Voluntary Professional Associations
Voluntary professional associations have difficulty justifying to others that they are a profession because practitioners working in the field are not required to be members. Based on memberships in the two largest professional associations in public relations, approximately 10 percent of all practitioners are involved in professional associations. Research indicates that public relations practitioners who are members of professional associations hold significantly different values and principles than do practitioners not associated with professional organizations.20
The primary reasons people join voluntary professional associations are to meet their colleagues and to “network”—to make contact with other professionals who can assist each other in their career development. In addition to sponsoring forums for meeting people and exchanging ideas, many professional associations also conduct contests to identify outstanding examples of professional work and accreditation examinations to ascertain and document a member’s professional status.
LO 3-3 Learn More No permissions needed. Title: Professional associations in the field of public relations Explanation: make all these "hot" listings by linking to Web sites Text:
Here are some of the professional associations in the field of public relations, by region or primary marketplace:
Global International Association of Business Communication (IABC) International Public Relations Association (IPRA) International Committee of the Public Relations Consultancies Organisation (ICCO)
North America Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) Arthur W. Page Society Health Care Public Relations Association Council of Public Relations Firms Canadian Public Relations Society (CPRS) Mexican Association of Public Relations Agencies.
Central and South America Interamerican Confederation of Public Relations
Africa and Middle East Federation of African Public Relations Associations HDD Public Relations Consultancies Association--Turkey Public Relations of Southern Africa
Europe The Institute of Public Relations--England Public Relations Consultants Association
Public Relations Institute of Ireland Association of Public Relations Consultancies--Spain Confederation Europeenne Des Relations Publiques (CERP) Young European PR Professionals Netherlands Association of Public Relations Consultants Norwegian Public Relations & Information Association
Eastern Europe and Eurasia Hungarian Public Relations Association Slovak Republic Public Relations Association Public Relations of Slovenia
Asia, India and Pacific Rim Institute of Public Relations of Singapore India—Prime Point Foundation Public Relations Institute of Australia (PRIA) Public Relations Institute of New Zealand (PRINZ)
|
Award Programs Recognize Professional Norms
Most professional associations offer awards programs for best practices by their members and others. For example, the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) has a program for its members called the Golden World Awards.iv Country-specific campaigns, some of which have regional or global reach, are reviewed by an expert panel of judges. Among award recipients in recent years have been campaigns in Poland, Spain, Brazil, Canada, Germany, USA, Turkey, United Kingdom, Philippines, India and Australia.
The Public Relations Institute of Australia has an award program to recognize best practices in public relations in each state of Australia. Categories for awards cover the full range of public relations activities including community communication, employee/member communication, issues/crisis management, government communication and marketing communication.v
Two of the largest professional organizations in the field-- the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC)--have award programs that serve as models.vi At their competitions, both PRSA and IABC solicit, from members and non-members, detailed descriptions of public relations programs and campaigns. The submissions are judged against others within such categories as special events, investor relations, employee communication programs, public service, feature-length video programs, communication audits and research, newsletters, public affairs, marketing communications, international public relations, publications, corporate advertisements, annual reports, speeches, photography, and more. Panels of professional peers are used to select award-winning entries. Judges focus on how well practitioners executed the four basic steps in the public relations strategic planning process: research, planning, implementation, and evaluation. PRSA refers to these stages as research, planning, execution, and evaluation. IABC refers to them as the need, goals and objectives, execution, and evaluation and results.21
LO 3-4 Learn More No permissions required. Title: Professional award programs in public relations and business communication Explanation: list of Web sites Text:
See the award programs--and winners--of these associations:
|
Accreditation of Professionals
Both PRSA and IABC accredit qualified practitioners who pass written and oral examinations. Approximately 25 percent of the members of PRSA are accredited, and approximately 5 percent of IABC members are accredited. The examinations are designed to test the members’ understanding of the body of public relations knowledge and their ability to apply that knowledge in practice. Both examinations test the members’ knowledge of their association’s code of ethics.
IABC’s examination is administered by a committee of IABC members.22 PRSA's examination is administered by an independent board that uses a professional grading service to score the exams. The IABC examination is targeted to members with several years experience. It test both strategic thinking and tactical skills. Practitioners who pass the exam earn the ABC designation: Accredited in Business Communication.
