1.3 Ethical/Legal Responsibilities and Critical Thinking
Defining the Public Interest
At the beginning of this book, we began with a definition of public relations from the Canadian Public Relations Society (CPRS): “Public relations is the strategic management of relationships between an organization and its diverse publics, through the use of communication, to achieve mutual understanding, realize organizational goals and serve the public interest.” What is the public interest? Who defines it? How can we be sure that we are serving it as professional communicators?
To be sure, different groups have different beliefs about what the public interest is. Sometimes, their definitions of the public interest seem to align very nicely with their own individual interests. In these situations, the term “public interest” is being used to argue in favour of a more narrow interest – an intentional or unintentional manipulation of the term, to argue in favour of what they want.
Collins Dictionary defines “public interest” as “the welfare or well-being of the general public.” This definition is egalitarian in nature, meaning based on equality among people, with equal rights and opportunities for all. Fairness is important.
This definition is helpful because it gives us a basis from which to assess whether a public interest claim is valid or not. Things like evidence, science and critical thinking can be used to assess whether a specific project or activity is truly in the interest of the general public. Our own personal ethics, morals, values and knowledge can also affect our interpretations of the public interest, but at the end of the day, anyone who claims to be advancing the public interest should be able to point to hard evidence, facts, and show a very broad and extensive examination of the relative impacts and benefits of what they are proposing, both over the short and long term, and how those impacts and benefits could affect interested and affected publics.
Assessing public interest claims is always complex and challenging, but we can use science and critical thinking as tools to help assess these claims and to make sure we ourselves are truly communicating in the public interest.
Ethical and Legal Responsibilities
Ethics is a moral code that serves as a compass for individual or societal behavior. Engaging in unethical behavior or messaging can be particularly damaging for business brands. Countless businesses have been involved in scandals and crises stemming from unethical behavior and judgment. Recovering from these instances is difficult, and the effects are sometimes irreversible.The issue of ethics is critically important in public relations. Creators of content should heavily rely on a code of ethics when carrying out various tasks. Using ethical reasoning, whether you’re designing a social media campaign or writing an opinion editorial for a newspaper, demonstrates basic understanding of the influence of messages on audiences. Ethical communication also helps an organization avoid dilemmas and compromising situations. Several cases covered in the media highlight the ramifications of failure to use ethical and honest standards in communication efforts.
Most subfields related to professional or strategic communications have what is called a code of ethics or a collection of rules and values that play a foundational role in conduct and the decision-making process. Here are links to the major codes of ethics for public relations, journalism, and advertising in Canada:
Defamation
Compromising a code of ethics may have legal consequences, depending upon the situation. One of the most common ethical problems that occurs in court cases is defamation. Defamation is intentional damage done to one party’s reputation by another party. Although it is not a crime, it is considered a civil suit in a court of law. Individuals or organizations with particularly high stakes attached to their reputation (for example, celebrities, public figures or popular businesses) are more inclined to sue for defamation. A recent example is a defamation case launched by Canadian-based Dominion Voting Systems against Donald Trump, as reported by Global News:
“An [sic] senior employee of Dominion Voting Systems has sued U.S. President Donald Trump‘s re-election campaign in a Colorado court for spreading false conspiracy theories related to November’s presidential election that Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden…The lawsuit claims that Trump’s campaign and its agents ‘manufactured and spread a false narrative’ that Dominion ‘conspired to rig its equipment and the election in favor of President-Elect Biden,’ which led to ‘devastating consequences,’ including death threats which forced Coomer to leave his home for fear of his safety.”
Slander And Libel
There are two categories of defamation: slander and libel. Slander is the non-permanent spoken or gestured version of defamation, when something is said verbally or symbolically that harms another party’s reputation. Libel is the written or “permanent record” version of defamation, when something is published that damages a party’s reputation in print, online or in another medium. Because this textbook focuses on writing, libel will be discussed in greater detail.
