Introduction Ethical behaviour is crucial in any business industry. Activities such as insider trading significantly jeopardize ethical values, which are of significant importance to industries such as the financial sector. Essvale Corporation Limited (2008, p.11) defines insider trading as the act of trading shares or other securities held in a company by individuals, with the potential of gaining access to information on the company, which is not accessible to the public. Insider trading is an offence punishable by law in the US. This paper seeks to examine the Martha Stewart insider trading case. Martha Stewart Case; Her Image’s Contribution; Her Conviction’s Implication for Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. and Modern Day Business Environment It is believed that Martha Stewart’s association with ImClone System was the origin of her role in the insider trading scandal. Martha Stewart held 3,929 shares in ImClone System, which was a biopharmaceuticals company. Martha Stewart being a highly profiled business and corporate personality, her image had significant influence on potential investors in both Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia and ImClone System (Pride & Ferrell 2006, p. 115). Martha Stewart had prior information that the shares of ImClone System would decline in value, following a notification that the Food and Drug Administration would not approve a prescription drug the pharmaceutical company was developing. As such, Martha acted by instructing her broker to sell her shares a day to the impending action by the Food and Drug Administration, in order to avoid incurring financial losses to her shares (Rawls 2009, p.1). Martha Stewart’s image played a critical part in the trading scandal (Peck 2011, p. 94). First, Peck (2011) reiterates that Martha had worked as a stockbroker before founding her very successful company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc. As such, more than the other personalities involved in the insider trading scandal, she should have known better, the implications of insider trading, given her background in the securities trading industry. Second, the net worth of Martha Stewart was $ 650 million, while the amount she avoided loosing was only $ 45,673 at the time of the insider trading scandal. Thus, the striking thing in the context of her wealth is that it is hard to understand why Martha Stewart, was willing to break the law on insider trading for such a relatively small amount of money. Her actions portray her image as a greedy and arrogant individual. She was greedy in the sense that she made the decision to save as little as $ 45,673, at the expense of making an ethical decision. Her decision was arrogant since she thought that she could get away with the crime, by insinuating the sale of her 3,929 shares in ImClone System, with regard to the $ 60 stop-loss order. This was scandalous since there was no evidence of any stop-loss order issued to her broker, Peter Bacanovic (Pride & Ferrell 2006, p. 115). Even without Martha Stewart the person, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia will survive though with difficulties. According to Franzen and Moriarty (2009, p. 340), this is because the brand was created on virtues which emphasize “how-to” ideas and inspiration; and high qua