LO 3-5 Learn More No permissions required. Title: Accreditation programs in public relations and business communication Explanation: list of Web sites Text:
See the accreditation programs of these associations:
|
PRSA has the oldest accreditation program in the field: since 1964, PRSA has offered an exam. Its current examination is administered by the Universal Accreditation Board (UAB), a consortium of professional associations that designs and administers a common examination for its members. Nine public relations organizations are members of the UAB: Agricultural Relations Council, Florida Public Relations Association, Maine Public Relations Council, National School Public Relations Association, Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), Religion Communicators Council, Society for Healthcare Strategy and Market Development, Southern Public Relations Federation, and the Texas Public Relations Association.vii The UAB receives financial support from its member organizations and administrative support from PRSA. The exam, designed to meet international standards in accreditation, measures a practitioner's knowledge of public relations basic principles, history, law, ethics and communication theories. It also tests a practitioner's ability to think strategically and to plan, research, implement and evaluate various public relations campaigns, especially those involving crisis communications management. Professionals who pass the exam earn the APR designation: Accredited in Public Relations.
Enforcement of professional codes: more educational than punitive
While the vast majority of professional associations have codes of ethics--it is, after all, the hallmark of a profession to have a code of ethics--few in the field of public relations have strong enforcement policies. This lack of enforcement is especially true for associations with corporate members within a single industry, because strong, enforceable codes invite antitrust proceedings and lawsuits.23 While each code outlines enforcement procedures, including guidelines for processing inquiries and complaints, the harshest sanction against any convicted violator of any of the codes is the revocation of membership. Most professional associations in public relations stress the educational, rather than punitive, function of their ethics codes.
LO 3-6 Callout Permissions required for reprinting the entire codes of these organizations in the appendix. See LO 3-5 for Web sites for these organizations: Public Relations Society of America; International Association of Business Communicators; International Public Relations Association; Canadian Public Relations Society of America; Public Relations Institute of Australia; and the International Committee of the Public Relations Consultancies Association. Title: A systems-based analysis of codes of ethics in public relations: Text:
A system-based analysis of codes of ethics in public relations:
In the appendix of this book are the codes from the following organizations: PRSA, IABC, IPRA, CPRS, PRIA and ICCO. Examples of principles found in each of these professional codes have been placed into the following general systems framework to help clarify the basic thrust of the various codes in this field. (In parenthesis is the number assigned to the principle in each association’s formal code.)
Professional codes emphasize cultural values and beliefs:
PRSA A member shall conduct his or her professional life in accord with the public interest. (1) IPRA Each member shall endeavor to contribute to the achievement of the moral and cultural conditions enabling human beings to reach their full stature and enjoy the indefeasible rights to which they are entitled under the United Nation’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” (1) IABC Professional communicators understand and support the principles of free speech, freedom of assembly, and access to an open marketplace of ideas; and, act accordingly. (3)
Professional codes emphasize laws and public policies
IABC Professional communicators obey laws and public policies governing their professional activities and are sensitive to the spirit of all laws and regulations and, should any law or public policy be violated, for whatever reason, act promptly to correct the situation. (6) PRIA Members shall not knowingly disseminate false or misleading information and shall take care to avoid doing so inadvertently. (3) ICCO Member firm shall neither propose nor undertake any action which would constitute an improper influence on organs of government, or on legislation, or on the media of communication. (2.6)
Professional codes emphasize the practitioner’s relationship with publics outside the immediate control of the sponsoring organization or client
IPRA Each member shall undertake to act, in all circumstances, in such a manner as to take account of the respective interests of the parties involved: both the interests of the organization which he/she serves and the interests of the publics concerned. (8) IABC Professional communicators give credit for unique expressions borrowed from others and identify the sources and purposes of all information disseminated to the public. (7) ICCO A member firm shall, when working in association with other professionals, identify and respect the codes of these professionals and shall not knowingly be party to any breach of such codes. (2.4)
