Ethics in Public Relations

Published on June 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 93 | Comments: 0 | Views: 628
of 65
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

ETHICS IN PUBLIC RELATIONS Contents 1. Introduction and Acknowledgements - Johanna McDowell, IPRA board member. 2. Preface - Philip Sheppard, IPRA president 2007 3. Review of earlier Gold Papers related to the subject Göran Sjöberg, member emeritus 4. Ethics and Core Values – some definitions – Göran Sjöberg 5. Ethics and Public Relations – a 50 year perspective. Tim Traverse-Healy, member emeritus 6. Ethical Aspects on Openness and Transparency in Transnational Communication - Margot Wallström, the Vice President of the European Union 7. Ethics and Corporate Governance - Ambassador Ola Ullsten, former Swedish Prime Minister, Chairman of Global Forum for Corporate Governance 8. Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility – a transAtlantic Dialogue – Professor Dennis Wilcox, San José State University, and Göran Sjöberg 9. Ethics in a non-ethical world – managing ethics across a global network The Thin Red Line – Laura Muchnik, Argentina 10. Ethics in Politics and Business. - Aune Past, University of Tartu, Estonia

1

Introduction and acknowledgements 2007 sees the renaissance of one of the International Public Relations Association’s hallmarks, the Gold Paper. In this new series of Gold Papers, the content will be published on line through the IPRA website on www.ipra.org and in print utilizing a new online service. We are hopeful that all of our new global technology will enable Gold Papers to be accessible to all of those individuals who wish to learn more about the world of public relations as its sphere of influence continues. The theme for the Gold Paper for 2007 is Ethics in Public Relations and was chosen in line with our IPRA President’s theme for his year. We decided to invite contributions from a number of experts and on a range of topics within the overall theme. Having been entrusted to organize and deliver the Gold Paper this year, I am indebted to Göran Sjoberg, member emeritus, who worked in partnership with me to co-ordinate and define the contributions and contributors from around the world. These contributions have ensured that a wonderful range of opinions and thoughts are available for all interested readers. My thanks go to all of those illustrious figures who took the time out of their busy lives to compile their individual papers for the benefit of this Gold Paper. I am particularly grateful for the editing support of our 2007 President, Philip Sheppard, the administrative support of Jim Holt and the secretariat along with the input from our FrontLine editor, Robert Gray

2

We trust that these readings within this Gold Paper will be stimulating to new thought and further discussion around the important topic of Ethics in Public Relations.

3

Preface I am delighted to invite you to read, to enjoy and maybe to learn from this Gold Paper all around the theme of ethics in Public Relations. It was ethics that I chose as my theme for the year and made tangible with a new code of conduct for the association: namely the Code of Brussels for public affairs practitioners. Its core set of undertakings lists some basic do’s and don’ts of good conduct such as being transparent about who you are and who you represent – but for me there are a couple of articles which I find the most appealing: article 1 - Integrity Act with honesty and integrity at all times so as to secure the confidence of those with whom the practitioner comes into contact article 3 - Dialogue Establish the moral, psychological and intellectual conditions for dialogue, and recognise the rights of all parties involved to state their case and express their views; If this code helps us secure the confidence of those to whom we speak, and to help remind us to be as good listeners as we are talkers, then I believe it will be doing its job. The Code of Brussels builds directly on the sure foundation of our existing Codes of Athens and Venice and is a timely reminder of the standards that IPRA represents. It was also a necessary reaction to a shadow that has passed over our profession with the advent of spin: and on the topic of spin do enjoy what Professor Travers-Healey has to say on the subject!

4

This Gold Paper is another in a series of collaborative efforts where we have used the richness of IPRA’s membership and its members’ contacts to bring together a truly international dimension to ethics and PR. My sincere thanks go to Johanna McDowell and Göran Sjöberg for their dedication in bringing this Gold Paper from an idea to a reality. Philip Sheppard IPRA President 2007

5

Ethics in IPRA through 50 Years By Göran E. Sjöberg Ethics have always been one of the cornerstones in the 50 or so years of IPRA issues. The very first multi-national gathering of public relations professionals after the Second World War – a meeting that later led to the foundation of IPRA in 1955 – ended with the signing of a statement that read: “Having considered the necessity of furthering the skill and ethics of their profession and a clear understanding of their work, and considering further the value of international exchange of information and cooperation, we have resolved that a provisional International Committee be set up with the object of furthering exchange and cooperation and the eventual establishment of an international public relations association.” Three objectives were agreed upon between 1950 and 1955: The problem of professional recognition; professional skills; and “The problem of professional ethics: linking and perhaps completing the codes of professional conduct being compiled in several countries.” The Codes At the 2nd IPRA World Congress at Venice in May 1961, the IPRA Code on Professional Conduct (“The Code of Venice”) was approved unanimously, and similar codes were adopted by many national public relations associations in the years leading to 1965. From there on, work continued to create an international code of ethics. One of the icons of international public relations, Lucien Matrat (France), fine-tuned the final text that was adopted by the IPRA General Assembly in Athens, Greece, on 12 May, 1965 – hence the name “The

6

Code of Athens. This code ” is still adhered to by public relations associations worldwide. The Code of Conduct of Public Affairs Worldwide (“The Code of Brussels”) was adopted by IPRA in 2006. With reference to the Code of Athens, it underlines inter alia that practitioners in their conduct of public affairs shall observe integrity, transparency and accuracy, avoid falsehood and deception, honour confidentiality and neither propose nor undertake any action which would constitute an improper influence on public authorities. The Code also states that members should help enforce disciplinary procedures of IPRA in upholding any breaching of the Code. (See appendix for The Code of Venice, The Code of Athens, and The Code of Brussels) Ethics in IPRA Gold Papers When the series of IPRA Gold Papers was initiated in 1973, the logical theme for the initial paper was the “First Report on Standards and Ethics of Public Relations Practice” by Herbert M. Lloyd (UK). His research showed that a quarter of the national associations that responded to his questionnaire were beginning to spend more time considering the question of ethics and enforcement and that more disciplinary committees were being set up. Among his ten conclusions and recommendations, the fith stated that “Ethics should be included in all curricula for public relations education at all stages of training and teaching” ,and the sixth read: “All countries should be encouraged to have a respected Ethics tribunal preferably with lay representatives, and an efficient disciplinary procedure.”. In 1982, Gold Paper number four was presented at the World Congress in Bombay with the title “A Model for Public Relations Education for Professional Practice”. The task force, led by Göran Sjöberg (Sweden), followed up on Lloyd’s suggestions and included studies of ethics and professional conduct in its recommendations for a

7

curriculum (which was later adopted in parts, by several universities around the world). Gold Paper number five, 1985, “The Communicative Society” was written by professor Tom T. Stonier (UK) for the World Congress in Amsterdam. He stated, among other things, that the “danger of unethical behaviour is that the general public condemns the practitioner as a person who is not concerned with disseminating information but with manipulating it”. He argues that practitioners should become fully aware of the possible uses and misuses of the techniques they have at their disposal, but also to resist demand that may be made upon them to misuse their skills and techniques. Tim Traverse-Healy (UK) was the author of Gold Paper number six in 1988, “Public Relations and Propaganda – Values Compared”, presented at the World Congress in Melbourne. He explored the comparative values implicit in the two terms. After examining inter alia Joseph Göbbels’ use of propaganda, he noted that several leading public relations professionals were very concerned about the image of our profession as consisting of propagandists. And he states: “Truth, dialogue and the public interest lie at the heart of the matter and should ideally be our guiding principles as most, if not all, our definitions and national codes of conduct presently suggest.” On the individual plane, the author writes, “I am conscious that men use language in four ways. One is cognitive in that it describes what is fact. Another is emotive in that it expresses feeling. The third is persuasive in that it seeks to influence thought, and the fourth is imperative in that it affects conduct. When communicators, and educators for that matter, misuse or confuse these uses then they need to consider the ethics of their chosen profession in order to straighten out their thinking”. Gold Paper number eight in 1991 was written for the World Congress in Toronto by John F.Budd Jr (USA) on “Ethical Dilemmas in Public Relations- a Pragmatic Examination”.

8

The author raised the question whether we are ethically literate and quoted Tim Traverse-Healy (UK) who had warned in 1956 that “the further development of public relations depends on the confidence of the community in the integrity of our practitioners”.. One of Budd’s concluding concerns was that “materialism, short- term profit pressure… will silence moral reasoning. Not by wilful neglect, or deliberate avoidance, but simply because it takes time, slows things down and correspondingly we give it little space on our daily agenda.” Gold Paper number ten, “Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Public Relations – New Directions for Organisational Communication”, was presented at the World Congress in Punta del Este, Uruguay, in 1995 by task force leader Göran Sjöberg (Sweden), Kirsten Berth (Denmark), professor Claes Fornell (USA) and professor Donald K. Wright (USA). The task force raised the question of how clients can rely on our confidentiality and how we declare that we subscribe to the IPRA Code of Athens and the ICO (today ICCO) Rome Charter for consultants so that clients will know how we behave in critical moments. This initiative was followed up in 1997 when the Helsinki Charter on Quality in Public Relations was signed at the World Congress by the presidents of IPRA, CERP and ICO, and where one of the seven points read: “As a profession public relations must be characterised by a common body of knowledge, academic studies, research, ethical rules and performance control. These characteristics are complementary to each other and form the cornerstones of quality as a concept for the profession”. Year 2007 onwards The issue of ethics for public relations professionals is as vital today and tomorrow as it was for the forefathers of IPRA in the 1950’s. That is why this Gold Paper is devoted to the subject of ethics, seen from a number of different perspectives.

