LECTURE 11: APPROACHES TO ETHICAL PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTICE

Overview
Public relations professionals serve the public interest by serving as responsible advocates for
those they represent. They provide a voice in the marketplace of ideas, facts, and view-points
to aid informed public debate. Protecting and advancing the free flow of accurate and truthful
information is essential to serving the public interest and contributing to informed decision
making in a democratic society.As advocates in the marketplace of ideas, public relations
professionals should strive to further the ideals of democratic institutions. Whether in
business or government or non-profit practice, the common good is served only when the
“voices” of special interests present their views in ways that advance informed decision
making and contribute to the well-being of the greater society. The moral end in public
relations…“must centre around respect for that individual to whom the particular persuasive
effort is directed”;…it must enable or empower those to whom it is directed to make good
decisions and voluntary choices for themselves.
The question is How can ethical principles be applied to the issues of advocacy and
persuasion? This lecture examines how PR practitioners can practically implement ethics.
We look at some guidelines that PR practitioners can follow to ensure ethics in their
organizations. We shall look at the concept of professional social responsibility and the
various approaches to ethical PR practice.
Learning outcomes
By the end of this lecture, you should be able to:
i) explain the following approaches to PR practice: Responsible advocacy; A duty-based
approach; A virtue ethics approach
ii) Discuss the guidelines of ethical PR practice
Responsible Advocacy
This approach to public relations proposes that the best way to practice public relations ethics
is through the ideal of professional responsibility.
A communicator must always consider their responsibility to the community over that of
their selfish self-interest. Self-interest in this context includes profits and career success.
The common good in social responsibility signifies that, as persuaders are members of the
community, the overall benefit to the community should be examined when creating
persuasive messages.
Public relations professionals as persuaders are a privileged voice in society and as such share
a responsibility to improve and not hinder the communal well-begin. Persuaders should
consider social responsibility on both the macro and micro levels i.e they must consider how
each message will affect an individual and group and balance that information in order to
create a message that positively impacts society.

To measure the social responsibility of a message ask yourself the following questions

1. Does this message help or hinder public trust

2. Does this message allow for consideration of opposing views?

3. Does this message create the opportunity for public dialogues?

4. Will having, or not having, this information lead to harm for individuals or groups?

5. Does this message unfairly depict groups, individuals, ideas or behaviors?

6. Have the messages’ potential negative impacts been taken into account

A duty-based approach
This approach to public relations ethics, specifically within organizations, is based on the
notion of autonomy and respect for persons.
The model proceeds through several phases.
1. Phase 1 is issue identification in which the PR practitioner must determine the
importance of the issue. Typically, only complex issues move through the succeeding
phases. Smaller issues are usually handled immediately, but can benefit from the
complete process.

2. Phase 2 involves issues managers meeting in teams to discuss the issue, collect more
information and research, or bring in experts to help analyze the issue. This is the point at
which alternatives are discussed. It is also the first point at which ethical dimensions are
considered. In this approach the decision makers are expected to “do what is right” based
on their duty to universal norms—usually concepts of fairness and rights.

3. Phase 3 engages the “law of autonomy,” which refers to the moral conscience of the
decision makers and reminds them not to submit to undue pressure from other
organizational functions. It also allows decision makers to act according to their moral
duties “without fear of harmful repercussions.” Each decision maker should be allowed to
 express himself freely, and that expression should be respected by the others involved in
the decision. This argues strongly for an autonomous public relations function within
organizations. This phase also requires us to ask whether we are acting on the basis of
reason alone and not because of political influence, monetary influence, or pure self-
interest.

4. Phase 4 asks questions such as, “Could we obligate everyone else who is ever in a similar
situation to do the same thing we are considering?” or, “Would I accept this decision if I
were on the receiving end?”

5. Phase 5 asks the organization to consider its duty, its intention, and dignity and respect
for the organization, publics, and society. This would imply a willingness to be open to
the input of all stakeholders, and it would validate the notion of acting out of a good will.
It asks the question, “Does this decision make us worthy of earning trust, respect, and
support from our publics?” “Publics and stakeholders are more likely to be satisfied with
a decision when the intent of the organization toward them is based on a good will rather
than when other interests taint it.”

6. Phase 6 calls for symmetrical communication about the results of the decision-making
process. This approach works well in conjunction with phase 5 in that it allows for
ongoing communication and contributions to the process by all parties.

A virtue ethics approach

This approach contends that simply having a practicable ethical model, such as an ethics
code, to apply to decision making won’t insure good ethical decisions. Rather, they propose
that the virtue, or character, of the moral agent is more important. 6 The person of virtue
values the intrinsic worth of right action (i.e., virtue is its own reward); whereas, the person
who lacks virtue might feel discomfort in being forced into right action, or even see no harm
in avoiding it.
Achieving excellence in a practice, such as public relations, means doing something good for
its own sake, and requires and develops the virtues of justice, honesty, and courage. This
approach concentrates on three, primary virtues:
Justice demands that we:
recognize the skills, knowledge, and expertise of other practitioners; and
learn from those who know more and have greater experience than we do.
 Courage requires that we:
take self-endangering risks;
push ourselves to the limits of our capacities; and
be prepared to challenge existing practice in the interest of extending the practice, despite
institutional pressures against such critique.
Honesty asks us to:
be able to accept criticism; and
learn from our errors and mistakes.
In order for individual virtues to be realized, the organization in which the individual works
must develop an environment conducive to the development of good character. In order to
actualize these virtues, the focus of right actions should be the public interest.
If this sounds a bit too idealistic, then, at the very least, “public relations practitioners may
participate in and contribute to the internal good of organizations they choose to work for, as
long at the organization’s focus is on doing something that is good for its own sake.”

How do can practitioners cultivate an ethical organizational culture?

The following are guidelines that PR practitioners can follow:
1. PR people must pay attention to ethics before they desperately need it. Once a conflicting
ethics crisis befalls the organization, it is too late to begin searching for ethical guidance.
2. PR practitioners must be conversant with the value systems of their organizations before
these values are publicly called to question
3. PR Practitioners should have and know their own values. When PROs take a thorough
and systematic look at the values they hold, these values will help them when they are
being pressured by a supervisor or client to do something unethical.
4. PROs should “resolve the conflict between serving their client’s interest and that of the
public good by responding to the legitimate concerns of the client and the media, but not
in such an extreme fashion that the PR professional and ethical obligations are sacrificed
in an effort to serve the wishes of other people
5. PR Professionals can identify the underlying values of the organization in its vision and
mission statements, code of ethics, or other policy documents. Identifying the core values
of the organization and implementing them is key to instilling an ethical organizational
culture.
6. Encourage ethical debates within the organization by using internal communication tools
and channels. The internal communications tools chosen should communicate what
 should be considered when confronting an ethical dilemma, and how the organization will
reward ethical behavior. Further to that, the PR department, through its internal
communications channels, can create an environment that encourages an atmosphere of
open ethical debates.
7. PR Professionals should train their chief operating officer how to prevent ethical
dilemmas and how to engage media in ethical debates. This can be done by organizing a
workshop or simply developing a short manual with practical guidelines outlining how
top executives can deal with ethical dilemmas.
8. PR Professionals must be willing to defend their ethical decisions even when it is
unpopular. Unpopular solutions to ethical dilemmas often prove their wisdom over the
course of time. Hence, it is pivotal that PRP continually offer consistent and reliable
ethical analyses, to enhance both their personal credibility and that of the public relations
function within the organization.