Professional codes emphasize the practitioner’s relationship with the sponsoring organization or client
PRIA Members shall be prepared to identify the source of funding of any public communication they initiate or for which they act as a conduit. (9) PRSA A member shall not use any individual or organization professing to serve or represent an announced cause, or professing to be independent or unbiased, but actually serving another or undisclosed interest. (8) CPRS A member shall not guarantee specified results beyond the member's capacity to achieve. (8) ICCO A member firm shall inform a client of any shareholding or financial interest held by that firm or any member of that firm in any company, firm or person whose services it recommends. (3.2) IABC Professional communicators do not accept undisclosed gifts or payments for professional services from anyone other than a client or employer. (10)
Professional codes emphasize the practitioner’s relationship with other individuals and small groups within the sponsoring organization or client
IABC Professional communicators protect confidential information and, at the same time, comply with all legal requirements for the disclosure of information affecting the welfare of others. (8) ICCO A member firm shall not invite any employee of a client advised by the member to consider alternative employment (an advertisement in the press is not considered to be an invitation to a particular person). (3.10) PRIA Members shall inform their employers or clients if circumstances arise in which their judgment or the disinterested character of their services may be questions by reason of personal relationships or business or financial interests. (7)
Professional codes emphasize the practitioner’s relationship with the self
IABC Professional communicators refrain from taking part in any undertaking that the communicator considers to be unethical. (5) IPRA Each member shall endeavor to bear in mind that, because of the relationship between his/her profession and the public, his/her conduct—even in private—will have an impact on the way in which the profession as a whole is appraised. (4) IABC Professional communicators are honest not only with others but also, and most importantly, with themselves as individuals; for a professional communicator seeks the truth and speaks that truth first to the self. (12)
|
Similarities among professional codes
An analysis of complaints to PRSA’s Grievance Board, based on the association's code of standard (since revised--with the basic principles remaining the same), indicated that most alleged and actual violations of these ethical principles fall into the following specific categories: abuse of media discounts and complimentary rates for purchasing media; ownership of campaign materials, documents, and records produced for the sponsoring organization; guarantees for media placement; blind solicitation of business from organizations with in-house specialists or outside counsel; and disclosure of a potential client’s plans to a competitor.24 The principles cited most often in complaints registered with the association over the past thirty years have been as follows: dealing fairly with clients, employers, fellow practitioners, and the general public; using care to avoid communication of false or misleading information; conducting professional life in accordance with public interest; adhering to truth and accuracy and to generally accepted standards of good taste; and engaging in practices that tend to corrupt the integrity of communication or governmental processes.25
Each of the codes stresses the values of truth and honesty, and each emphasizes discretion and loyalty, which are potentially conflicting principles. Each code, however, resolves any potential contradiction by explaining that in situations where these principles are in conflict, the professional should always tell the truth.
All codes underscore the importance of obeying the law.
Laws and public policies
For the ethical public relations practitioner, obeying the law is considered a base level of operations; it’s the floor. If a public relations program or campaign drops below this base level, both the practitioner and the employer or client are open to legal liability.26 The ethical public relations manager operates well above the base level, because the law may not address certain issues or may not declare illegal certain actions which the practitioner considers to be unethical. For example, the public relations field is infamous for making exaggerated statements not intended to be taken literally (“the greatest show on earth”) and for staging attention-getting pseudo-events as significant news events. Neither activity is illegal, per se, except in extraordinary cases, but both are considered unethical by most public relations professionals.
It is beyond the scope of this book to describe in detail the legal issues that affect the practice of strategic public relations and integrated communications. However, the basic legal considerations important to a public relations professional will be highlighted. The wise public relations manager will meet on a regular basis with lawyers who specialize in commercial speech and communication issues. He or she can discuss the specific legal environment within which the organization or client operates.
