Chapter 5 reaction blog
Ethical Issues
I have to say, when I said I’ll do chapter 5 for our weekly reaction blog, my initial thoughts were “Here we go again.” Public relations and ethics just can’t get enough of each other!
Lundgren and Mcmakin start of the chapter by expressing the difficulties of addressing ethics because this is a rather subjective matter. According to the book,“ethics is a philosophical study with its own language and concepts"(p.73). This is only too true since I myself experienced communication difficulties when I first came to the states. I was taught that it was rude to look at somebody directly in the eyes.“What are you hiding from me?”was the response I got in the states when I avoided direct eye contact.
The book categorizes ethics in three different areas: Social, organizational, and personal ethics. Basically, social ethics is the society's judgment of our behaviors (p.74). It determines how risk is communicated according to“changing societal demands"(p.74). The Sociopolitical Environments Influence addresses how the society views risk and how risk decisions are made. This goes further to explore the changes of public demands on the depth of involvement during a risk decision process. Another ethical issue discussed will be the decision of a risk situation and to whom the risk will be communicated. There are different stages when audience concerns can be factored into risk communication efforts, and those who communicate to the audience must know who they are communicating to and what and how much information is needed to the audience. Table 5-2 in the chapter describes different stages of risk communication and analyzes each advantages/disadvantages of audience concerns during those stages. In most cases, it is better to communicate during the initial stage before rumors build up. It becomes difficult to“justify”the risk as time goes by.
Another issue is the Fairness of the Risk. This was new for me, and I found it very interesting that“environment equity"(p.80)is a variable considered for dealing with risk. It makes perfect sense after the reading that the anger level and hostility elevates when the audience perceives that the risk is dealt unequally among ethnicity. Hurricane Katrina dealt with this issue, and it is still facing beliefs that the crisis had much to do with race and poverty. Consequences of Multiple Meanings and The Issue of Stigma each explain ethical problems when the messages are misunderstood and how stigma can impact communication during risk situations.
Organizational ethics is what I personally think public relations practitioners struggle with the most. First of all, there’s Legitimacy of Representation. This determines who should be the spokesperson and if that spokesperson appropriately represents the risk, and whether “the information represented actually represents the risk” (p. 83). It is important that the selected spokesperson meets the expectations of the audience, but seldom does one representative encompass all aspects of an audience. Designation of Primary Audience is, as it speaks, to determine who is of most importance in risk communication process. Certain factors are considered in this process, but determining who is more or less important during a risk situation seems unethical itself to me. Releasing Information deals with when and how much information should be released during risk communication. Many times, information released during risk situations are confidential, so naturally, the organizations are reluctant to release much of this piece. Audience, on the other hand, want as much as possible and thus rises an ethical issue.
Personal ethics is perhaps the most controversial factor within the areas of ethics. This mainly deals with what you think is right. In other words, if you believe something is ethical, organizational and social levels may not be much of a concern. Using Persuasion describes how risk information is presented and whether this is ethical or not. Persuasion is an intentional communication method to“force an opinion on the audience”(p.89). Whether it is ethical to build a tendency of an issue is debatable, but I personally think persuasion is inevitable during the process of risk communication. Let alone risk situation, persuasion occurs on daily bases, and it is nonsense to automatically reflect persuasion as a manipulative communication method. Every communication process is an exchange of meaning, a method to build shared consensus and develop understandings. This in nature involves the exchange of various thoughts and beliefs, and this is persuasion. The intention of persuasion is what should be more considered, not the happening itself. The Role of the Communicator illustrates what roles“you”should play during the risk situation. This returns to the importance of personal ethics since what you believe will affect what you do during the communication process. When your personal beliefs conflict with what the organizational ethics, an ethical dilemma rises. Whether the organization wants you to cover up risk information, or set you a vague line of ethical codes, it is difficult to act up in contradicting situations.
Is there even a conclusion for ethics, especially in pr? I can’t help but go back to the“subjective morals”dilemma. L&M also note that these are only “few of the ethical issues” communicators of risk situations deal with. Like their advice, do be aware of these issues and additional factors as well. As a closing comment, all I can hope for is “world peace” in order to resolve ethical issues.
