Balancing the scales to make ethical decisions

Through the case study exercises in class I learnt that our value systems influenced our decisions more often than not. Applying some theories could help with making ethical decisions. These could either be application of the cognitive theory that looks at right and wrong then making a decision or just adopting codes of ethics outlined by the different bodies. However some argue that making these decisions can be much more complicated.
“One of the most difficult things for practitioners is reconciling the sometimes conflicting loyalties and duties that they have.” [1] They have to assess their duty to themselves, duty to client or organization, duty to profession or duty to society. Additionally, PR practitioners have to also contend with legal implications and being social responsible.
Now the dilemma how do they resolve these conflicts?
Public relation practitioners have to apply aspects of the decision making process that would help them make sound choices.[2] These include external guides such as the law and companies and or industry codes. Another model is Parson (2004:21) which involves five criteria such as veracity (tell the truth), non-malfeasance (do no harm), beneficence (do good), confidentiality (respect privacy) and fairness (to be fair and socially responsible). Whatever the choice of theory, practicing good ethics will only contribute positively to the profession.


[1] Tench, Yeomans. Exploring Public Relations Prentice Hall 2006 pg. 297
[2] Ibid pg.300

PR, Propoganda and Persuasion

For Kevin Moloney in his book Rethinking Public Relations he states that he cannot see PR and propaganda as two separate entities. With this in mind I have to agree that although some people can make a distinction between the two, PR to me is the modern version of propaganda. This is since they have similar elements namely:
They are done systematically
They aim to influence and to gain support
They use media relations
They are meant to be persuasive
However an argument against my theory is by Shirley Harrison which states that “in effect”, propaganda tries to spread the faith and persuade people to believe, perhaps through half truths and distortions. While PR is more done honestly since practitioners generally are guided by ethics. What do you think?


Commentary on DVD War Spin

In commenting on the DVD I think the question to pose is did the US military engage in good media management? The evidence presented shows that at the beginning of the War in Iraqi, the military maintained control to some extent by creating a central command that handled all information. Additionally another strategy used is that key people were chosen to deliver specific messages.
Another way they tried to maintain this control was to shoot their own footage which was then disseminated to journalists. They also made sure to broadcast information between time zones. Images and pictures were very important to transmitting the information worldwide and so the military made sure these were shown in breakfast time.
Notwithstanding this view the journalist thought that the central command unit restricted them and the truth was elusive at times. Since questions asked were often unanswered and it seemed they were told only what the military wanted them to know. Even when allegations were made they were always denied or a ‘spin’ was placed on the subject.