LO 3-7 Callout No permissions required. Note: all principles have citations. Title: Legal principles governing strategic public relations and integrated communications Text:
The following statements about the major legal issues affecting the practice of public relations, based on a wide array of laws and regulations, are presented in the form of principles:
1. A public relations professional understands what constitutes the rights of individuals and corporations to experience free speech and open public discussions.27 2. A public relations professional understands that national, state, and other jurisdictions often require registration and financial disclosure of lobbyists representing special-interest groups and, especially, foreign governments.28 3. A public relations professional understands that national, state, and other jurisdictions often establish ethical standards for elected officials, and that when a practitioner is lobbying these officials, these ethical standards must be honored.29 4. A public relations professional understands and complies with laws and regulations enforced by a variety of government agencies at national, state, and local levels that deal with truth in advertising, package labeling, testimonial techniques, and promotional games and contests.30 5. A public relations professional understands that certain government agencies can be required to release information pertaining to government decisions—except matters directly affecting national security, trade secrets, and personal privacy—to individuals and corporations requesting that information through the Freedom of Information Act and similar legislation.31 6. A public relations professional understands and respects copyrights, not only because materials produced for programs and campaigns may be copyrighted, but also because works for hire supplied by freelance writers, artists, and producers may be protected by copyrights.32 7. A public relations professional understands that if trademarks and trade secrets are not properly and consistently protected in all official corporate communications, the courts may rule that others may use this information as they see fit.33 8. A public relations professional understands the difference between research and industrial espionage, and between research and sales promotion.34 9. A public relations professional recognizes the rights of employees which have been established by national and state governments and regulatory agencies; these rights include regular reports from management, fair union elections, equal employment opportunities, affirmative action, and occupational safety—as well as the employee’s right to blow the whistle on employers who violate these and other employee rights.35 10. A public relations professional understands the risks and responsibilities involved in corporate disclosure of information that may have a material impact on the buying and selling of a corporation’s stock, and most importantly, that such disclosures should be accurate, mention bad news before good news, and be widely disseminated within minutes of when the information was recognized as being of material value to investors.36 11. A public relations professional understands the special financial relationships and income reporting procedures that are required of organizations engaging in philanthropic activities.37 12. A public relations professional understands that postal service regulations address numerous aspects of communication activities using the mails—from the size and weight of allowable pieces of mail, to the truthfulness of solicitations.38 13. A public relations professional understands that organizations can form political action committees by soliciting contributions from employees and others, that these solicitations cannot be coercive, and that the size of individual donations from givers and the size of contributions to specific political candidates are limited and closely monitored.39 14. A public relations professional understands that truth is the best defense against charges of libel; that persons claiming they were libeled must prove that they were identified, that they were damaged by the libelous statements, and—if they are public figures—that there was malice on the part of the communicator.40 15. A public relations professional understands that truth may not be a defense in cases alleging an invasion of privacy; rather, there are two other defenses: (1) proving that the communication is about a newsworthy event, and (2) having prior written consent from the individuals involved.41 16. A public relations professional understands that a legal consent from someone—for example, for the use of a picture or creative product—should name all parties involved (including heirs and personal representatives) and describe in writing an exchange of something of value for the consent, the intended use of the information, and the length of time the consent is valid.42 17. A public relations professional understands that the relationships between public relations practitioners, employers, and clients are governed by contract law, that public relations practitioners act as agents for their clients or employers, and, consequently, that an illegal action by either party in the relationship makes both open to legal liability.43
|
Cultural values
When human culture is broadly defined as the synergistic set of lifestyles of a recognizable group of people, it is possible to identify a wide variety of cultures. For example, one community may have standards of living, including ethical standards, that differ dramatically from those in another community. These cultural differences can exist between communities located side-by-side within one small regional area. Obviously, such differences can exist between people living in different countries and in different parts of the world. For example, business ethics have been found to vary dramatically from country to country. In recent years, Germany was perceived as the most ethical country in which to conduct business, followed by the United Kingdom, the United States, and France; Mexico was ranked the least ethical of the countries surveyed.44 The researchers found that consistent ethical behavior based on a common set of principles was strongly linked to economic development within a culture.
As global changes sweep through cultures, the practice of strategic public relations and integrated communication is affected.45 Transnational consumerism, international marketing, expansion of free market economies, new alliances among nations, multinational corporate mergers, organizational specialization, and diversification are trends that offer public relations both opportunities and problems. In one way or another, public relations practitioners find themselves, for a variety of clients and employers, either working to achieve these changes or working to resist such changes and maintain the status quo. Public relations practitioners work on a regular basis with two different cultures: the internal, organizational culture of the sponsoring organization or client; and the broader culture within which the organization or client operates. Both types of cultures have shared problems and opportunities; shared resources; shared transformational processes and technologies; shared values, principles, and loyalties; shared languages and communication channels; shared learning experiences; and shared boundaries of concern.
