I spoke to a friend of mine who practises celebrity PR in Mumbai and asked him what was his personal opinion about this.
"I come from a journalistic background, a place where ethics have ruled over the decades. So while I manipulate as a PR, I also let my conscience do the talking. It keeps me far away from attempting the unethical." -Dale Bhagwagar, PR guru .
This made me think that who monitors those who always ignore the faint voice of their conscience ? Can ethics be taught or imposed on PR's who personally favour profit and power more than ethics ?
If there had to be only one question haunting public relations , it would be ethics. Ethics is a word which falls of tongues very easily these days , yet many people who use it have not taken the time to consider it's true meaning. Philosophers define ethics as a study of moral rightness or wrongness , which is limited by human ability to reason. I believe that ethics are intangible assets , an extension of one's psyche and are formed on the basis of one's own morals.
Great power comes with great responsibility. But the power of Public Relations comes with even greater responsibilities. In their book, Public Relations Ethics, Philip Seib and Kathy Fitzpatrick talked about five duties of public relations professionals.In other words , the five masters which an ethical PR professional must serve - self, client, employer, profession and society.But , sometimes there is one situation in which it seems that telling the whole truth is not the most ethical course of action . If telling the truth outright is likely to harm one or more publics , then it seems that it is probably more ethical to avoid that disclosure.After all , one of the few principles of ethics in any situation is to do no harm. Often, however a judgement call is required here and it is the application of such judgement that calls into question of ethics of the decision maker. In such a case would the cognivitist theory that there is always one right decision to make hold true ? Or is it the cultural relativism theory where in moral truths are subjective , dynamic , changing and constructed by society ?
The question is still unanswered and the topic remains debatable as ever. I would rather believe that there is no right or wrong. They are just courageous decisions. And such decisions after taking which you should be able to sleep peacefully at night. >
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |
Posts