9

Some Definitions It is the objective of this Gold Paper to explore what Ethics means in public relations. The definitions below, taken from Websters are simply a starting point. “ETHICS” is the general term for attempts to state or determine what is good, both for the individual and for the society as a whole. It is often termed the science of morality. “BUSINESS ETHICS” is the field of ethics that examines moral controversies relating to the social responsibilities of business practices, in any economic system. It looks at various business activities and asks “Is this ethically right or wrong”. Business ethics can be applied at three levels: the individual employee, the organization, and the society. Very often situations arise in which the three levels are not in line. A behaviour may be good for the employee, bad for the company, and good for society (or some other combination). Some ethicists … see the role of business ethics as the harmonization and reconciliation of these three conflicting levels.

10

Ethics and Public Relations Tim Traverse- Healy Introduction: In the early days of public relations there was little debate about ethics as the pioneers in the field perceived PR to be an ethical undertaking. Times and attitudes have however changed radically, as have the nature and vocabulary of communications. This paper is a personal view of how the ethical landscape has evolved and a plea that despite the many difficulties and pressures communicators face, there must always be a place for integrity. Possibly the reason why I have been invited to review the course of ethics in regard to the public relations profession over its post World War Two developmental phase is because I am the only founding father of the International Public Relations Association – and incidentally of the British Chartered Institute of Public Relations – still living on this planet. I am reminded of a quip by a personal hero of mine – the American comedian, George Burns. Making his last television appearance just before his 100th birthday and his demise he joked: “I am so old that nowadays I get a standing ovation for just standing!” I now know what he meant. I am here because I am still here and therefore this contribution, I stress a personal perspective, is probably my last professional will and testament. In the immediate post-war years ethics and codes of conduct were not in my experience something ever discussed by those early phase two, modernist, pioneers.

11

I know because I was there and privileged to take part in their discussions. In the US men like Hill, Byoir, Earl Newsome – my personal mentor – and the renowned corporate executive Arthur Page. Tallents, Fife-Clark, Hornsby, and Campbell-Johnson in the UK. And on the mainland Europe lone leaders like Medboe, Matrat and Coup de Frejac, Janssen, Oekl, Guido de Rossi, Brongers, and Bjorkman. These were men amongst others at that time who witnessed at first hand the horrors and miseries of war. Some had been comrades in arms, some prisoners in fact or of conscience, some even military enemies. Looking back I now believe that the apparent indifference they displayed to the matter of ethics in our craft was dictated by their profound belief that the very practice of public relations as they envisaged it was in itself, in the fractured and tortured world of the time, an ethical act needing no explanations or defence. I bear witness that they believed that public relations was not publicity, not propaganda, not advertising or promotion, not press agentry. Of course they recognised that all these activities could be elements in the overall armoury of public relations that might be deployed on any particular programme. But they believed that what distinguished public relations from the aforementioned elements was the presence in every stage of the public relations process of three ingredients in more or less equal measure. Truth, concern for the public interest, and genuine dialogue. They understood that the first two ingredients were variables, value judgements, nevertheless sincerely arrived at and capable of debate. But the third ingredient, dialogue, was not. It was either taking place or it was not and indeed could even be measured and evaluated.

12

To these practitioners publicity, for products and services, and propaganda for ideas and concepts were generally if not necessarily always essentially self-seeking in character. Public relations on the other hand was based on the tenet that what people believed, felt and thought truly mattered. They believed that if true dialogue was taking place then views and opinions and associated corporate actions and group re-actions could sensibly be modified and the possibilities of conflict lessened or avoided. To them contact was essential to dialogue, information was the currency of contact, and controversy the price that had to be paid for the gain of trust. The practitioners of today may consider these beliefs to be idealistic and unrealistic, impractical and unworkable. But they should help to explain why, believing as they did that the very practice of public relations was implicitly an activity of human social worth it did not occur to them that ethics in regard to their chosen daily work was an issue calling for deeper consideration. That is what they felt and I have to admit so did I at that time. And I still do and I make no apologies on that score. By current reckoning we would appear a bunch of purists! It appears to me on reflection that over the years since their time, the profession’s attitudes and concerns regarding the ethical values underpinning and governing our efforts have been influenced by four distinct forces. • • • • The societal demands of the moment Occupational and commercial imperatives The real nature of the work actually being performed The cultural mores impacting contemporary society and particular communities at the point of time

13

Those early second phase pioneers in the late forties and early fifties considered they were responding to the societal needs of the time. Indeed it has been advanced since that if as a group they had not existed then society would have had to have invented them because of the need:* To meet the public clamour for more and more and hopefully better and better information * To understand what information was required, how it could be gathered, and how it could be released * To appreciate the impact of institutional and corporate policies, plans, programmes and actions upon society ;and to anticipate re-actions * To understand the nature of the different constituencies and the structure of various communities * To help resolve or reduce conflict and misunderstanding through improved communications * To monitor the complexity and speed of the development of the media By some definitions such a functionary could justifiably be titled a public relations practitioner. Indeed if as a grouping we were all addressing these requirements and performing efficiently, the society would not just tolerate our existence but welcome us. For by doing so public relations would demonstrate its societal value. But in return for such recognition we would need to demonstrate, as an emerging profession, the ethical standards which we insist be practiced by our members Arguably the Code of Athens adopted by the international association in 1965 – authored by the Frenchman Lucien Matrat and based on the UN “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” – is the closest to a formulation of a moral philosophy upon which the profession of public relations is based. It is now signed up to by the vast majority of the national associations that exist. But it must be recorded that in the four decades since its inception most of the codes subsequently constructed by these national

14

associations, albeit influenced by the example of the original leaders, the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, have adopted a distinctly different emphasis. Whilst admittedly re-iterating in their various ways calls for truth, honesty and fairness and admonishing against members bringing the craft into disrepute, most national codes have focussed on occupational and commercial concerns such as practitioner relationships with employers, employees, clients, intermediaries and peers. In different terms members are reminded to work within the law of the land and to respect the codes of other professions. But the bulk of the constraints placed upon members are occupational. The need for accuracy. The obligation not to misuse information. The honouring of confidences. The improper influencing of elected politicians, public officials, and media representatives. And in regard to practitioner-employer-client relationships: Seeking to supplant fellow professionals Actions or statements denigrating colleagues. The dubious setting of remunerations and fees. The making of false claims. Conflict of interest. Unfair competition generally. It is difficult to make an assessment of the extent, the number and the exact nature of complaints and references to these governing bodies under these headings since most associations consider such infringements and judgements to be confidential, often for legal reasons. But it is clear that most of the complaints made are over trivial matters and mostly by members complaining about others. Clients or employers would appear to resolve these situations by either parting with the individual involved or by moving their account elsewhere. Public, social, or political institutions rarely complain. And the media whilst being vociferous making generalised attacks on practitioners hardly ever take matters forward by providing the evidence upon which the case could be reviewed and

15

judged by professional peers. It would seem that only in a small number of instances have formal reprimands, suspensions, or expulsions been the outcome of disciplinary proceedings. Indeed anecdotal evidence suggests that often where such an outcome might result members have resigned prior to hearings. Thus whilst the bulk of those operating under the banner of “public relations” are outside the jurisdiction of the professional bodies even those within membership have a means of escape. Herein rests the greatest hindrance to the task of doing “ PR for PR”: the apparent inability of recognised leaders to police their chosen field of endeavour. Associations find their actions in this regard hampered in two ways. Lack of supportable evidence from third parties to back cases. Legal concerns regarding counter claims over defamation ,destruction of reputation, effect upon the ability to earn a living. However, clearly unless and until the intentions and actions of practitioners can be publicly weighed against both professional and professional norms and expectations and open judgements arrived at, then the general public will understandably continue to be anything from apprehensive and cynical to outright suspicious about our activities. And rightly so because in recent years the whole communications field has burgeoned and its impact upon our lives exploded. Whilst the membership of national professional associations has blossomed and their influence increased, it is a fact that the ranks of the many outside membership but labelling themselves public relations executives has exploded. Under the broad banner of being “communicators”, publicists, propagandists, promoters, marketers and press agents the numbers on the scene have swelled.