Public relations managers are involved in each of these cultural issues: defining problems and opportunities; gathering, monitoring, and controlling resources; working with others to transform these resources into goods and services; identifying and clarifying appropriate values, principles, and loyalties; using common languages and communication channels; creating shared learning experiences, from specific mass media to general educational programs; and distinguishing areas of interests and boundaries of concern. How these factors are explained to others and put into context—how the right and wrong ways of looking at these factors are presented—are ethical questions for public relations practitioners to answer.
Cultural factors
As indicated earlier in this chapter, professional codes contain principles relating to cultural values and beliefs. Their principles encourage upholding standards of good taste and conducting a professional life that is in accord with the public interest. Among other cultural values, the PRSA code states that its members “base their professional principles on the fundamental value and dignity of the individual, holding that the free exercise of human rights, especially freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press, is essential to the practice of public relations.”
The IPRA code refers directly to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see Appendix E). The preamble to this declaration, passed by the United Nations in 1948, calls for “a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief.” Article 18 of the UN declaration states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” Article 19 states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Article 27 states, “Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community. . . .” The title of the UN declaration states that these rights are universal: they apply to all individuals in all cultures.
The IABC code declares that it is “based on three different yet interrelated principles of professional communication that apply throughout the world.”
These principles assume that just societies are governed by a profound respect for human rights and the rule of law; that ethics and the criteria for determining what is right and wrong can be agreed upon by members of an organization; and, that understanding matters of taste requires sensitivity to cultural norms.
These principles are essential:
• Professional communication is legal.
• Professional communication is ethical.
• Professional communication is in good taste.
Cultural Relativism: A Critique
Some argue that the idea of universal values in ethics is a myth. They argue that the various customs of different societies are all that exist, and that these customs cannot be said to be correct or incorrect, for that implies an independent standard of right and wrong. Philosophy professor James Rachels explains that cultural relativism assumes that “there are only the various cultural codes, and nothing more. More over, our own code has no special status; it is merely one among many.”46
A fallacy in the logic of cultural relativism, Rachels points out, is to jump to the conclusion that because there are different sets of cultural values, there is no objective truth in ethics—that right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.
Rachels states, “The trouble is that the conclusion does not really follow from the premise—that is, even if the premise is true, the conclusion still might be false. The premise concerns what people believe; in some societies, people believe one thing; in other societies, people believe differently. The conclusion, however, concerns what really is the case. The trouble is that this sort of conclusion does not follow logically from this sort of premise.” He gives an example:
In some societies, people believe the earth is flat. In other societies, such as our own, people believe the earth is (roughly) spherical. Does it follow, from the mere fact that they disagree, that there is no “objective truth” in geography? Of course not; we would never draw such a conclusion because we realize that, in their beliefs about the world, the members of some societies might simply be wrong. There is no reason to think that if the world is round everyone must know it. Similarly, there is no reason to think that if there is moral truth everyone must know it.
What if we took cultural relativism seriously? Rachels points out one of the consequences: “We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to our own.” While one of the most compelling assumptions of cultural relativism is that it is good to be tolerant and understanding of another societies’ values and beliefs, it does not follow that one should not be critical of another society’s ethical standards. Rachels has an example:
Suppose a society waged war on its neighbors for the purpose of taking slaves. Or suppose a society was violently anti-Semitic and its leaders set out to destroy the Jews. Cultural Relativism would preclude us from saying that either of these practices was wrong. We would not even be able to say that a society tolerant of Jews is better than the anti-Semitic society, for that would imply some sort of transcultural standard of comparison. The failure to condemn these practices does not seem “enlightened”; on the contrary, slavery and anti-Semitism seem wrong wherever they occur. Nevertheless, if we took Cultural Relativism seriously, we would have to admit that these social practices also are immune from criticism.
