Like all professions, public relations has codes of ethics that describe behaviors to guide those who practice the profession to differentiate what's right and wrong in how they do that.
A simplistic view, perhaps, but not far off a base description of what ethical behavior in PR should be about but, often, isn't.
So is the route to a more ethical public relations profession one that includes regulation or, at least, certification?
It's more than just an idea, and not a new one either, as my podcasting partner Shel Holtz argued in a powerful post last week, literally a call to action to address counter-ethical behavior by some in the profession.
[...] Using online tools and channels that were unimaginable a mere 25 years ago, anybody calling himself a public relations practitioner can engage in activities and behaviors that shame and belittle the profession. That's our own fault as a profession. We have allowed "public relations" to mean anything anybody wants it to. A recent campaign to define PR doesn't help, since not only is the definition overly broad, there is no mechanism to hold accountable anybody who operates outside the definition. As a result, anybody can say what they do is PR or communications, regardless of how far they stray outside the boundaries of professional or ethical practices.
In his post, Shel holds up as an example of what he calls "jaw-dropping abuses" the way in which one individual, self-proclaimed "media manipulator" Ryan Holiday, candidly describes his approach to PR, quoting from an interview Holiday gave to the Mixergy podcast.
Holiday, whose day job is director of marketing at American Apparel - and who's also a Huffington Post blogger in the U.S. -- is the author of Trust Me, I'm Lying, a so-called expose book published in the US last month that some have called "a primer on how to hack the media zeitgeist."
Shel argues in his post that if you're looking for behaviors that aren't in the codes of ethics from professional bodies such as the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) or the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) -- or the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) in the UK, for that matter -- look no further than this book.
I haven't read the book but the excerpts referencing it in the Mixergy interview that appear in Shel's post are damning enough to illustrate Holiday's contempt for such things as codes of ethics by professional bodies.
To bundle some metaphors together, Holiday may well be the straw that breaks the camel's back for Shel, yet he's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to unethical PR practice down the years.
Think of astroturfing half a decade and more ago (and which never went away). More recently, look at the Bell Pottinger political lobbying scandal in the UK last year. And, bang up to date, look at the fake Shell Oil "PR" stunt earlier this year.
Isn't all that a strong reinforcement, then, for Shel's call to action? For regulation, or at least, certification?
Or maybe it's indicative of behavior shifts in society that require a re-think on what "ethical behavior" in practicing PR means, leading to rewriting the rules of the game?
I think the latter has more chance of happening than regulation or certification. That's not to say for one minute that this suggests practices like Holiday's (which to my eye look like nothing more than a fancy way of describing the end justifies the means, and cunning self-promotion for a book) are okay. They're not, far from it, in my view.
Yet Shel's argument is highly compelling and must also be addressed. But, I don't think regulation or certification is the way, certainly not yet -- to me it seems a last resort, when all else has failed, never mind the legal, diplomatic and logistical hurdles to jump if this is seriously about taking it on for the profession as a whole as opposed to a branch of the profession in one particular country, e.g., the USA.
It seems to me that this is the moment for professional associations such as those I mentioned earlier to be handed the golden opportunity to put their money where their mouths are, so to speak. Give this a chance! Maybe a last chance for the associations to voluntarily put their member-houses in order as far as ethical behaviors are concerned.
Associations should take their existing codes of ethics and practices, and give them enforcement power -- teeth! -- and credibility to weed out those members of their associations who don't abide by those codes.
How difficult can it really be to address this and draw a line? Let's get started.
Follow Neville Hobson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jangles
Your suggestion that “Associations should take their existing codes of ethics and practices, and give them enforcement power -- teeth!” is well taken. PRSA tried for more than 50 years to enforce its Code of Ethics. Sadly, the effort was vexed by a lack of cooperation; enormous legal and investigative expenses; significant investments of time, money and resources for investigating alleged violations; and a slow but steadily growing realization that the meager results of the effort in relation to the time and resources required, failed to provide a valuable return on investment for PRSA, its members or the broader profession.
Simply put, to have punitive power, PRSA must have additional authority conferred on the Society by a government agency, legislative body or judicial decision, instruction or opinion. Then, to carry out said authority would require massive infusions of human and capital resources. Just look at the resources the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has at its disposal to ensure that advertising is truthful and not deceptive.
