnson has dragged its corporate feet, while misleading consumers and the FDA, but their profits and stock price have not seen any effect.  This can only result from consumers continuing to purchase their products.  Have we gotten to a point that we simply do not care about corporate behavior?  It seems that the corporate world has realized that our reward for ethical conduct is the same as our punishment for dishonesty and is starting to act accordingly.

 It is thought that life is a circle, and what goes out, one day comes back in.  In 2010, we have witnessed the revival of some 80’s trends like plastic bracelets, leggings, Molly Ringwald, and even the Rubik’s Cube. Let’s hope that corporate responsibility will be the next to follow.  Maybe it’s time for consumers to be the trend-setters and force companies to resist their darker, profit-driven impulses and follow the path of moral character.