Libel includes both print and online publications; even social media posts can be grounds for a libel suit. In 2011, lawyer Rhonda Holmes sued her former client, punk rocker Courtney Love, over a disparaging tweet Love had sent in reference to Holmes’s work ethic. Love was the first person in history to stand trial for social media defamation; prior to her case, there was no record of someone being sued for defamation because of something posted on Twitter (Chow, 2014). Popular media dubbed the case “Twibel.” A jury acquitted Love of all charges. Click here for more information on the case and its implications.
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression Offers a good short primer on defamation, libel and slander in the Canadian context.
Conflict Of Interest
Before reading the section on conflict of interest, think about the following situation: Should a newspaper travel writer accept a free hotel stay, airline ticket, meals, and so on from a resort as an enticement to get the writer to do a story? Does this produce real or perceived bias in the resulting reporting? Is this arrangement disclosed to readers? What if the only way the newspaper could afford to have a travel writer was to accept such free offers? What kinds of conflicts, real or perceived, need to be considered?
Conflict of interest is “a clash between a person’s self-interest and professional interest or public interest” (Business Dictionary, 2016). Communication professionals should try to eliminate any action that may compromise their impartiality or the interests of their organization. That includes separating personal interests from the organization’s goals.
The definition seems straightforward, but real-life situations can be murky. As a PR consultant, should you take on two clients who are competitors? Most within the industry would say that you should inform both parties of the situation and let them decide if they want to proceed. However, let’s say your agency takes on a client who has a history of using unethical labor practices, something that you staunchly oppose. How do you remain impartial in this situation? How do you write material that benefits your client when your personal opinions may affect the content? Or, should you, as a journalist, accept a small gift from a source (for example, they offer to pick-up the tab for lunch) before or after an interview? Most journalists would say no, because accepting a gift from a source, no matter how small, could affect their feelings toward the individual (or affect the way others perceive their feelings about the individual), which could be reflected in their writing (or affect the perception of it).
There are several ways to avoid a conflict of interest. Gather as much information as you can about the potential conflict in order to make as objective a decision as possible. Firms should have formal rules, and conflicts should be disclosed to supervisors. To safeguard your career and reputation, it’s important to always uphold high ethical standards and conduct yourself in a manner above reproach. You may want to ask colleagues or supervisors for advice. Also, be as upfront as possible with the parties involved.
Here is an example of conflict of interest playing out in the worlds of journalism and public relations in the Canadian context.
Plagiarism
Lack Of Transparency
Most crisis communication experts agree that transparency is key to maintaining or regaining the public’s trust. Lack of transparency can have devastating effects that sometimes leave a permanent stain on a company or brand’s image. Brands cannot thrive without the public’s trust.
A recent case that demonstrates the negative outcomes of failing to be transparent is the emissions scandal at Volkswagen. In 2015, news outlets reported that the German car company used a “defeat device” in many of its cars as far back as 2009 to cheat on several emissions tests conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency. These devices were able to detect when tests were being conducted and help reduce toxic emissions during the procedures. In reality, the vehicle emissions were well above the levels permitted by the EPA.
Soon after the public received the news, Volkswagen sales plummeted and a social backlash against the company ensued. As a result, the CEO resigned and the company lost the public’s trust. The organization is still going through damage control and court settlement procedures. Compromising transparency to benefit a company’s bottom line in the short-term can create long-term damage.
Misleading Advertisements
Advertising firms often have a reputation for using manipulative tactics at the expense of the consumer. This is largely due to consumers’ experiences with misleading advertisements, or promotions that exaggerate claims or misinform audiences. The goal of an advertisement is to emphasize the benefits of a product or service over any drawbacks or shortcomings.
However, agencies should not create deceptive advertisements at the expense of consumers. By law, claims in advertisements have to be truthful and supported by evidence. Going back to the Volkswagen emissions scandal, the company also faced legal troubles for falsely advertising that its cars had low emissions. The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Volkswagen in federal court, arguing that the company deceived its consumers through unsubstantiated claims and corrupt evidence.
In Canada, the Competition Bureau enforces legal provisions that, “…prohibit making any deceptive representations for the purpose of promoting a product or a business interest, and encourage the provision of sufficient information to allow consumers to make informed choices.”