16

The reality of the situation is that the vast majority of operatives are not governed by any codes of conduct or regulations. That is not to say that ninety per cent of them are not acting ethically or scrupulously. Far from it. Most are doing a worthwhile job in a worthy fashion albeit sometimes in difficult circumstances working for unprincipled masters or on the staff of a so-called consultancy totally driven by the profit motive. But the activities of some are highly questionable hence the label invented by the media and now in general public use – “Spin Doctors”. It must be said however that some of the journalists who are most vociferous in attacking Spin Doctors in general are often the very same individuals who are dealing with them most often; using them as sources often on an exclusive basis and thereby becoming pawns complicit in influencing their readers, listeners and viewers; falling down on their responsibilities. What is it then that Spin Doctors do that is causing such concern both within the ranks of legitimate executives and without amongst community leaders? What are the practices these persons employ that are concerning such concern? Manipulative practices that are outlawed under the various codes which demand that practitioners present a balanced picture of the organisations or interests they represent. Spin Doctors never tell lies by commission only by omission. There is always a basis of fact ,an element of truth, in any statement they make. They engage in repetition providing a steady drip of the main theme. They maintain a clear, simple, objective behind a whole series of actions. They select various audience groups to expose to tailor made readily recurring messages. More sinister is their de-selection of specific audiences depriving them from receiving particular sorts of

17

information. They plant stories and leak information to chosen members of the media excluding others. They incorporate and repeat either a slogan or concept in the form of a colourful sound-bite or catchy strapline. They routinely conceal their true motives and camouflage the origin of their utterances. They raid moral philosophy and invest warm words like “trust” with totally new meanings. They often employ the trick of attributing thoughts and suggestions to respected third parties who they believe are not likely to deny them thus providing endorsement. They then arrange for others to publicly support the views expressed. They encourage what has become known as “laser reportage” – a commentator focusing on a particular, often small, aspect of a situation and ignoring the overall picture. They suborn selected journalists by embedding them firmly into their own organisations by providing a level of knowledge, assistance and facilities ensuring that they become totally dependent on the Spin Doctor to continue to do their job. To these tricks of their trade must be added: The setting up of fake, front organisations peddling propaganda without identifying the true source, what is now termed “Astroturfing”, the creation and promotion of false internet blogs, plus the age old action of delaying the necessary release of bad news until the attention of the media, for professional or technical reasons, is focused elsewhere and space available for coverage that much less. Such manipulative techniques are indeed outlawed in the various codes governing our work. But how if at all can such activities be policed? The good news is that more and more academics are now researching and commenting on our field of endeavour. More and more students at all levels are being taught to become “media savvy”. Today media monitoring services make it that much easier to detect Spin Doctors at work. But in light of the fact that

18

so many operators are outside our jurisdiction could we do more? Could we support, promote and help fund an independent body comprising intermediaries, community leaders and members of the public to “name and shame” such activities whenever they are detected and proven? A form of Ofcom. On reflection we may come to realise that we have more in common than not with the various watchdog concerns available on the internet, such as PR Watch. Steps are being taken in the right direction. The PRSA in the US expressly demands that its members must report unethical behaviour by fellow members. The CIPR has recently added to the rules of its Professional Practices Committee an important change enabling the Institute to investigate an apparent breach of its code without receiving a formal complaint and also where a member has resigned before a case is investigated then the process is still proceeded with and a judgement announced. The CIPR is of the opinion that rapid and public condemnation of bad practice is essential for the defence of the profession’s good image. The public identification and proscribing of unethical practices in defence of the overall reputation of legitimate practitioners is only one of the two issues, dilemmas, facing us. The second in my view is the thorny question of whether or not as individuals or consultancies we should work for particular employers or as counsel act for certain clients? Indeed in any situation what exactly should our role be? In considering this matter it is important to recognise the context of our operations as pointed out by academics teaching ethics. In their opinion we are conditioned by two traditions and two paradigms. The “traditions” go by the names respectively of Deontology and Teleology. The “paradigms” have been described as the “Systems” view and the “Rhetorical” view.

19

Deontology is where something is done because of duty or obligation and in situations wherein the actions are judged to be societally worthy and possess true value. Teleology is the tradition holding the view that a right action is the one that has or is likely to have a sound outcome, good consequences. The Systems paradigm sees an organisation as part of the social, political, commercial scheme of things and public relations practice becomes dedicated to the task of helping the concern adjust itself to an ever-changing set of situations influenced by multiple issues and external pressures. On the other hand the Rhetorical paradigm views public relations practice as activities which seek to persuade the immediate stakeholders and members of the public likely to be affected by a particular point of view aired by organised dialogue and hopefully resolved by the achievement of consensus. In reality most practitioners apply a mix of these four factors when deciding who to work or act for and the nature of their input. But it is my personal view that the argument that like lawyers we act either in ‘defence’ or ‘prosecution’ according to which interest hired us first is fast becoming untenable. The ‘my client right or wrong’ school of thought raises a real question bearing on the public image of our craft. If only for the basic reason that the debate has moved on from the public has a right to information, via the tenet that to withhold information is an infringement of human rights, to the proposition that if subjected to information the public has a right to respond. And significantly, should be provided with the resources in equal so to do. Perhaps Ethics is just a fancy word for conscience. Each person knows what for them is right or wrong based upon their individually-held values. Values honed by culture, nationality, religion, schooling, family, community and peers. Frankly I have had no trouble over the years I was in

20

practice over knowing what was acceptable or what was not as to the methodology I employed. I had little difficulty over deciding what was the truth. I was able to decide to my satisfaction as to whether or not the intention to achieve dialogue existed. But I did over the matter of the public or general interest measured against the vested. Whether or not to act or to continue to act for a particular client. Altogether I faced eleven moral dilemmas. • • • • To work for an industry whose product harms most people. To resign a major international client when it became clear that it was a front for laundering the monies of organised crime Resigning an industry when it became obvious that it rigged the market causing gluts and famines when and where it wanted Deciding to act for the nuclear industry…for the chemical industry providing a watching brief following the Bhopal catastrophe…for the contraceptive industry Resigning the accounts of a well known concern whose pro-green programme only served to mask serious environmental infringements…of an international giant which was definitely employing unethical marketing methods in the Third World…of a well known business leader who lied in my presence on a financial matter to two top editors Refusing to act for the tourism and trade ministries of a regime guilty of human rights violations Against my personal feelings deciding in principle to act for the pro-abortion campaign but then finding that none of my colleagues wished to work on the task! And finally before an official government enquiry and under oath and threat of being instantly committed to gaol for contempt for refusing to



• •



21

disclose the names of prominent individuals in public life who I had consulted when endeavouring to decide what my advice to my client, a highly thought-of corporation, should be Other than pleading with academics, educators, teachers and trainers working in our field to allocate more time and effort to the teaching of ethics on their courses encouraging discussion and debate, I do not know what we should do. In any event it would be presumptuous of me to make any suggestions since this matter is one for the students, learners and improvers of today and tomorrow. But I am hopeful. When I first put up my plate in 1947 we practitioners talked about releases; share of voice; opportunity to hear, read or view; column inches; image, identity, deadlines and the familiarity-favourability factor. Today a new set of terms has entered into the public relations glossary - all with ethical undertones. Credibility, responsibility, transparency, accountability, governance and empowerment. We talk of content and gap analysis. Of reputational risk. Of issue and crisis management, of social auditing and of social reportage. Our employers and our clients are demanding we become involved in such matters. And of course we will but surely the guiding watchwords must be: personal integrity, professional vigilance and moral courage.

22

Ethical aspects of openness and transparency in trans-national communication Margot Wallström Introduction: Citizens have a democratic right to know what their public authorities are proposing, deciding and doing. In few places can this need for honest disclosure be more important than the European Union, with is complexities, perceived remoteness of decision making, national and supra-national interests. In this paper I explore the ethical aspects to formulating open and transparent communication that will reach a trans-national audience. "Do not lie" is the fundamental ethical principle of human communication. It is one of the famous 'ten commandments' which, for centuries, were regarded as the foundational moral code for European societies. It is just as valid a principle in today's secular, multi-cultural Europe. People of all faiths and none recognize the importance of honesty. Without it, trust is destroyed, human relationships break down and society cannot function. Truth is also essential to justice. That is why witnesses in courts of law in England, for example, must promise to tell "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". The point of the phrase "the whole truth" is, of course, that – without lying – you can deceive people by being economical with the truth. Presenting carefully selected facts that paint a false picture has long been a favourite tool of politicians, who nowadays like to call it 'spin'. I prefer to call it what it is: propaganda. When I took up my present post, as European Commission Vice-President with responsibility for communication, eurosceptics nicknamed me 'the Commissioner for propaganda'. They assumed my role would be to persuade people to love the European Union and that EU

23

communication meant 'selling' EU policies through slick advertising. That is most definitely not how I see my job. To me, honesty in public communication is essential. Not only as a basic ethical principle but because honesty is by far the best policy. Only honesty can build trust between people. Without the trust of the citizens, politicians cannot do their job and a political project such as the European Union cannot succeed. Citizens have a democratic right to know what the public authorities are proposing, deciding and doing. This is even more imperative at European Union than at national level because of the complexity and perceived remoteness of EU decision-making. Institutions such as the European Commission therefore have a duty to inform the public fully and accurately, and to explain our actions clearly. It is then up to the individual citizen to approve or disapprove of what we are doing and to react accordingly. Each citizen is free to form his or her own opinion about the European Union and its policies. I want people to make up their minds on the basis of knowledge and understanding, not ignorance or prejudice. And certainly not on the basis of mendacious propaganda. Transparency is just as vital as honesty. Citizens need to be able to check the accuracy of the information they receive from us, and to dig deeper into the facts by accessing background documents. European institutions therefore need to make available as much information as possible, and to ensure it is accessible through the appropriate media. This, of course, presents a number of practical problems. One is the choice of media platform. Television is still the medium through which most people in Europe prefer to get their news and current affairs information. But TV broadcasters rarely find EU affairs newsworthy enough to

24

allot them more than a few minutes of prime time coverage. Unless, of course, there is a juicy scandal or a political crisis to report. The internet is the medium of choice for the young, but not the old, and the printed press is fragmented into thousands of newspapers and magazines catering for different readerships. EU communicators therefore need to use the whole range of media and tailor their communication to meet the needs and interests of each specific audience. A second problem is the sheer complexity of the European Union: its institutions and agencies, its treaties, its decisionmaking processes, its many policies and programmes… How do you communicate this complex political and economic reality in clear and comprehensible terms? You are forced to simplify, and therefore run the risk of distorting the picture by "dumbing down". You have a duty to tell the whole truth, but you cannot do so in a single booklet, DVD or podcast. Practically the only place where a citizen can find a complete body of information about the EU is on the internet. The 'Europa' web portal gives access to a vast amount of material including all EU documents that are not confidential or merely internal. However, not all EU citizens have ready access to the internet and are willing and able to use it. There is an ethical issue here: equality of opportunity. There is also another practical problem: information overload. How do you find your way through the jungle of documents to the particular piece of information you are looking for? We try to help by structuring Europa in a logical and user-friendly way: simple and general information at the top level with a chain of links enabling the reader to dig down and find more detailed material at the lower levels.