PRSA agrees that the public relations industry is being marred by the unethical actions of some of those in the profession. For this reason, PRSA places a tremendous focus on communicating the value of ethics, advocating for ethical conduct on the part of the profession’s practitioners and offering vigorous professional development and education programs centered on ethical communications.
Thanks for the opportunity to weigh in.
Best regards,
Gerard Francis Corbett, APR, Fellow PRSA
Chair and CEO, Public Relations Society of America
No one said that addressing this huge issue would be easy, that's for sure! The history you recount regarding lack of cooperation, etc, isn't a surprise. This issue is a big one, with many different aspects leading to different perspectives and opinion by many people on what to do, if anything.
So writing a post about it as I've done is the easiest part of all.
I do accept that there are big hurdles that stand in the way of progress such as all the ones you mention. And I also realize that it's hardly a new topic nor are these new suggestions on addressing it.
I do believe that professional associations like the PRSA are in the best-placed position to kick-start a genuine discussion on this matter, one that would lead to a commitment to taking action. The action may well mean attempting to surmount those obstacles that lie in the road.
You have a code of ethics that, among other things, fulfills an oversight role on the behaviours of members, albeit passively. Perhaps re-examining the current code to see if it really is still wholly relevant in a contemporary profession (and society) would be the best start.
Unfortunately, for decades the professional organizations of PR and communications have shied away from any call for certification, preferring to manage their own accreditation programs instead, and promoting relatively toothless ethics codes that have no consequences for bad behavior.
The result is that the public assumes the role of public relations is lying, cheating, and all sorts of other gross distortions and caricatures based on this small minority of bad actors.
Have you ever seen a PR person portrayed on TV in a positive light or are they usually helping the crooked executive hide bad news?
What about the PR people from the American Red Cross who work nonstop during disasters to get information to the media and the public about relief efforts that save lives? Or the professional communicators in our military who also risk their lives in war zones to make sure that our public is informed about the real risks our soldiers, sailors and airmen face on the battlefields?
It's time for PRSA and IABC to create a formal certification program that requires people to demonstrate competence and ethics before they can call themselves PR counselors.
And what are ethics? PR is a broad church - what an organisation like the WWF might find unacceptable, a perfectly legal organisation like Shell might find normal. Photoshopping of images is abhorrent to many, but the fashion industry finds it essential. By the time the code was developed, it could be outdated and facing a new tranche of previously unimaginable ethical issues as the media and regulatory environment continues to shift.
How we see ourselves as PR people and how the public sees us are poles apart. Take the most basic PR principle - honesty. At what point does not washing your dirty linen in public become a cover up?
Furthermore, in recent debates on specific ethical engagement issues, I witnessed first hand the lack of empathy with ethical organisations displayed by some corporate representatives. Anything that these more 'powerful' industry reps might dictate as a minimum acceptable ethical standard might be so minimally ethical as to reinforce the already pitiful reputation of our industry. I wouldn't want many of their 'ethics' presented as mine.
Whilst I'm all for ethics I suspect it would be a Pandora's box into which lots of emotion and money could be thrown to no good
That doesn't make it honest or ethical, that makes it advertising and not PR. A larger question of self-esteem of women and body image has been raised by (how shocking!) an award-winning public relations campaign from Dove, questioning that whole canard about the ideal body image for women. Why do you so glibly accept this manipulation of the public because it's the fashion industry?
But evidently there are those in the PR profession and media who do consider it not only ethical, but abhorrent not to 'fix' images of women.
I would love to see a big ethical debate, but to be honest, anything the bodies come up with as a 'catch all' code could end up being so watered down and at the lowest common denominator level as to be pointless, and completely unrepresentative of those of us that do try and take a moral high ground. I would absolutely love to be proved wrong on this, and would even reconsider renewing my membership if one of the 'governing bodies' took a stand on the matter.
The trouble is that Dove does rather well from being different. So it too, despite appearances, has a vested interest in the status quo. (I'm not suggesting that this is conscious in their case, of course - more power to them for what they do).
Tell you what, why don't we join forces and try and make a code happen? I'd happily put some energy into it! We could wait forever for the professional bodies....
Otherwise, if we don't take a stand, then we will have betrayed the fundamental principle of honesty, probably other principles too. I think it matters, hugely.
Why not try and start the change on whatever issues you feel are most important? You have enough personal influence to start a change in motion, I'd have thought.
(What, incidentally, would the most important ethical issue be in your eyes?)