Another fallacy of cultural relativism is that it implies that we should decide what is right and wrong by looking at the society within which we are operating. From this point of view, if a corporate policy conforms to a particular society’s set of ethical standards, then it is ethical. This is a false assumption because few within any society think their society could not be improved; most think all societies can be improved. However, cultural relativism argues not only that we should not criticize the values of other societies, but also—by extension—that we should not criticize our own set of values. Cultural relativism assumes that values and beliefs do not change; this, of course, is not the case. For example, views on human rights have evolved over time and, no doubt, will continue to progress.
While there are many differences between cultures, there are significant cross-cultural similarities, for all cultures have some values in common. For example, all societies value children in one way or another. All societies abhor murder, although they may acknowledge its necessity on occasion. All societies strive to respect human dignity, as they define it. Rachels gives another example:
Imagine what it would be like for a society to place no value at all on truth telling. When one person spoke to another, there would be no presumption at all that he
was telling the truth—for he could just as easily be speaking falsely. Within that society, there would be no reason to pay attention to what anyone says. . . . Communication would then be extremely difficult, if not impossible. And, because complex societies cannot exist without regular communication among their members, society would become impossible. It follows that in any complex society there must be a presumption in favor of truthfulness. There may of course be exceptions to this rule: there may be situations in which it is thought to be permissible to lie. Nevertheless, these will be exceptions to the rule. . . .
Differences between cultures are caused not only by different values, but also by other factors—such as how the society uses symbols, heroes, and rituals. Geert Hofstede of the Institute for Reseach on Intercultural Cooperation, located in the Netherlands, argues that culture is “a collective phenomenon. . . . Culture is learned, not inherited. It derives from one’s social environment, not from one’s genes. Culture should be distinguished from human nature on one side, and from an individual’s personality on the other, although exactly where the borders lie between human nature and culture and between culture and personality, is a matter of discussion among social scientists.”47
LO 3-8 Callout No permission required. Rather, see citation: Hofstede, Geert, Cultures and Organizations (London: McGraw-Hill, 1991) p. 5. Title: Values that distinguish various cultures Text:
Geert Hofstede conducted a global survey of large samples of IBM employees involved in similar jobs, yet located in a variety of cultures. The survey instrument asked a range of questions about values. Because job-related factors were similar, differences in values were attributed to cultural differences. Hofstede found that the following four sets of values could be used to describe and distinguish between various cultures:
including people’s attitudes toward authority.
|
Specific cases
To identify values, principles, and loyalties of public relations practitioners faced with ethical dilemmas, more than twenty-five personal interviews were conducted by the author with public relations professionals. An initial set of personal interviews was conducted; case studies were prepared (fictionalized to protect the confidentiality of the participants); and copies of the cases were reviewed by the practitioners. They were asked to clarify the values, principles, and loyalties associated with each case.
Three case studies are presented here that describe how factors outside the control of the focal organization affect ethical decision making. At the end of the chapter there are additional case studies based on these personal interviews.
LO 3-10 Callout No permissions required. Title: Case 3.1: Shock Radio Advertising Explanation: The following format will be used with more than a dozen cases throughout the book: 1) a one-paragraph "set up" of the problem; 2) an embedded click-thru of the Potter Box (see LO 2-4) with mouseovers that present facts about the situation, values, principles and loyalties of the case; 3) after the Potter Box, one paragraph explaining what actually happened; 4) a series of questions that can be mouseovered to reveal the "answers"; and, 5) a final paragraph that offers an analysis. Text:
CASE 3.1 Shock Radio Advertising: how cultural values and beliefs affect ethical decision making in public relations
The problem: Should a radio station in one market have used television commercials that created controversy and public outrage in other markets? Some claimed the ads were tasteless and offensive, but radio stations using similar deliberately shocking TV ads in other markets dramatically boosted their ratings.
What actually happened? Before the commercials were aired, the director of promotions prepared a plan to respond quickly to irate callers. The switchboard operator was instructed to place all irate calls through to one staff member, who was instructed to apologize on behalf of the station and to send each caller a formal letter of apology plus a T-shirt. The station also produced its own set of radio and television commercials calling on listeners and viewers to send in their own ideas for a better TV commercial. The creator of the winning commercial was to receive a $10,000 cash award and a promise from the station to produce and air the winning commercial as soon as possible. The station waited until there was a public outcry about the original set of offensive ads before announcing the contest for the better commercial.