25

We also provide an answering service enabling citizens in any European Union country to e-mail or telephone us (free of charge) and receive a clear answer, in their own language, to any question about the EU. This brings us to the issue of multilingualism. Clearly, every citizen should be able to access the information they want in a language they understand, and ideally in their own native tongue. For an individual country this is not a major problem: for the European Union, however, it is a mammoth task. The EU institutions do their best to present as much information as possible in all the EU's official languages. But their resources – including translation resources – are limited. In short, there are a number of obstacles in the way of telling the whole truth to everyone all the time. But at least people should know that the EU institutions are honest and transparent – that we are committed to providing full access to as much information as possible. However, communication is more than just information. Real communication between people is about listening to one another and exchanging views and ideas. Political communication, as I see it, should therefore be a process of dialogue between governments and the governed, and of open public debate about matters of public policy. Citizens have the right to hear the full range of views expressed in that public debate, and the right to have their own views heard by the policy-makers. Dialogue and debate of this kind are vital for democracy. Without them, how can policy-makers understand the views and wishes of the citizens? And how can individual citizens reach informed judgments about the issues on which they will be asked to vote? In Europe, dialogue and debate are not very difficult to achieve in a local, regional or national context. The media keep people informed about public policies and TV or radio

26

debates allow audiences to question politicians and other experts. But the process gets more difficult at the trans-national European level. Cross-border debate is hampered by language barriers. There are hardly any trans-national mass media, and very few trans-national fora in which citizens of different countries can meet to discuss issues of common concern. European Union politicians such as Commissioners and MEPs are not well-known outside their own country and their contact with the general public is limited. The institutional mechanisms of the European Union are little known by the general public, so it is hard for people to understand how decisions are taken and how to influence them. In addition to these practical obstacles there are ethical issues. National leaders sign up to EU policies and legislation, but they are less than forthright about this when speaking to their home audiences. All too often they 'spin' their action as a victory over other countries – or as a defeat for which they blame 'Brussels' – rather than explaining it as a collective decision taken in the collective European interest. This, to my mind, is not the kind of honest and accurate communication to which EU citizens are entitled. The media too surely have a responsibility to inform the public in a balanced and objective fashion. Is it fair to report European issues only from a national – and indeed nationalistic – perspective? Is it responsible to focus only on political personalities, crises and conflicts? How can citizens reach a balanced judgment about the actions of EU institutions if their favourite newspaper feeds them a constant diet of euromyths and EU-hostile editorial commentary? In national politics the media are expected to provide a fair debate: why not also in European politics?

27

In February 2006 the Commission published a consultative document (a "White Paper") addressing these issues. We argued strongly for a European Communication Policy that gives citizens the tools for democracy to which they are entitled: relevant and accurate information; fora and meeting-places for debate; channels for dialogue with European decision-makers. Delivering these things is a task well beyond the capacity of the European Commission itself – or indeed of any single institution. It will require concerted action by all the EU institutions, national governments, regional and local authorities, as well as civil society and the media. It should start in schools. Young people should learn the basic facts about the EU as part of their civic education curriculum. It should continue in adult life with the media providing regular information about what is being discussed and decided in Brussels and Strasbourg. Local authorities should organize public meetings in the town hall or local school where citizens can meet with local politicians, environmental activists, consumer representatives, trade unionists and business people to discuss the impact of EU legislation on life in the local community. NGOs should provide topic-focused discussion fora on the internet, and hold international conferences where citizens from across Europe can meet to discuss the hot topics with EU officials and MEPs. This might seem over-ambitious: but just consider what people rightly expect in national, regional or local politics. Why should they be content with anything less in European politics? The European Commission can and will organize transnational citizens' debates and conduct opinion polls to get an overview of European public opinion. Our public

28

information networks and contact centre will also help us to identify the issues of greatest concern to citizens. The results of this "listening" exercise will feed directly into the process of formulating EU policies. European political parties should also be permanently taking part in this public debate. When the time comes for elections to the European Parliament, these parties should clearly present their positions on the key issues and thus give citizens a real choice between live options. This will motivate many people to turn out and vote, and that in turn will give greater democratic legitimacy to European institutional decision-making. European Communication Policy, as I envisage it, will therefore certainly not be about legitimizing the status quo or 'selling' any particular view of Europe's future. It will be about making the EU more understandable and accessible. It must also stimulate a healthy debate in which the citizen can compare different views: pro- and anti-integration views; views for and against specific EU policies; the views of all political parties and of the European Commission, whose job is to foster the common European interest. Moreover, in any EU country citizens should be able to hear the views of people from the other EU countries. It should be a genuinely open-ended trans-national discussion. When might such a Communication Policy become reality? In the summer of 2007 the Commission published a new policy document proposing a range of measures that it is prepared to take – jointly with other EU institutions, with governments and with civil society. The emphasis is on setting up practical working partnerships. Our document puts forward an agenda for concerted action on communication. We would not presume to tell any of our partners what to do, but we can and will make concrete suggestions for doing the job together.

29

The European Union is a political project and it must therefore be conducted democratically, ensuring that EU policies reflect the will of the citizens in all EU countries. That is possible only with honest and transparent political communication across national boundaries. In short, ethical trans-national communication is an essential tool for European democracy.

30

Ethics and Corporate Governance Ola Ullsten Introduction: Corporate Social Responsibility is not a philanthropic project to make corporations look good. It should be seen as part of a business strategy that helps the bottom line. I believe the time has come for corporations to provide leadership, realizing the competitive power of ethical behavior and the importance for their business of a good social image. When Albert Einstein suggested that “Relativity applies to physics, not to ethics” he was right. Ethics is about norms for human behavior. And a norm is by definition an absolute. If it isn’t, it’s not a norm But as the late Professor John Ziman (Science, UK, 4 December 1998) observes, “Ethics is not just an abstract intellectual discipline. It is about the conflicts that arise in trying to meet real human needs and values.” Ethical norms are something that people agree upon as the right thing to do. Ethics are based on value systems that develop over time. Rules and regulations might reflect those values but ethics goes beyond abiding by the law of the land. Ethics may be an absolute at any given time, but it is one that is culture dependent. As cultures develop, so does ethics. Ethics is about the courage to extend or otherwise alter existing norms. Ethics can be spelled out in various ways. Parents try to instill norms for their kids. Schools have rules for what is acceptable from the students. Sport authorities may have strict ethical rules for athletes. So does business and the uninstitutional institution of CSR - Corporate Social Responsibility.

31

But corporations, most particularly the big multinationals, have more power than most other organizations in modern society. There are more than half a million foreign affiliate corporations in the world. The 100 biggest multinationals have assets in the magnitude of 2000 billion dollars, which is more than the GDP of China, India, South Korea, Singapore and Malaysia combined. These are countries with more than one third of the world’s population. Economy drives politics. Business shapes social values and influences culture. Industrial activities impact on the human environment; on the climate, on biodiversity, on the survival of forests and fishery. Business has the power and the technology to make a difference. Globalization has created these giants and made them powerful. That is why corporate governance has become more vital than ever. The ethics of business can be regulated only so much from outside: it is from within corporations that new behaviours must arise. Sometimes legislation will help to create a level playing field for those in favour of high ethnical standards. CSR is about ethics. It is an idea concerned with how corporations can behave ethically and pursue industrial processes that have a positive impact on society. It advocates transparency, accountability, integrity, and responsibility in the governance of corporations. The World Council for Corporate Governance is part of the CSR movement and for us CSR is not a philanthropic project to make corporations look good. It should be seen as part of a business strategy that helps the bottom line. We agree with Charles Handy, an Irish philosopher and author, when he suggests: “To say that profit is a means to another ends and not an end in itself is not a semantic quibble, it is a serious moral point.” We use the politically sounding term equity because we consider it important that corporate governance includes

32

participation from all stakeholders. We like to see corporations taking a holistic view and be aware of the socio-political and environmental impact of their activities. It helps to make use of the knowledge base of society that a participatory process offers. CSR started out in a local context when corporations realised that their ethical codes and social image mattered. It became generally accepted: 1) that people feel better and do a better job when working for a respected company than for one with a bad image, and that better labor quality means better products and more profit; 2) that a bad image due to poor ethical standards, such as poor working conditions in developing countries, negatively effects the building of brands. There are different opinions on what CSR is or should be all about. A Mallen Baker (mallenbaker.net) survey showed that in the United States CSR is often akin to charity. Business makes money and gives some of it back to the local community. While in Europe the dominant perception is that social responsibility should be considered an integral part of the wealth creation process. Says an envious US CEO Champion’s Andre Sigler: “An ethical company will in the short run and in the long term be a better institution…behavior is simply good business” These differences on what CSR is or is not exist between corporations in the same regions as well. Corporations fall into three groups in their approach to social responsibility: 1) irresponsible corporations - those who do not care much about either societal goals or their own social image; 2) compliant corporations - those who obey laws but nothing more; 3) pro-active corporations - those who provide leadership, realizing the competitive power of ethical behavior and the importance for their business of a good social image. The last approach is the one whose time has come. Corporations, big or small are working in an increasingly

