Ethical Practice as Industry Standard

Most industries develop a set of ethical codes, imperatives for members and owners. Codes form common ground for what can be perceived as acceptable conduct. Codes should not be confused with minimum standards, as they usually express visions that member organizations are expected to live up to.

Responsible conduct by organizations includes assuming ethical responsibility not only for one’s own actions, but for those of peers, colleagues, and competitors in the public relations community. An organization may be affected by disloyalty or ethical misconduct by one of its employees. That may affect competitors, bringing the industry into discredit. The notion that certain public relations conduct is perceived to be in a morally gray area could embarrass competitors and peers.

Conversely, the industry as a whole gains when practitioners earn and deserve praise. A favorable reputation is usually accrued slowly. It may, however, easily be ruined by misconduct. If the public perception is that there are rotten apples in an industry, the industry’s legitimacy may be tarnished. Social trust, an industry cornerstone, may well be compromised. This may be the consequence if the free exchange of opinions and ideas is suppressed, or when communicators consciously attempt to mislead stakeholders or the general public.

Unethical and Ethical Practices on the Global Stage

Some nations have skeletons in their closets. They thus provide examples of the low hanging fruits of questionable public relations. Despite its close association with Germany and the overwhelming welcome the Austrians gave Nazi troops in March of 1938, Austria declared itself a victim of Nazism, a position supported by the Soviet Union, one of its postwar occupiers. A high and disproportionate number of Austrians played vital roles in the realization of Hitler’s expansionist politics, as well as in the extermination of European Jewry. The global community long turned a blind eye to embarrassing parts of the country’s history. Victim theory, Opferthese (Hammerstein, 2008), was a fundamental part of Austria’s postwar history.

All that changed in 1986, when Austrians elected the former Waffen‐SS officer Kurt Waldheim as its president. Waldheim had risen to the rank of Oberleutnant, lieutenant, stationed in Yugoslavia and Greece during World War II. Despite Waldheim denying any knowledge of Nazi atrocities, it was documented by NGOs that, while in Greece, he had been stationed in the outskirts of the city of Thessaloniki during 1943 when the city’s 54,000 Jews were deported to Auschwitz concentration camp. The British newspaper The Guardian wrote in its obituary on Waldheim:

Waldheim's offence was to lie, and when exposed for lying, to persist – even as the truth about his war service emerged piecemeal. First, he said he was not there, and then that he was there but had never known what was going on. Finally, he said he could not understand what all the fuss was about. The contrast with his German presidential contemporary, Richard von Weizsäcker, who took full responsibility and apologised for his own wartime service as a military intelligence officer, could not have been greater.

(van der Vat, 2007)

During Waldheim’s tenure as president, the country’s global reputation was damaged. Austria became an international pariah. President Waldheim and his wife were officially declared persona non grata in the United States and several other countries, an unprecedented humiliation for a head of state of a presumed friendly nation (van der Vat, 2007). Austria has also earned a reputation for being a haven for extreme right‐wing politics and politicians. A common joke about Austria was: “Question: Who is the world’s best spin doctor? Answer: Austria: It has managed to convince the world that Hitler was German, and that Beethoven was Austrian.”

There are many examples of poor judgment, and practices that are perceived as being of a poor ethical standard. This author’s birth nation and home, Norway, demonstrates stubborn insensitivity to global protests against its whaling industry, which damages the nation’s reputation and embarrasses many Norwegians. Some Spanish cities and regions have a love for bullfights – regarded by many to be a shocking ordeal – and this is highly controversial. World protests against animal suffering in religious rituals, such as throwing live goats from church towers in Zamora, made local authorities outlaw such practices, as did the highly influential region of Catalonia with its bullfights. Mexico’s de facto, even if undeclared, war between drug cartels and the country’s military forces is a disastrous blow to the nation’s reputation. When Copenhagen’s zoo found that it had too little space for its many giraffes, local preschool students were invited to witness the slaughtering of Marius, an adolescent bull. The well‐documented mutilation of Marius, with wide‐eyed kids as bystanders, witnessing the bloody spectacle, was a public relations disaster, not only for Copenhagen Zoo, but for the city, and the country.

On the other hand, many corporations are well aware that they have a lot to lose. A textbook example of ethical behavior, albeit back in 1982, happened shortly after the “Tylenol murders.” The pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson’s flagship brand of paracetamol, Tylenol, enjoyed a US market share of circa 35%. In several drug stores in the Chicago metropolitan area, containers of Tylenol were tampered with and contaminated with cyanide, a poisonous, lethal chemical. Seven people died after taking contaminated Tylenol. Within a few days, 31 million bottles of Tylenol were pulled from shelves in all markets. After its return to shelves, Tylenol’s market share dropped to 7%. Despite a huge financial loss, Tylenol, as well as Johnson & Johnson, seemed to consolidate their already rock‐solid reputation. The incident seems to have changed the consumer product industry. On‐the‐shelf medical containers are now marketed in tamper‐free, sealed containers. The owner company, as well as the brand, came out of the crisis relatively well. Tylenol has never regained its former market position, losing shelf space to competitors. However, the Johnson & Johnson corporate reputation seems to be intact.

