Academic Corporate ‘Shills’ and Conflict of Interest

Abstract

This paper provides a philosophical examination of what it means to be a corporate shill. In particular, it examines ethical issues related to situations in which individual academics stand accused of being corporate ‘shills.’ The paper examines the general question of what it means to be a shill and what the wrongness of shilling in general consists of, before considering the specific case of academics – university professors – who are accused of acting as shills, and corporate shills in particular. The paper argues that true instances of shilling involve failure to deal properly with a specific form of conflict of interest. This implies that accusations that a particular academic is acting as a corporate shill should be interpreted and responded to within a framework appropriate for dealing with conflicts of interest.