i'll bite... nothing in the leaked memo strikes me as an example of a straightforward case of lying (much less, unethical lying). They're asking their employees to give a stock response saying they have no information to share. They are not asking them to say something like: "we don't have any inventory in stock" when in fact they do, which would be a lie. Perhaps we can read some ambiguity in the phrase "no information to share." If you interpret that to mean simply "we have no information" then sure, we might reasonably construe that as a lie, since they do have information. But it seems to me that what is meant here is: "we have no information we can share with you at the time." And corporate or not, government or not, this is normal everyday practice and not necessarily unethical or devious.
think of it this way: one of my students might come up to me and ask me what his or her grade was on the final exam. and i might reasonably say "I can't share that information with you right now," because, for example, I want all the students to get their grades at the same time. He or she might then follow up and ask, "well can you at least let me know whether you've graded mine yet even if you can't tell me the grade?" And I might again follow up that, "I can't say," simply because I just think it would be more a of a headache to have the student trying to read my facial expressions to get hint, or risk him or her telling other students, which might lead to me being flooded with similar questions, etc.
Of course sometimes, witholding information can be unethical, but that will depend on the details of the specific case. The simple point is basically that witholding information is not necessarily evidence of corruption or an example of unethical practices.
And I'm sure there was a healthy dose of hyperbole in the claim that this is what's wrong with america today, but surely best buy asking its employees not to divulge information to the customer until they hear something more concrete from verizon is not even close to the heart of what's wrong with america.
indeed, if you want to see best buy's practices as an example of what's wrong with america, you might do better to look at the various anti-competitive practices they've been accused of over the years. we might think that companies with a lot of capital selling goods way under market price (because they can afford to run a loss for an extended period of time) thereby making it impossible for small businesses to have any chance is a better candidate for criticism.
There's also a debate in economics whether "price-matching" guarantees are anti-competitive. When best buy guarantees that it will match any rival's lower price, it makes it so that they don't actually need to worry about losing customers because a competitor offers lower prices, while still allowing them on the whole to charge higher prices to their loyal customers. The implication of these kinds of policies for small business competitors is clear.
No matter where we stand on these kinds of issues, it seems that the really important ethical questions are at this level -- not at the level of employees witholding inventory information.
Of course, there's another matter entirely as to whether this is good business practice (not in an ethical sense, but in a prudential sense). So we might think, well, maybe they aren't actually lying or being unethical, but things like this might be bad business practice since it can potentially alienate or frustrate consumers. But i think there's good reason to suspect that a) only a very small subset of their customer base will actually experience an employee saying they have no information to share in this manner. and b) within that small subset, an even smaller subset will be so upset by this as to take their business elsewhere (just think of how many of us are still waiting on the nexus, despite how frustrated the farcical nature of the whole pre-"release" process has made us).
sorry for the essay, but i thought i'd add my two cents, because sometimes there's a tendency in this thread to express our quite reasonable frustration into ethical or principled charges against these companies. and i just wanted to caution against that, because it can be a bit myopic. companies like verizon and best buy do all kinds of things that we might reasonably interpret as ethically dubious and have tremendous implications on the livelihoods of a great number of people. the real ethical issues are there, not in the fact that they dont give us, the particularly energetic consumers, our toys how and when we want them.
This is what's wrong with America today! The Corporate stance of LYING to their customer base is accepted as normal policy. Then the young kids working for these corporations "learn" that lying is an acceptable practice and continue the cycle. Why would BB want to lie, what would be wrong with saying "yes, we have them in stock but Verizon has asked us not to sell them until they give us the go ahead"? If Verizon doesn't like the response then eff'em...they just lost 1500 retail outlets! I'm sure BB doesn't make much off of these sales anyway, and it would hurt Verizon much more than BB! This way the 3rd party retailers have a little clout and can help keep Verizon in check. Please don't take this as corporation bashing, I totally believe in our enterprise system, but there are bad companies and bad leadership out there making bad decisions...we need honesty and ethics back in the boardroom!