In politics, the current German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has an exceptionally good image in her party, in her country, in Europe, and on the world stage. Lovingly nicknamed Mutti, Mummy, Merkel has been affably parodied on Saturday Night Live, by Kate McKinnon, and by Tracey Ullmann. The Merkel brand strength is usually perceived as the Merkel personal image, not party strategy or tactic.

Travel Industry Incidents

In the corporate world, amateur footage in 2017 shows Dr. David Dao screaming and bleeding while being dragged off a United Airlines flight at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. The flight, United’s last one to Louisville, Kentucky that night, had been overbooked. The crew had not succeeded in persuading customers to voluntarily trade their seats for flight coupons, to make room for airline crew needed for service at Louisville the following morning. Flight management subsequently called airport police, who commanded Dr. Dao to leave. Refusing to do so, Dr. Dao was forcibly removed from the plane. The CEO of United Airlines, Oscar Munoz, issued a statement commending the flight crew, and labeling Dr. Dao belligerent and disruptive.

Some of Dr. Dao’s fellow passengers documented crew and a United manager unsuccessfully negotiating with Dr. Dao, threatening him, and finally calling for airport security officers, who then forcibly removed him. Dr. Dao suffered injuries to his head and mouth when an officer threw him against an armrest.

Even prior to takeoff, smartphone videos went viral in social media. One of the videos was shared 87,000 times and viewed 7.6 million times within 24 hours of the incident. It was reported that the family origins of 69‐year‐old Dr. Dao were Chinese/Vietnamese, and some videos were spread to, shared, and viewed by millions in Chinese networks, stirring up questions about how United would treat passengers on their routes from China to the United States.

The United Express Flight 3411 incident opened floodgates for disgruntled airline passengers. Hundreds of incidents were uploaded on YouTube and shared on Facebook to document cabin crews’ poor behavior. Websites like TripAdvisor enable passengers to subjectively tell their stories about airline employees misrepresenting their company. Video images objectively show, so publics may interpret images for themselves.

Talk‐show hosts had field days, with dozens of spoofs on the United slogan “Fly the friendly skies.” One news media cartoonist suggested that United passengers, for a mere $50, could “purchase an upgrade to not be beaten unconscious in an overbooking re‐accommodation situation” (Beeler, 2017). CEO Munoz added insult to injury in releasing the following statement: “This is an upsetting event to us all at United. I apologize for having to re‐accommodate these customers” (McCann, 2017). Myriads of new connotations of re‐accommodate emerged.

Mr. Munoz was soon forced to apologize. Dr. Dao was paid off with an undisclosed amount. United stock did not seem to suffer; however, influential investors like Warren Buffett criticized United, as did politicians, calling it horrible.

The United Express Flight 3411 incident not only embarrassed the flight crew in question, but the airline, the airport security staff, and the industry. Among the obvious and relevant questions asked were:

• Are routines pertaining to airlines’ overbooking flights good enough?
• Do flight coupons suffice as incentives for passengers to give up their seats?
• Do they think that offering coupons that do not cost the airlines a penny will iron out any problem?

More critical questions may be lurking in the public’s mind, questioning the aviation industry’s policies toward the travelling public, its relations with paying customers, and its raison d’être:

• Do airlines care about their customers?
• Where is their moral responsibility?
• Are the perspectives of airline chief executive officers and chief financial officers just based on the next quarterly report, so that they may claim their bonuses?
• Would this have happened to a Caucasian, middle‐aged person?
• Is there racism, or at least, an insensitivity to minority issues?

While crew aboard one of his cruise ships was trying to put out an engine room fire and thousands of passengers endured another day on the Carnival Triumph with no power, little water, and very little food, the owner of Carnival Cruise Lines, Micky Arison, attended a professional basketball game in which his Miami Heat team played the Portland Trail Blazers: “Boss of Carnival cruise ship adds insult to misery by going to basketball game as 4,000 suffer aboard ‘stinking stricken ship’ with urine‐soaked carpets and sewage in cabins” (Durante, Malm, & Boyle, 2013). Cruise travelers, active in social media, reminded Mr. Arison of the Carnival‐owned Costa Concordia disaster the previous year; 32 people lost their lives when the ship’s captain, in an apparent attempt to impress a female companion, sailed too close to the shores of the Tuscan island of Giglio, ran aground and sank. Media coverage was overwhelming. Negative publicity could hardly get worse, with more than 426,000 Google hits on the Costa Concordia disaster.