Ad Standards is a national, not-for-profit, advertising self-regulating body in Canada that includes a complaint and review process for advertising (as does the Competition Bureau).
Propaganda, Misinformation, Fake News and Harmful Speech
According to Wikipedia (quoting from Encyclopedia Britannica), propaganda, “…is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts in order to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language in order to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.” In this sense, it is undeniable that some public relations efforts can be classified as propaganda.
In his book of the same title (Propaganda), Edward Bernays, who some term “the father of public relations,” states that, “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”[8]
In the 20th century, propaganda has taken on an increasingly negative connotation, primarily because of false and dangerous examples of its use (e.g. to promote war and hatred). Even with less extreme examples, the public is increasingly weary of any effort to influence and manipulate their opinion, and yet, such efforts are everywhere, and in some places the public is becoming increasingly polarized and partisan as a result of such efforts in the political sphere.
From the the non-profit imploring you with celebrities and sad music to donate to a worthy cause, to the oil company that uses the term “oil sands” while environmentalists use “tar sands,” there is an ongoing battle to influence your opinion and values, and sometimes at the expense of rational thinking. As PR practitioners, where do we draw our own ethical boundaries? Are we doomed to be spin doctors and PR hacks? No. We can make a conscious decision to engage in ethical persuasion, and many would argue that most practitioners, especially those that are successful and respected, take an ethical approach to their work. For example, the third principle of the CPRS’s Code of Professional Standards for the PR industry states that, “A member shall practice the highest standards of honesty, accuracy, integrity and truth, and shall not knowingly disseminate false or misleading information.” This principle prohibits the worst excesses of propaganda, excesses that all PR practitioners should disavow, primarily because they are ethically wrong, but also because they are counterproductive even from a simple business point of view.
In the United States, the Trump reelection campaign has completely abandoned any notion of honesty or truth, and has gone beyond propaganda to embrace misinformation, disinformation (fake news), and in some instances harmful speech in an effort to overturn election results and to vilify political opponents (read this Q&A on Harmful Speech by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University and this short primer on the difference between propaganda, disinformation and misinformation from Wayne State university). In the end, these efforts have only undermined the brand value and political fortunes of the Republican party. Most recently, the party appears to be headed to defeat in two Senate run-off races in the state of Georgia, which will determine control of the United States Senate, thereby giving President-Elect Joe Biden’s government, full control of the legislative branch.
Coinciding with dangerous efforts to manipulate public opinion, has been a rise in the proliferation of fake news (a form of disinformation) and misinformation in the service of both local and international/national interests. This content has flooded social media networks and has forced businesses like Facebook and Twitter to begin fact-checking and investigating these sources (efforts that many say currently miss the mark).
Critical thinking
An important antidote to fake news, and indeed a skill that future employers expect of PR practitioners is to read and think critically, which means moving beyond what a text says to asking questions about the how and why of the text’s meaning. In an era of proliferating “fake news” stories and campaigns to improve information literacy, being cautious in consuming information and media is paramount.
Let’s reflect on what it means to think and read critically.
Questions for reflection
- What do you think “fake news” is and isn’t?
- Do you feel comfortable identifying sources of information or news stories as biased or inaccurate?
- Can you think of an example of a “fake news” story? What makes it biased or inaccurate?
- What are the potential dangers of making decisions or acting upon biased or inaccurate information?
- What does it mean to think critically? How do you do it?
- What does it mean to read critically? How do you do it?
Reading critically
Reading critically means reading skeptically, not accepting everything a text says at face value, and wondering why a particular author made a particular argument in a particular way.
When you read critically, you read not only to understand the meaning of the text, but also to question and analyze the text. You want to know not just what the text says, but also how and why it says what it says. Asking questions is one key strategy to help you read more critically. As you read a text critically, you are also reading skeptically.
A critical reader aims to answer two basic questions:
- What is the author doing?
- How well is the author doing it?
What is the author doing?