I have to say, when I said I’ll do chapter 5 for our weekly reaction blog, my initial thoughts were “Here we go again.” Public relations and ethics just can’t get enough of each other!
Lundgren and Mcmakin start of the chapter by expressing the difficulties of addressing ethics because this is a rather subjective matter. According to the book,“ethics is a philosophical study with its own language and concepts"(p.73). This is only too true since I myself experienced communication difficulties when I first came to the states. I was taught that it was rude to look at somebody directly in the eyes.“What are you hiding from me?”was the response I got in the states when I avoided direct eye contact.
The book categorizes ethics in three different areas: Social, organizational, and personal ethics. Basically, social ethics is the society's judgment of our behaviors (p.74). It determines how risk is communicated according to“changing societal demands"(p.74). The Sociopolitical Environments Influence addresses how the society views risk and how risk decisions are made. This goes further to explore the changes of public demands on the depth of involvement during a risk decision process. Another ethical issue discussed will be the decision of a risk situation and to whom the risk will be communicated. There are different stages when audience concerns can be factored into risk communication efforts, and those who communicate to the audience must know who they are communicating to and what and how much information is needed to the audience. Table 5-2 in the chapter describes different stages of risk communication and analyzes each advantages/disadvantages of audience concerns during those stages. In most cases, it is better to communicate during the initial stage before rumors build up. It becomes difficult to“justify”the risk as time goes by.
Another issue is the Fairness of the Risk. This was new for me, and I found it very interesting that“environment equity"(p.80)is a variable considered for dealing with risk. It makes perfect sense after the reading that the anger level and hostility elevates when the audience perceives that the risk is dealt unequally among ethnicity. Hurricane Katrina dealt with this issue, and it is still facing beliefs that the crisis had much to do with race and poverty. Consequences of Multiple Meanings and The Issue of Stigma each explain ethical problems when the messages are misunderstood and how stigma can impact communication during risk situations.
Organizational ethics is what I personally think public relations practitioners struggle with the most. First of all, there’s Legitimacy of Representation. This determines who should be the spokesperson and if that spokesperson appropriately represents the risk, and whether “the information represented actually represents the risk” (p. 83). It is important that the selected spokesperson meets the expectations of the audience, but seldom does one representative encompass all aspects of an audience. Designation of Primary Audience is, as it speaks, to determine who is of most importance in risk communication process. Certain factors are considered in this process, but determining who is more or less important during a risk situation seems unethical itself to me. Releasing Information deals with when and how much information should be released during risk communication. Many times, information released during risk situations are confidential, so naturally, the organizations are reluctant to release much of this piece. Audience, on the other hand, want as much as possible and thus rises an ethical issue.
Personal ethics is perhaps the most controversial factor within the areas of ethics. This mainly deals with what you think is right. In other words, if you believe something is ethical, organizational and social levels may not be much of a concern. Using Persuasion describes how risk information is presented and whether this is ethical or not. Persuasion is an intentional communication method to“force an opinion on the audience”(p.89). Whether it is ethical to build a tendency of an issue is debatable, but I personally think persuasion is inevitable during the process of risk communication. Let alone risk situation, persuasion occurs on daily bases, and it is nonsense to automatically reflect persuasion as a manipulative communication method. Every communication process is an exchange of meaning, a method to build shared consensus and develop understandings. This in nature involves the exchange of various thoughts and beliefs, and this is persuasion. The intention of persuasion is what should be more considered, not the happening itself. The Role of the Communicator illustrates what roles“you”should play during the risk situation. This returns to the importance of personal ethics since what you believe will affect what you do during the communication process. When your personal beliefs conflict with what the organizational ethics, an ethical dilemma rises. Whether the organization wants you to cover up risk information, or set you a vague line of ethical codes, it is difficult to act up in contradicting situations.
Is there even a conclusion for ethics, especially in pr? I can’t help but go back to the“subjective morals”dilemma. L&M also note that these are only “few of the ethical issues” communicators of risk situations deal with. Like their advice, do be aware of these issues and additional factors as well. As a closing comment, all I can hope for is “world peace” in order to resolve ethical issues.
posted by Min at
1/21/2007 10:17:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home