33

integrated world economy. Their social image depends as much on the work environment of their suppliers, employees, as on that of their own. Business said yes when Kofi Annan wanted the business community to become a partner in the UN Millennium Development Goals which range from cutting in half extreme poverty to stopping the spread of HIV/AIDS and guaranteeing universal primary education by 2015. To achieve those goals requires a concerted action by governments, international donor and other organizations and civil society. The partnership isn’t working that well according to some. But usually new ideas take time to be effectively implemented. And the idea seems to be an indisputably good one. Development does not happen without economic growth and economic growth requires investment. Whole new markets are opening up for those who dare think big when thinking small, and adjust product development, manufacturing, marketing and financing to meeting the needs of the poor. Climate change and other environmental ills are no less of a challenge. And no less of an opportunity either. We have all contributed to the mess we are in by driving our cars, trucks and buses; by heating and cooling our homes; by criss-crossing the continents in gasoline-slurping jets; by the way we cook our meals, farm the land and fish the oceans; by cutting down the world’s forests and consuming ever more products. Producers or consumers, we are all part of the problem, and we all have to take part in finding the solutions. On legislative matters the usual attitude of business is one of “oppose and accept”. Typically business is against new regulations but adapts to it once introduced. With a different attitude business to their own advantage, could from time to time be a partner in policy making instead of an opponent. And for sure a climate change in business

34

would help to combat the climate change in nature. Still, the role of government and business should be kept apart. Governments should listen to business when setting the targets through framework legislation. Business should be trusted to finding the best way, in terms of choosing technology and otherwise, for reaching those targets. Markets alone cannot always deliver the right solutions. Government and business must learn how to work together. Some say that governments have failed to come up with solutions, so now it is time for business to take the lead. In some areas that might be so. A more likely development is that business will ask for “more government” on environmental issues – to level the playing field in setting higher standards for protecting the environment. Far sighted business leaders have read the Stern report and believe its findings that unabated climate change might cost the global economy 5 to 20 times more than the cost of reducing the emissions that causes global warming. The whole business community has listened carefully to financial institutions’ predictions on how companies might be affected when climate change is an accepted fact. Said one institution following the publication of the latest UN report on global warming: “The pace of firm’s adaptation to climate change over the next several years is likely to prove to be another of the forces that influence whether any given firm survives and prospers or withers and, quite possibly dies”. Said another institution: “Policies to combat the threat of global warming are converging to influence people’s behavior, alter the risk profile of various businesses and improve the outlook for others.” Globalization if we manage to make it work for both poor and rich countries and people, is a good thing for

35

development and people’s well-being. World poverty – 4 billion people are today living on less than 2 dollars a day – is a challenge with serious human, economic and political consequences. Environmental ills are a serious threat with unknown implications far into the future of mankind. In all of this there is an ethical dimension: Do we care, or do we not?

36

Ethics and CSR: An American and a (North) European Perspective Dennis L. Wilcox and Göran E. Sjöberg Introduction: Few would argue against corporations demonstrating their responsibilities to society but precisely how they should do so is a much more contentious and divisive matter. In Ethics and CSR: An American and a (North) European Perspective, we hope our debate centred on crucial CSR issues will help underline some important benefits and potential pitfalls in areas such as ethical business and cause marketing. DW: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has received a lot of media attention in the United States, not all of it favorable. Many skeptics, for example, say corporations use the rubric of CSR as just a marketing and public relations strategy to make them look good instead of a genuine effort on the part of corporations to instill CSR into the core values of the organization and how it conducts its business at all levels. Indeed, this perception is reinforced by surveys of CEOs. The Conference Board asked executives why they participated in corporate citizenship programs, and the top answer (92 percent of the respondents) was that such programs enhanced corporate reputation and brand. Another 74 percent said such programs helped recruit and retain employees. Even Christian Aid, an NGO, has concluded that CSR is a “burgeoning industry …now seen as a vital tool in promoting and improving the image of the world’s largest companies and corporations.” Enhanced corporate reputation is one legitimate outcome of a CSR program, but most U.S. experts agree that CSR programs must be based on ethical principles such as action, truth, genuine concern, and core corporate values. Michael Coates, CEO of Hill & Knowlton Canada, simply

37

says, “For a company to behave ethically, it must live and breathe its code of conduct, train its personnel, and communicate the code through its visioning statements. It cannot just print a manual that sits on a corporate shelf.” In sum, ethical CSR means that a company’s vision, values, mission, and strategy have to become an integral part of its entire corporate culture. Indeed, CSR is unethical if it is just another strategy of the marketing, public relations, or advertising department. GS: I agree completely, but unfortunately many top managers fail to realize that they can reach more win-win situations if they commit themselves to solid CSR programs and let the goodwill of it come out as a result of, not a prerequisite for, the programs. We must accept that CEOs and Boards of Directors primarily look after the quarterly dividends and thus want to see a measurable positive impact on the bottom line even of CSR programs; they should, however, also consider the long-term positive outcome of programs that make their companies stand out as ethically conscious, good citizens, good neighbors, good employers – which will have nice effects on the brand value of the company. DW: Establishing trust and credibility are major factors in the conduct of ethical CSR programs. The Public Relations Coalition, consisting of 20 major public relations organizations in the United States, issued a report “Restoring Trust in Business: Models for Action,” which called on corporate leaders to put a priority on ethics. Two of the three major recommendations touched on ethics; one called for corporations to articulate a set of ethical principles that are closed connected to core values and strong management commitment. Another recommendation was to make trust and ethics a boardlevel corporate governance issue and establish a formal system of measuring how well the corporation measures up to their CSR commitments.

38

There are several dimensions to ethical CSR. Some key components of ethical CSR include: (l) treat employees fairly and respect human rights on a global basis, (2) compete fairly with competitors, (3) ensure an ethical supply chain, (4) act responsibly toward the environment, (5) make sustainability a key priority, (6) do more than the minimum set by law, and (7) be honest and upfront about your efforts, mistakes, and goals. GS: Your #3 is a difficult ethical dilemma – how do you keep control of the entire chain from raw materials through refining, finishing, transporting and marketing a product? To check that tropical wood is not used in furniture is relatively easy; to find out whether e.g. child labor is used or trade union rights are not violated down the supply chain is far more difficult. When news broke that a remote supplier to a Swedish multinational corporation used child labor, media cried shame – on the Swedish corporation. It sent a mission to the supplier and found that accusations were true. Instead of sacking the supplier, however, the Swedes guaranteed a system whereby the children could go to school half the week and work in the factory the other half. End result of the ethical dilemma: better educated children, income to their families still guaranteed; and corporate reputation restored or even reinforced. DW: Companies should be highly strategic about their CSR efforts, which is ethical, but they should not be naïve in the respect that all stakeholders will applaud their efforts. Some stakeholders, particularly those critical of the organization’s past efforts, will dismiss any CSR efforts as simply a marketing and public relations gambit. Also, it is rare that a corporation will score well on all the dimensions of CSR. Google, for example, has the corporate credo of “do no evil” but critics still believe the company is unethical when it comes to ensuring the privacy of its customers. And Ford Motor Company, although introducing more fuel efficient cars, is still criticized by the Sierra Club for producing the industry’s most “gas-guzzling fleet of cars”

39

and says Ford’s CSR is “another example of corporate rhetoric trumping reality.” Perhaps a more ethical CSR approach, for Ford and other corporations, is to be honest about their current shortcomings and articulate their ultimate goals. Most stakeholders know many societal and environmental problems can’t be solved overnight, but they do expect corporations to set some long-range goals and articulate their plans to achieve them. Nike, for example, has announced that it was working toward labor rights and the freedom to join and form unions in all of its overseas factories by the year 2011. Coca-Cola has also announced its aspiration to become water-neutral by gradually reducing the amount of water it uses to make its products. It is announcing benchmarks and working with the World Wildlife Fund (WFF) to monitor its progress. Indeed, an important dimension of ethical CSR practice is for corporations to engage in an honest, sincere dialogue with various stakeholders, including activist groups concerned about everything from treatment of employees to pollution, global warming, and sustainable resources. The idea of a productive dialogue and involving stakeholders in finding solutions is a relatively new concept among U.S. companies. In past years, there has been a more adversarial relationship between activist groups and corporations where name-calling and shrill rhetoric were the norm. Today, however, there is more emphasis on conflict resolution and how the company can do better with the assistance and help of NGOs, etc. In addition, outside groups can provide credibility and legitimacy for the corporation’s CSR program. GS: Here you find quite a difference between several European countries and the USA: while several countries in my area solve their social security problems through state intervention, you solve it principally through private insurance or the like. In our case, this opens up for a

40

division of responsibilities between state (or regional/municipal) authorities and business: in each case, we should ask ourselves: how do we - Define society’s needs? - Define our corporation’s self-interest? - Define state/municipal responsibility? - Discuss the gaps? - Suggest divisions + co-operation? This way, we can avoid duplications of efforts and collision of responsibilities, thus optimizing the results of the joint efforts of public and private industry’s investments and work in the social responsibility sectors. And there is another important effect of this co-operation between the public sector and the business world: their dialogue helps diminish the ethics window-dressing and create more results to the benefit of society. An example from my own experience in Sweden as early as 30 years ago may illustrate my point: The forest industry, which is a backbone of Swedish industry, was – rightly – criticized for its emissions to air and water. A three-year long intensive effort by all experts on process and environment led to substantial reductions of the environmental hazards. We naturally trumpeted out the improvements our task forces had created. But – and that is crucial – we also put on record which problems they had not been able to solve despite their considerable joint effort – and why. Furthermore, the announcement of the improvements was made after consultation not only with the Environmental Protection Agency but also with the trade unions and several green NGOs. This strategy had a double positive effect: we had good partners and we avoided criticism for “green-washing”. DW: A good example, but this is not to infer that all dialogue and negotiation is a win-win situation. Environmentalists, for example, are no more homogeneous than the corporate world and differing points of view are standard. Should a company endorse the concept of biofuels, which pleases some groups, but also raises