To answer “what is the author doing?” begin by carefully examining the following:
- What are the author’s claims (a claim is what the author says is true)?
- What is the evidence (evidence is what the author offers to support what they say is true)?
- What are the assumptions (assumptions are what the author says is true or will happen without giving any support)?
It may be helpful to try to see the argument from different angles:
- How else could the author have written this piece?
- What other kinds of evidence could have been used?
- What difference would that other evidence make?
- How has the author constructed his or her argument?
How well is the author doing it?
To answer “how well is the author doing it?” consider the following questions:
- How effective is the introduction? Why might the author have started the piece with this paragraph?
- Are the main ideas supported by solid evidence?
- What evidence does the author use? Is it effective? Useful? Can you think of other evidence?
- Is the author biased or neutral? How do you know?
- Does the conclusion effectively tie the argument together? Could you draw a different conclusion from this evidence?
- What kind of language is used? How would you describe the author’s style?
- How is the piece organized?
Asking questions
Asking questions of a text helps readers:
- Predict what a text will be about
- Identify confusing parts of the reading
- Clarify what confused them
- Develop a response to the text
- Understand the author’s purpose for writing a text
The easiest way to develop questions about a text is to be aware of your thinking process before, during, and after reading.
- What did you wonder about before you started reading?
- What did you think the text might be about?
- What questions did the text raise in your mind as you read?
- What seemed important or surprising?
- What were you wondering when you finished reading?
- What did the author hope to accomplish in writing this text?
- Did the author achieve that purpose?
- What remains unresolved in your mind?
Thinking critically
As you approach your writing, it is important to practice the habit of thinking critically. Critical thinking can be defined as “self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking” (Paul & Elder, 2007). It is the difference between watching television in a daze versus analyzing a movie with attention to its use of lighting, camera angles, and music to influence the audience. One activity requires very little mental effort, while the other requires attention to detail, the ability to compare and contrast, and sharp senses to receive all the stimuli.
As a habit of mind, critical thinking requires established standards and attention to their use, effective communication, problem solving, and a willingness to acknowledge and address our own tendency for confirmation bias. We’ll use the phrase “habit of mind” because clear, critical thinking is a habit that requires effort and persistence. People do not start an exercise program, a food and nutrition program, or a stop-smoking program with 100 percent success the first time. In the same way, it is easy to fall back into lazy mental short cuts, such as “If it costs a lot, it must be good,” when in fact the statement may very well be false. You won’t know until you gather information that supports (or contradicts) the assertion.
As we discuss getting into the right frame of mind for writing, keep in mind that the same recommendations apply to reading and research. If you only pay attention to information that reinforces your existing beliefs and ignore or discredit information that contradicts your beliefs, you are guilty of confirmation bias (Gilovich, 1993). As you read, research, and prepare for writing, make an effort to gather information from a range of reliable sources, whether or not this information leads to conclusions you didn’t expect. Remember that those who read your writing will be aware of, or have access to, this universe of data as well and will have their own confirmation bias. Reading and writing from an audience-centered view means acknowledging your confirmation bias and moving beyond it to consider multiple frames of references, points of view, and perspectives as you read, research, and write. False thinking strategies can lead to poor conclusions, so be sure to watch out for your tendency to read, write, and believe that which reflects only what you think you know without solid research and clear, critical thinking.
Tying it All Together
For our part as public relations writers, assuming we value a healthy democratic society that is informed by objective information and truths based on science and hopefully social justice, we must read and think critically, and we can and should refuse to produce work that is dishonest or inaccurate, regardless of who our client is. Often the most persuasive arguments and messages we can create are the one’s that can speak truthfully and respectfully about opposing views, while also making the case for our own position.
References
Gilovich, T. (1993). How we know what isn’t so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.
Attributions
This chapter contains material taken from “Critical thinking”; “Overview 3”; and “Reading critically” in Developmental Writing by Lumen Learning (used under a CC-BY 3.0 license) and Chapter 5.1 “Think, then write: Writing preparation” in Business Communication for Success (used under a CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 International license).
