Ethics and modern public relations (4470)

Almost everyone thinks that public relations professionals are shady. PR pros are seen as deceptive, sleazy sales people who are only interested in selling the perfect conception of their company, product or service to the public, even if it means lying about the facts. PR pros are almost always thought of as unethical people who will say or do anything to get what they want. Unfortunately, there have been publicized cases in which PR pros have breached professional ethics, and a few bad apples can make the tree look sour.

Most of the practice of public relations is commonplace and unnoticed. Companies seldom have to publicly defend themselves for something written in a brochure or newsletter. News releases don’t really incite passionate rebuttals. Backgrounders generally don’t destroy reputations. The incidents that taint the PR field are big, public catastrophes in which someone or something has caused a stink, and the PR pros who clean up the messes try to hide or alter the truth.

What most of the public doesn’t realize is that the information the company gives out is ultimately approved, and often directed and or/dictated by the leaders of that company. PR pros and agencies are almost never given carte blanche to handle situations. There’s no concrete evidence, but it can be argued that often times the company leaders tell the PR pros exactly what to do and say in crisis situations. It’s an unspoken understanding among PR pros that when a PR representative or firm uses the words “no comment,” the order to keep quiet probably came from the company’s executives. PR pros often know what to do in a crisis situation, but the company bigwigs get scared and are afraid of the potential implications of conveying any information at all. When the PR pros say something to spin public opinion away from the facts, the order to do so likely came from the company’s executives.

However, some PR pros and agencies exaggerate or omit certain aspects of cases to alter public perception of a company or individual. We recently studied the lawsuit Mike Leach brought against ESPN, Inc. and Spaeth Communications, Inc. The lawsuit claims, “…[Craig] James was enlisting the aid of a public relations firm to inflict further damage on Mike Leach’s reputation.” Exhibit 5 in the case is an email sent from Merrie Spaeth of the PR firm Spaeth Communications to Sally Post, who was the director of communications for Texas Tech at the time. The email appears to offer suggestions about how to make the staff’s treatment of James’ son Adam seem worse than it actually was. The doctor’s report claimed that Adam had been diagnosed with a “mild” concussion. About the concussion being mild, Spaeth writes, “There is no such thing.” She suggests they downplay the doctor’s report, saying, “…recant ‘mild’ and talk about the need for rest.” The email contains a report from Mark Chisum, Texas Tech’s director of sports medicine for football, which gives a detailed, factual description of the building Adam James was put in. The report proves that Adam’s public claims were exaggerated, yet Spaeth wrote, “The Chisum statement is really irrelevant.”  The email seems to prove that Spaeth was indeed trying to skew the facts. Also, on December 30, 2009, more than a week after the facts of an investigation by Texas Tech University’s attorney proved that Adam James’ story had been exaggerated, Spaeth Communications published a video of Adam “locked” in a closet to YouTube. The video, which is still on YouTube as of the publishing of this blog, is captioned with information that had been refuted by TTU’s attorney. Spaeth Communications obviously distorted the truth of the case in the interest of its client.

This does happen from time to time, and it sullies the image of PR.

When thinking about ethics in the field of PR, the public needs to understand the bigger picture. When something goes wrong with an individual or business, there are so many factors that must be taken into account. If a politician is involved in a sex scandal, what would be the best way to handle it so as not to cause more harm to his or her family? How much information must be shared to be fair to the public as well as the people involved? If a CEO is caught in an insider trading scandal, how do you keep one person’s mistake from tainting a business that is only guilty by association? What about the innocent employees and stakeholders? Communication has to be handled expertly, and sometimes difficult choices must be made. PR pros must weigh the ethics of what is revealed so as to hurt the fewest individuals.

Sources

“Mike Leach v. ESPN, Inc. and Spaeth Communications, Inc.” Cause No. 2010554969. District Court of Lubbock County, Texas. 72^nd Judicial District. Filed 2010 Nov 24, PM 12:34.