Quote:
Originally Posted by TGS
This is a request to those who have asserted that browsing without buying has some kind of ethical value: can you tell me what normative ethical positions you are relying on to make this assertion?
|
Let me try to summarize the situation as I see it:
Vendors invest in bricks-and-mortar stores and employ sales staff in the hopes of making a sale. If a shopper visits the store and takes advantage of these services he then has a moral obligation to support the store. It's not written down anywhere; let your conscience be your guide.
If he doesn't see anything he likes and doesn't buy anything then that's fine; c'est la vie. But, if having thus determined what he wants he then deliberately leaves the store and buys it online because it's cheaper then that's just not right. He's taken advantage of the vendor - essentially gotten something for nothing. If everyone did that there would be no stores.
The reason why this differs from traditional "comparison shopping" is the vast difference in the cost of operating a B&M store vs. an online store. This is something new, as a result of digital technology, and that's why traditional retail models are being undermined.