[Note: the answers that are revealed with the mouseover of each of the following questions appears below.]
Key ethical questions: Who were the moral agents? What was morally permitted? What was morally prohibited? Who was most blameworthy--and was this person likely to seek forgiveness? Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions? What would the Ideal Virtuous Director of Promotion have done in this case?
Who were the moral agents?
What was morally permitted?
What was morally prohibited?
Who was most blameworthy--and was this person likely to seek forgiveness?
Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions?
What would the Ideal Virtuous Director of Promotions have done in this case?
Analysis: The advertising campaign was designed to test the limit, if not go over the line, of acceptable behavior within the community--to "push the envelope" of acceptable cultural values. It was designed to shock those with certain values. The public relations campaign was designed to deal efficiently with the public outcry and to turn it to the advantage of the radio station. Had the radio’s management not wanted an outrageous image, it would not have used the campaign. Had management misjudged the outer limit of acceptable community standards, more protests would have resulted, with the potential that certain advertisers would not buy commercial time on the station. Had the director of promotions been involved in the initial decision to purchase the controversial ad campaign, the station management probably would have had more ethical options.
|
|||||||
LO 3-11 Callout No permissions required. Title: CASE 3.2 Releasing Public Information About a Top Secret Organization: how laws and public policies affect ethical decision making in public relations Explanation: The following format will be used with more than a dozen cases throughout the book: 1) a one-paragraph "set up" of the problem; 2) an embedded click-thru of the Potter Box (see LO 2-4) with mouseovers that present facts about the situation, values, principles and loyalties of the case; 3) after the Potter Box, one paragraph explaining what actually happened; 4) a series of questions that can be mouseovered to reveal the "answers"; and, 5) a final paragraph that offers an analysis. Text:
CASE 3.2 Releasing Public Information About a Top Secret Organization: How laws and public policies affect ethical decision making in public relations
The problem: How to release information about a top-secret organization when the public had a right to know certain information, but the essential work of the organization had to be kept secret. How could these two conflicting principles be resolved when information was released to the media?
What was the situation? The nature of much of the corporation’s work was conducting top secret research and testing state-of-the-art defense systems. For this reason, most information was kept confidential, and the public relations director had to be cautious when releasing information to the public. According to one spokesperson, “Our hands were tied much of the time.” The director could not be as forthright with the public as most public relations specialists. For example, the organization was once audited by a federal environmental protection agency, which found hazardous waste containers on the premises. This, in turn, created a large public protest requiring immediate attention. However, an exact reason for using certain chemicals at the facility could not be given to the press, because their use at the facility was considered top secret.
What were the values? The following values were identified as being relevant to the public relations practitioner in this case.
To be operating within the law at all times. To be honest and accurate but not to disclose properly classified, secret information. To be technologically sophisticated and conduct state-of-the-art research for clients. To make money. To be sensitive to the public’s right to know.
What were the principles? The following principles were considered by the public relations practitioner.
National security is more important than the public’s right to know. Do not lie. The public has a right to know about environmental safety issues. Always obey the law. When making difficult decisions, choose the option that does the least amount of harm.
What were the loyalties? The following loyalties were important to the public relations practitioner in this case.
To the public, especially regarding public safety. To the corporation. To national security. To the media. To professional colleagues in public relations.
What actually happened? Before any information was released, it had to be approved by both the director of research at the organization and public affairs officers with senior military officials. In addition, the public relations practitioners had to learn how to speak in general terms. They had to address the problem and demonstrate genuine concern for the public without offering the types of details that would disclose top-secret information. It was always a thin line they had to walk, but they only walked it after clearing information with superiors.
Key ethical questions: Who were the moral agents? What was morally permitted? What was morally prohibited? Who was most blameworthy--and was this person likely to seek forgiveness? Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions? What would the Ideal Virtuous Public Relations Practitioner have done in this case?
Who were the moral agents?
What was morally permitted?
What was morally prohibited?
Who was most blameworthy--and was this person in a position to seek forgiveness?
Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions?