41

hackles among other environmental groups (including a UN commission) who are concerned about biofuel production causing food shortages, increased poverty, and lost of biodiversity. Such differences of opinion are part of the wrangle in the marketplace of public opinion and, ultimately, a corporation has to balance all the arguments and make a decision that is “ethically” right for them in terms of corporate self-interest and the greater public good. GS: True. In the Harvard Business Review December 2006 issue, Michael Porter and Mark Kramer remarked that “The CSR field remains strongly imbued with a moral imperative. … It is nature of moral obligations to be absolute mandates, however, while most corporate social choices involve balancing competing values, interests, and costs.” DW: Cause-marketing is a popular manifestation of CSR in the United States, but it also raises ethical questions. The Gap, for example, spent $100 million on its Product Red campaign in which 50 percent of its sales were directed to raising money for fighting HIV/AIDS in Africa – raising a total of $25 million. The ethical question, of course, is whether the amount spent on marketing justifies the end result. Some critics, for example, fault companies for spending large sums on marketing and suggest that CSR might be better accomplished if the corporation just made a major donation to the cause. David Hessekiel, president of the Cause Marketing Forum, thinks advocates of increased corporate philanthropy are being unrealistic and naïve. CSR, in order to gain the approval of investors and stockholders, must be grounded in solid business practice. Acts of philanthropy, although admirable, are not sustainable if a CSR program doesn’t benefit the business as well as the cause. He says, “A major advantage of this win-win approach is that such alliances are sustainable.” Profitable responsibility is not only ethical but the major point. Hindustan Lever, a subsidiary of Unilever, is an example.

42

It makes a profit selling small bars of Lifebuoy soap to the poor in India, but it also actively promotes using hand-soap among Indian villagers as a way to reduce the estimated l.8 million deaths annually caused by diarrhea-related diseases. In sum, an ethical corporation has to assess its causerelated marketing and its purpose. One criteria that can be used: “Do you feel comfortable doing a $l million marketing or and advertising campaign that only generates $l0,000 for the cause? Scott Pansky, from Allison & Partners public relations, makes a good point: “Social responsibility should be the beginning of any cause initiative, not the sales end. These relationships need to come from the heart and be authentic while working long-term, ultimately making a real social change.” A final note from my side: Consumers increasingly are getting more sophisticated about what corporation are doing, or not doing, regarding an ethical approach to CSR. They, as well as employees, no longer tolerate the “greenwashing” of packaged products or claims that the company is committed to CSR. Indeed, one survey of US adults by Capstrat and FGI Research indicated that 50 percent of the respondents say that their concern about the quality of CSR work has increased over the past several years. The ethical mandate for corporate communicators is to be honest, document results, be accessible, establish ongoing relationships, engage in conflict resolution and negotiation, and practice transparency in all dealings with an organization’s various stakeholders. GS: And a final note from my Swedish perspective too: Ethics are measured with different yard-sticks in different business and political cultures. It is not without complications to set down a document on ethical standards for a corporation that is a world-wide actor. Bribery, kickbacks, intermediaries, half-truths etc. exist – to a varying degree – in most cultures. Above all, I think that many of

43

the multinational corporations must confess that their socalled CSR programs are primarily aimed at enhancing their profiles as “good citizens” rather than really being good citizens. Brand value enhancement and serious Corporate Social Responsibility are not necessarily twins… It is a monumental task for management, as well as for the public relations function, to find and agree upon principles that can be adhered to and that make the CEO and his public relations manager sleep well at night, with good conscience. Recent experience shows that we are improving the ethical standards in most businesses – but there is still a long struggle ahead for us all.

44

The thin red line Laura Muchnik Introduction: Dysfunctional government and overly powerful media have contributed to ethical distortion in Latin America. High levels of corruption often necessitate that PR practitioners perform a high wire balancing act on behalf of the organizations they represent. But good reputation is highly and increasingly prized, partly because it is so hard to keep. In my paper, The Thin Red Line, I suggest tools that the PR industry can use to create an ethical atmosphere; an approach that will help it grow by leaps and bounds. The waters in Latin America are so murky that it would be better to speak about micro ethics than of ethics at large. It is no wonder that when I started out in this industry, twenty years ago, most PR professionals were lawyers. In these twenty years public relations (reference IPRA style minimlise use of capitals) have changed in fundamental ways. In Latin America we have gone through a process of innovation and professionalization that picked up speed in the past decade. It is now a much more complex industry, one that requires abilities complementary to the communications core: being a good business-person, understanding the business models from several different markets, nourishing a network of relations and having sound ethics. In our corner of the world the lack of independence of the Judiciary and Congress from the government is taken for granted. Routinely there is a superimposition of powers and an invasion of spheres from the part of the Executive. The Judiciary tends to be inefficient and lacking in resources. The situation creates a complex void filled out by the media, that tend to become a factor in politics and mete out verdicts and punishments. As a result, the media in Latin American wield a power that is often excessive. Ethics in the region are

45

deeply distorted by those two elements: a dysfunctional government, a too-powerful media. Except for Chile, (which found itself in a comfortable position in the Transparency International ranking of country at number twenty in a group with the US and Belgium) (and for Uruguay at number 28 along with Malta and Slovenia), Latin America emerges poorly showing in hard figures the level of corruption that affects the continent. Brazil, México and Peru share rank 73 with India, Ghana and Saudi Arabia, while Argentina is ranked number 93, in a group with Eritrea, Syria and Tanzania, among others. In fact, the 2006 Corruption Index ends with two Latin American countries, Ecuador and Venezuela, which equally rank at number 138. Morals spawn a long list of concepts and ideas: ethics-virtuegoodness-deeds-concience-duty-justice-severity-delicacyscruples-respect-rights-convention-habit-conduct-disciplinecommandments-principles-morality-health. It is a concept of enormous potential. And a concept of enormous diversity, as varied as the cultural differences to be found in Latin America. Ethics and culture might differ from man to man and from country to country, but Latin American countries have in common political and economic instability, the lack of longterm planning, social inequality, faulty educational systems and scarce social mobility. The media, of course, are affected by that situation. They are companies with policies that change according to their relationship and degree of agreement with the changing powers-that-be. PR professionals act as enablers of dialogue between sectors, governments, media, companies, NGOs, and opinion makers. It's a complex act. There is a thin red line there. The key issue impacting ethics and morals in this situation is corruption. There are high levels of corruption in our countries, and the media are not exempt. While media

46

companies have private interests and change their policies according to who is in office, journalists are quite independent and act following their own rules, not always in tune with their companies. That is quite common in Latin America because the situation is not clear and limits are flexible; it would be quite remarkable in countries with a higher level of transparency and control. The waters here are murkier and journalists find it more congenial both to investigate and expose, and to cover up. PR professionals in Latin America have become high-wire artists. There are many PR policies possible and we must understand them all. It is not an easy task to tell good stories about people who are entrepreneurs, who create something from nothing, invent products or services, or are well known businessmen. Our role is to create bridges between the companies and their map of opinion-makers. Therein lies our ethical dilemma: create a map that will help our clients to act as good corporate citizens, build up a corporate identity and, if they do what they say they'll do, gain a corporate reputation. Reputations are highly valued in Latin America because they are very hard to keep. New PR Only now are companies starting to delve into creativity and hesitantly to trust PR as a tool to build brand value, corporate reputation and sales. The Latin American PR business is reinventing itself as part of a global trend. Part of our ethical construction should be to make clear promises, to be able to set realistic expectations, regularly tally results and contribute directly to our clients' business. After a deep crisis in the region's major countries, the PR market has bounced back strongly. In the last two years of this post-crisis period the leading PR firms have gained in strength, created jobs and worked non-stop. Competition today is fast and furious. All multinational companies have already chosen local PR partners to handle their communications with opinion makers. Regional firms look for

47

regional PR and local companies understand that tool as very cost-effective. On the other hand, the buy-out fever that in the nineties made it commonplace that multinational PR firms would acquire local and regional partners has abated almost completely. In a way, that fact has spurred local PR firms into developing new business. Now multinationals are back in the market, keenly looking for new partners, trying to determine who shares their ethical standards and growth projections. A few have understood that markets are no longer local but regional and that Latin America is the map where we have to act, interfacing with complex and varied local realities. The most innovative and sophisticated PR markets in the region are Mexico, Brazil and Argentina. Then comes a second tier with the Andean region and Caribbean countries. More and more opportunities are popping up in the region to create advertainment, brand activation, segmented advertisement, viral marketing, technological marketing, oneon-one marketing, niche marketing, mouth to mouth marketing and relational marketing. All these require a high dose of creativity coming from PR and not merely from advertising or below the line companies. PR now can create 360-degree communications campaigns and that means it can grow in the market. If it had the "leave" of the ad world or if it could break out, PR would find a market with great potential. I personally have trust in the room for growth that new PR has, focusing in the creation of contents --activation ideas, advertorials, advertainment -- and in communications consulting to help create links with opinion makers. I think that all professionals who work to make our clients' brands "greater", to find value in those brands, to discover stories of interest to consumers and readers, to expose the public interest of private activities, are under the obligation to think big. And to think about our ethics at a personal, local, regional and global level.

48

What does that mean? How do we go about building credibility with creativity? It means knowing the marketing and communications tools. It means helping to communicate. It means helping to sell. It means finding means and ways to put together brands and consumers, and all the intermediate audiences that change the message with their own experiences and opinions. It means creating new channels, new ways, new spaces of visibility, new and original spaces of dialogue with those that are tempted by the messages generated by each product, brand or company. It means daring to measure up results beyond the intangibles, entering a realm of analysis that measures results along with sales. And it also means being creative, original and credible, good listeners for our clients in each company, and above all good messengers. Along these lines, the PR industry can grow by leaps and bounds in Latin America, creating an ethical atmosphere that will reflect well on us. The tools are simple: Integrity, which demands impeccable conduct and honesty, and a rigorous coherence between our corporate practices and our values. Transparency, built up by the truthfulness of the information we emit and on the clear communication of our clients' activities. Responsibility, which consists in assuming ours, as high as they might be, and behave accordingly. We must engage all our talents in helping interests that have in the end a proper social sense and are, therefore, ethical. Without those values our task is rudderless. Ethics do exist. Only some give them a wide swerve. Laura Muchnik President of Muchnik, Alurralde, Jasper & Asoc/ M, S&L

49

Ethics in Politics and Business Aune Past Introduction: During the last 15 years, new countries, which have been freed from the Soviet Union’s planned economy, have joined the market society. How was modern ethical and effective public relations born in countries that were ruled by ideology and where public relations was largely the tool of the ruling party, or a propaganda vehicle? Do the countries that are new to public relations base their public relations on ethics? Is ethics in business and politics also reflected in public relations ethics? I endeavor to answer these questions in my paper, "Ethics in Business & Politics". At the University of Tartu (www.ut.ee), (style point we need to refer to the IPRA style guide for hyperlinks) media and communications have been taught since 1954, while the public relations specialty was established in 1996. The EPRA (in full) (www.epra.ee) was established in the same year and a code of ethics, which is based largely on the IPRA code of ethics, was adopted at the first meeting. Estonia became independent in 1991 (www.vm.ee/estonia), while private enterprise was introduced a few years earlier. The need for public relations already existed during the period of Estonia’s struggle for independence. In 1987, public meetings and joint actions took place in opposition to the establishment of phosphorus mining in Estonia. The mines would have polluted nature and the imported labour (need for a UK English spell check all contributions) force would have made Estonians a minority in Estonia during one generation. A popular TV series called for the formation of a National Front, which was supposed to support Gorbachev’s perestroika policies. In answer to an appeal by the National Front, every fourth Estonian resident, including children and the elderly, gathered at the Song Festival Grounds, which is a very symbolic place for Estonians. Today, the Estonian

50

independence movement is called the Singing Revolution, and the highlight of this revolution was the Baltic Chain, in which people holding hands in a 600-kilometer chain that reached from Tallinn to Vilnius, joined the people of the three Baltic countries. Since the majority of the Estonian population participated in the peaceful campaigns to restore Estonian independence, it is understandable that public relations continues to be focused primarily on mutual communications that aspires to symmetry. Public relations was not born as an advocacy service but as a consulting service, regarding the representation of public interests as its goal. (need to have consistent paragraphing style and maybe subtitles) With the development of the market economy, the number of public relations practitioners increased. The students that were admitted to the public relations specialty in the fall of 1996 had already found work at leading banks and state institutions by Christmas. The majority worked throughout their study period. Ethics had a very important role in the curriculum, because the faculty perceived its responsibility in the establishment of the standards of the new specialty. Public relations quickly became a specialty with great competition for admittance. However, the necessary number of PR specialists was not enough , and enterprising (former) journalists became public relations specialists, as did some with an economic academic background, plus sothers who simply found PR to be an attractive profession. Reputation and image have become fashionable words connected to distinct activities. Estonia, which has become one of the most successful transition countries during the last fifteen years, is no exception. Reputation is a word often used in politics and economics as a threat: “you are ruining Estonia’s reputation or image”. In academic literature, the words reputation and image are differentiated, but not in economics or politics. I asked Estonian public relations practitioners what image is, and I got 45 different definitions from 75 PRO-s. in 1996.

51

Grunig (Hon and Grunig1999), who has great influence on the EPRA and academic public relations, says that reputation is what the public says and remembers about an organization:it is a quality function of relations with the public. Image cannot be managed but the process of forming an image can be managed.Therefore public relations practitioners manage the communications process in order to create and preserve good relations with the target group. We cannot directly influence reputation or relations, but we can manage the communications process that influences relations and reputation. Thanks to a good level of philosophical education, the works of Kant and Habermas were familiar to many in Estonia. Jim and Larissa Grunig personally sent me materials on which we established the teaching of academic PR ethics. The Quality Public Relation Series No. 1 by G. Sjöberg and K. Bertht was material necessary for a specialized education. The Gold Paper materials received at the IPRA Congress in Helsinki and meetings at the IPRA headquarters were the basis that determined the ethics and objectives of public relations in both politics and business in a transition society. Although it seemed that the mixed motive model of PR is working, research revealed a different picture. In 1999, together with the students taking the ethics course, we conducted research on the perceptions of public relations among Estonian business people. The expectations regarding the content and results of public relations differed between academicians and specialized people. Sixty-six percent of company directors found that the principal objective of public relations was to create positive media reporting and to advertise them. One company CEO claimed, “We don’t need public relations, because we only tell the truth.” Another added, “We are so successful that we don’t need public relations.”

52

In 1999, the importance of public relations activities in companies was ranked as follows: media relations, advertising, and client events. The respondents did not think that internal communications or the development of social responsibility was important. The main qualification for public relations practitioners was familiarity with journalists and a good appearance (Past 2004). By 2004, the situation had already changed-73% of companies use public relations often, 23% from time to time, and 4% seldom (Markuashvili, 2005). Even today, most public relations specialists are part of marketing departments. The majority used in-house specialists. The trend is toward the increased importance of internal communications and social responsibility. The 2004 study showed increased awareness among company directors of the role of public relations, but only 5% of the respondents treated public relations as a management tool. At the same time, press articles, as well a public relations handbooks and academic training, concentrated on the fact that public relations is a management tool and reputation is formed as a result of good relations, not reputation management. I feel the reason that public relations had not established itself as a management tool in the businesses of a transition society is the differing language and knowledge of managers and public relations practitioners. Public relations practitioners with strong communications skills are not qualified in organizational management and company directors see public relations primarily as the development of a reputation. A study conducted among the Top 100 companies designated by the economic publication Äripäev (Kuusik 2005), showed that the public relations practitioners at successful companies see the creation of reputations as most important, while the job descriptions for public relations specialists place the management of internal communications and media relations first. The public relations directors of successful companies belong to management and public relations in these companies is practiced as a management tool.

53

The cooperation between journalists and public relations practitioners is also progressing. A study by Eneken Laasme (www.jrnl.ut.ee/loputood/2005bakatood/laasme_eneken.pdf in Estonian) showed that journalists think that 48% of public relations practitioners see journalists as their partners, but only 28% of public relations practitioners think that journalists should be their main partners. The importance of various public relations activities were rated a followed on a scale of 5. The function of public relations is to be: a management tool, 3 points; a bridge between the organization and the media, 5 points; creation of a reputation, 4 points; a means of advertising, 4 points. We analyzed the image of Estonia’s largest commercial bank, Hansapank, among its workers and the public. Hansapank has always been a leader in reputation research. I consider the reason to be the choices of Kristi Liiva, the director of communications at the time. Pragmatic public relations practitioners do not think about ethics, they fulfill tasks; idealistic public relations practitioners as a member of the management act based help to create organizational cultures in which the entire decision-making process is based on ethics. Organizational public relations must be based on the attitudes and value assessments of the publics. The values of Estonia’s transition period have been analyzed by a U of T research project entitled “Me. The World. The Media”. In 2003, people primarily appreciated values related to physical well-being and a secure environment. Less important were individualistic values (possession of power, social recognition, wealth, a pleasant life). Individualistic values were highly valued by younger people. A

54

characteristic of transitional society is youth-worship and the majority of public relations practitioners are under 30. Here a hidden risk exists for the ethical practice of public relations, as middle-aged people are deprived of information or their interest cannot come to the fore. Collective values like health, a clean society, and honesty are not highly valued among young people, while these values become more important as they get older. Company directors and public relations managers are well-paid specialists. However, research (Kalmus, Vihalemm) shows that people with higher incomes value self-realization and the possession of power higher than other respondents. When creating an organizational public relations strategy in a transition society, one must keep in mind that people who are not satisfied with the changes, who have adapted less well to changes, value a comfortable life higher than other values, and this is clearly a deficit value. An equal and pleasant world is also valued higher, and the reason for this is the need of people who have adapted poorly to change for mental support. The change in value judgments during a transition period shows an increase of individualistic values and those related to consumption, which indicates the freeing of individuals from an equalizing and standardizing environment. During the transition period, the appreciation of the possession of power has increased, which indicates that the need for self-realization has also increased. The need for self-realization is closely related to brand awareness and consumerism, with consuming becoming a part of people’s lifestyles. The transition period clearly highlights the individualization of values by generation. An image is people’s picture of something or someone, and knowledge of “how things are.” To analyze Estonia’s image, we asked the following questions, among others: Which of the pair of words characterizes your feelings about Estonia and to what degree?