What would the Ideal Virtuous Public Relations Practitioner have done in this case?
Analysis: Government contract and procurement procedures, and laws protecting national security, limited the options of the public relations professionals. The public’s right to know and the practitioner’s desire to tell the truth had to be balanced with the legal requirements of conducting top secret research and the principle of national security which, properly defined, protects the rights of the greatest number of people. If the series of clearances for press releases had not been used, certain information might have been released to the public that would have satisfied the press but would have jeopardized the secret research, the government contracts and national security.
|
||||||
LO 3-13 Callout No permissions required. Title: CASE 3.3 Hype Versus Solid News Value: how external publics and other organizations affect ethical decision making in public relations Explanation: The following format will be used with more than a dozen cases throughout the book: 1) a one-paragraph "set up" of the problem; 2) an embedded click-thru of the Potter Box (see LO 2-4) with mouseovers that present facts about the situation, values, principles and loyalties of the case; 3) after the Potter Box, one paragraph explaining what actually happened; 4) a series of questions that can be mouseovered to reveal the "answers"; and, 5) a final paragraph that offers an analysis. Text:
CASE 3.3 Hype Versus Solid News Value: how external publics and other organizations affect ethical decision making in public relations
The problem: The executives of a small advertising and public relations agency felt that to compete successfully with larger agencies for media placements in their markets, they had to hype up press releases and create pseudo-news events to generate publicity for their clients.
What was the situation? Two professionals comprised the staff of the agency, with billings that placed it somewhere in the top 40 or 50 agencies in their metropolitan market. Most of their clients had local or regional business interests; only one was a national account. One of their clients had renamed an existing service, which was a computerized listing of new homeowners in the community derived from public records of new home sales. Because the client was dissatisfied with current sales, the decision was made to reposition it as a unique research service. The client did not conduct any market research to ascertain either current customer satisfaction or potential customer reaction to the name change. The decision was simply made, and the public relations agency was told to prepare an appropriate campaign to introduce the “new” service.
What were the values? The following values were identified as being relevant to the public relations practitioner in this case.
To be successful and make money. To be creative. To be better than other agencies at gaining the media’s attention. To generate lots of publicity for the client. To satisfy the needs of the customer.
What were the principles? The following principles were considered by the public relations practitioner.
The client is always right. The media always are interested in human-interest stories. You can fool some of the people some of the time—and those are pretty good odds. Client monies are better spent on surefire publicity than on what-if research. Take only those actions that would be viewed as proper by a disinterested panel of professional colleagues.
What were the loyalties? The following loyalties were important to the public relations practitioner.
To the public relations agency. To the client. To the media. To current and potential customers. To members of the community.
What actually happened? The agency distributed press releases describing the computer listing as a one-of-a-kind research service, claiming that it was unique because it was timely and because the names could be presented in a variety of mailing label formats. The agency also designed a scavenger hunt involving teams from local high schools. Using the most current list of new residents, students went from home to home, asking homeowners for old household items from their previous residences and for comments about why they chose to move to their current home. The team with the most outlandish set of old household items and the best set of new quotes won a cash prize. Following the scavenger hunt, the agency invited local media to a press conference. There, the loot was displayed, scholarships were awarded to the winning high school teams, and press releases were distributed with the best quotes from people who had recently moved into the community. Prominently mentioned throughout all these activities was the “new” research service of the client.
Key ethical questions: Who were the moral agents? What was morally permitted? What was morally prohibited? Who was most blameworthy--and was this person likely to seek forgiveness? Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions? What would the Ideal Virtuous Public Relations Professional have done in this case?
Who were the moral agents?
What was morally permitted?
What was morally prohibited?
Who was most blameworthy--and was this person in a position to seek forgiveness?
Who was in a position to grant forgiveness--and under what conditions?
What would the Ideal Virtuous Public Relations Professional do in this case?
Analysis: The agency’s small market share of public relations business put the two professionals who ran the agency in a vulnerable position: they could not easily afford to lose the account. They did not question the lack of market research or the duplicity of changing the name of an old product and calling it a new product without making substantive changes in the old product. Had the agency a broader client base, they might have raised additional issues during the early planning stages of the campaign.
|
||||||