55

The rhetoric about Estonia as the Baltic tiger corresponds to the popular vision—Estonia is seen as a developing, and open country. The intimacy factor is very definitely visible— Estonia is one’s own, attractive, and friendly. Transition societies are characterized by cultural trauma. This must be taken into account when planning public relations strategy, in politics as well as business. Since directors and communications managers have coped more successfully with change, from the standpoint of public relations ethics, it is very import to analyze the ability of various publics to adapt to the changes, because only then it is possible to practice ethical public relations. The results of research conducted in Estonia in 2003: For me, the changes have been Gratifying More Hard More Distressing gratifying to say distressing than than distressing gratifying 14% 41% 22% 20% 2% In Estonian society, change has been assessed as rather positive since 1996, and the number of people that are able to cope is increasing. Changes at the state level are assessed more positively, and social changes are assessed more negatively. People’s hopes to improve their lives are related primarily to the improvement of their material well-being. Reforms in a transition society are about the replacement of a socialistic planned economy with a liberal market economy. The implementation and assessment of reforms is based on value judgments. The ethics of communications and public relations practices depend on the broader worldview of the public relations practitioners (Hon and Grunig 1999) . It is important for public relations practitioners to determine how many people in their target group agree with liberal principles and how much they appreciate social values.

56

In Estonia, the attitudes toward changes vary between ethnic groups, rural and urban people, as well as people with various levels of education and coping opportunities. Those who are happy about the changes hold more liberal views, while more critical publics expect increased social responsibility from organizations and state support for the weaker members of society. People that are oriented to self-fulfillment also find it easier to adapt to change, while those with lower self-esteem need more balanced mutual communication. If we compare the informational level of people with changes in coping, one notices that wellinformed people are more satisfied with changes. Public relations in a transitional society is very much a means of development, and therefore, it is important that public relations practitioners be familiar with ethics and quality standards and that these be implemented in public relations at the management level of both business and politics. Bibliography (need to standardize style for this) Berth, K. and Sjöberg, G. Quality Public relations Series No1. The International Institute for Quality in Public Relations. Grunig, J.E and Hon, L. C (1999) Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in public Relations. IPRA Kuusik, K. (2005) Suhtekorraldajad suhtekorraldusest Eesti äriettevõtetes / PRO-s about PR in Estonian companies. In Estonian./ Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus. Marukashvil, I. (2005) Suhtekorralduse kasutamine Eesti äriettevõtetes /Practical PR in Estonian companies. In Estonian / Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus Laasme, Eneken (http://www.jrnl.ut.ee/loputood/2005bakatood/laasme_enek en.pdf in Estonian) Past, A. (2004) Corporate self-image and public relation. Tartu: Tartu University Press

57

Appendix IPRA Codes
INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS ASSOCIATION CODE OF CONDUCT (adopted in Venice – May 1961) A Personal and Professional Integrity. It is understood that by personal integrity is meant the maintenance of both high moral standards and a sound reputation. By professional integrity is meant observance of the Constitution rules and, particularly, the Code as adopted by IPRA. B Conduct towards Clients and Employers. A member has a general duty of fair dealing towards his/her clients or employers, past and present. A member shall not represent conflicting or competing interests without the express consent of those concerned. A member shall safeguard the confidences of both present and former clients or employers. A member shall not employ methods tending to be derogatory of another member’s client or employer. In performing services for a client or employer a member shall not accept fees, commission or any other valuable consideration in connection with those services from anyone other than his/her client or employer without the express consent of his/her client or employer, given after a full disclosure of the facts. A member shall not propose to a prospective client that his/her fees or other compensation be contingent on the achievement of certain results; nor shall he/she enter into any fee agreement to the same effect. C Conduct towards the Public and the Media. A member shall conduct his/her professional activities with respect to the public interest and for the dignity of the individual. A member shall not engage in practice which tends to corrupt the integrity of channels of

58

public communication. A member shall not intentionally disseminate false or misleading information. A member shall at all times seek to give a faithful representation of the organisation which he/she serves. A member shall not create any organisation to serve some announced cause but actually to serve an undisclosed special or private interest of a member or his/her client or employer, nor shall he/she make use of it or any such existing organisation. D Conduct towards Colleagues. A member shall not intentionally injure the professional reputation or practice of another member. However, if a member has evidence that another member has been guilty of unethical, illegal or unfair practices, including practices in violation of this Code, he/she should present the information to the Council of IPRA. A member shall not seek to supplant another member with his employer or client. A member shall co-operate with fellow members in upholding and enforcing this Code.

59

INTERNATIONAL CODE OF ETHICS Code of Athens Author: Lucien Matrat, Member Emeritus (France) Adopted by IPRA General Assembly, Athens, May 1965 and modified at Teheran, April 1968 CONSIDERING that all Member countries of the United Nations Organisation have agreed to abide by its Charter which reaffirms “its faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person” and that having regard to the very nature of the profession, Public Relations practitioners in these countries should undertake to ascertain and observe the principles set out in this Charter: CONSIDERING that, apart from “rights”, human beings have not only physical or material needs but also intellectual, moral and social needs, and that their rights are of real benefit to them only insofar as these needs are essentially met; CONSIDERING that, in the course of their professional duties and depending on how these duties are performed, Public Relations practitioners can substantially help to meet these intellectual, moral and social needs; And lastly, CONSIDERING that the use of the techniques enabling them to come simultaneously into contact with millions of people gives Public Relations practitioners a power that has to be restrained by the observance of a strict moral code. On all these grounds, all members of the International Public Relations Association agree to abide by this International Code of Ethics, and that if, in the light of evidence submitted to the Council, a member should be found to have infringed this Code in the course of his/her professional duties, he/she will be deemed to

60

be guilty of serious misconduct calling for an appropriate penalty. Accordingly, each member: SHALL ENDEAVOUR 1. 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 “Universal declaration of Human Rights”; 2. To establish communications patterns and channels which, by fostering the free flow of essential information, will make each member of the group feel that he/she is being kept informed, and also give him/her an awareness of his/her own personal involvement and responsibility, and of his/her solidarity with other members; To conduct himself/herself always and in all circumstances in such a manner as to deserve and secure the confidence of those with whom he/she comes into contact; 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;

3.

4.

SHALL UNDERTAKE 5. To observe in his/her professional duties, the moral principles and rules of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”; 6. To pay due regard to, and uphold human dignity and to recognise the right of each individual to judge for himself/herself;

61

7.

To establish the moral, psychological and intellectual conditions for dialogue in its true sense, and to recognise the rights of these parties involved to state their case and express their views; 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 organisation which he/she serves and the interests of the publics concerned; To carry out his/her undertakings and commitments which shall always be so worded as to avoid any misunderstanding, and to show loyalty and integrity in all circumstances so as to keep the confidence or his/her clients or employers, past or present, and all of the publics that are affected by his/her actions;

8.

9.

SHALL REFRAIN FROM 10. Subordinating the truth to other requirements; 11. Circulating information which is established and ascertainable facts; not based on

12. Taking part in any venture or undertaking which is unethical or dishonest or capable of impairing human dignity or integrity; 13. Using any “manipulative” methods or techniques designed to create subconscious motivations which the individual cannot control of his/her own free will and so cannot be held accountable for the action taken on them.

62

Code of Brussels for the conduct of public affairs worldwide Adopted, Brussels 2007 RECALLING the Code of Venice 1961 and the Code of Athens 1965, of the International Public Relations Association, which together specify an undertaking of ethical conduct by public relations practitioners worldwide; RECALLING that the Code of Athens binds public relations practitioners to respect the Charter of the United Nations which reaffirms “its faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person"; RECALLING that the Code of Athens binds public relations practitioners to observe the moral principles and rules of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights"; RECALLING that public affairs is one discipline undertaken by public relations practitioners; RECALLING that the conduct of public affairs provides essential democratic representation to public authorities; This Code of Brussels is a code of ethical conduct applying to public relations practitioners worldwide as they conduct public affairs and interact with public authorities including staff and public representatives. In the conduct of public affairs, practitioners shall: 1. Integrity. Act with honesty and integrity at all times so as to secure the confidence of those with whom the practitioner comes into contact; 2. Transparency. Be open and transparent in declaring their name, organisation and the interest they represent;

63

3. Dialogue. Establish the moral, psychological and intellectual conditions for dialogue, and recognise the rights of all parties involved to state their case and express their views; 4. Accuracy. Take all reasonable steps to ensure the truth and accuracy of all information provided to public authorities; 5. Falsehood. Not intentionally disseminate false or misleading information, and shall exercise proper care to avoid doing so unintentionally and correct any such act promptly; 6. Deception. Not obtain information from public authorities by deceptive or dishonest means; 7. Confidentiality. Honour confidential information provided to them;

8. Influence. Neither propose nor undertake any action which would constitute an improper influence on public authorities; 9. Inducement. Neither directly nor indirectly offer nor give any financial or other inducement to members of public authorities or public representatives; 10. Conflict. Avoid any professional conflicts of interest and to disclose such conflicts to affected parties when they occur; 11. Profit.

64

Not sell for profit to third parties copies of documents obtained from public authorities; 12. Employment. Only employ personnel from public authorities subject to the rules and confidentiality requirements of those authorities.

Sanctions. Practitioners shall co-operate with fellow members in upholding this Code and agree to abide by and help enforce the disciplinary procedures of the International Public Relations Association in regard to any breaching of this Code.

65

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close