The Carnival group’s board of directors wrote in their quarterly report on February 28, 2013: “Management believes the ultimate outcome of these claims and lawsuits will not have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements.” Micky Arison was quoted by The Guardian saying that “it will take up to three years to recover the company’s reputation and profitability [after the Costa Concordia shipwreck]” (Porritt & Jones 2013). As of 2019, seven years after the shipwreck, Costa cruises were still suffering, with travel professionals announcing huge discounts on all Costa Cruises.

Spin Doctors

Public relations and communications industries are commonly accused of serving special interest groups, effectively the rich and the powerful. It is argued that influential elites may buy professional services to a much greater degree than private citizens. That is, of course, correct, although not much different than in other sectors of society. Corporate and personal wealth, and political influence, are commodities that are unevenly distributed in society. In what may be efforts to defuse criticism, the public relations communities in Europe often equate and compare their industry with legal counsel, which by all norms is a legitimate industry in the private and public spheres.

It is also claimed that public relations practitioners, more specifically in the sector of public affairs, operate as spin doctors. Spin doctors present one‐sided news on organizations and individuals to the public, and are sometimes accused of concealing facts and inconvenient truths. The impression of the public relations professional as a cynical, overpaid employee with credibility issues sticks in the public mind. Politicians are often accused of recruiting spin doctors to explain away dubious behavior or oversell good stories.

Spin doctors usually operate tactically, not strategically, as witnessed in press conferences and news media. The daily White House press briefing in the United States, to mention one such platform, is a forum for giving praise, stretching observations, and explaining how policies and tweets should be interpreted. Former press secretary Sean Spicer, and his successor (from September 2017) Sarah Huckabee Sanders, have often circumvented reporters’ questions to present presidential views favorably. Counsellor to the US president, Kellyanne Conway, coined the term alternative facts. In an effort to defend Sean Spicer’s statement about attendance numbers at President Trump’s inauguration, she used the term to describe demonstrable falsehood (NBC News, 2017).

Literary Review and Theoretical Underpinning

Leeper (1996) argues that while increasing attention is being paid by people in public relations to ethical theory, the predominant ethical perspective in the field is situational, not normative. The reasons for that, he claims, could be the loss of the societal grounds for moral objectivity: tradition, religion, and universal reason. However, a situational perspective fails to provide a common and universal ethical code of conduct in the field of public relations:

The problem with the situational approach is that “from a logical viewpoint, any fact can be used to justify any action, and any principle is moral. The only constraint is that an individual must be able to live with an action‐at least for the short term.” After acknowledging this subjectivist perspective and the problems inherent in it, Pratt [1991, p. 146] suggests that public relations needs to develop ongoing, dialogical, two‐way symmetrical public relations.

(Leeper, 1996, p. 134; internal quote from Ryan & Martinson, 1984, p. 27)

Leeper claims that a two‐way symmetrical public relations model, as argued by Grunig and Hunt (1984), is consistent with coorientation theory (McLeod & Chaffee, 1973), which “suggests methods for measuring the degree of mutual orientation of individuals, groups or organizations toward an object, or the consensus among them about an object – for example, a value system such as ethics” (Leeper, 1996, p. 134). He argues that terms and phrases used to describe two‐way symmetric, as well as coorientation models, include “theories of communication rather than theories of persuasion”; “mutual understanding”; “dialogue [rather] than a monologue”; and “both management and publics will change somewhat.” Leeper, as well as Grunig and Hunt (1984) and L. A. Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier (2002), lean on Habermas (1990), whose “approach is dialogical, two‐way symmetrical, and cooriented” (Leeper, 1996, p. 134).

This chapter builds on Leeper’s tradition of analyzing and seeing ethics as situational. It furthermore accepts and acknowledges two‐way symmetric and coorientation approaches as preferred methods for ethical strategic communication, and thus ethical public relations.

Freedom of Expression

A fundamental prerequisite for exchange of opinions, for truth, for strategic communication, and for practicing public relations, is freedom of expression. The global body of the United Nations, and its Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 establishes and protects freedom of expression. The UN can, however, do little about regimes and nations that do not adhere to the declaration. It might also lack credibility since states in the UN Human Rights Council, which oversees such issues, include Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Qatar, China, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (as of 2019), none of which can be said to be torches of freedom and human rights.

Most nations in Western Europe have signed the European Convention on Human Rights (dating from 1950), which protects freedom of expression both legally and politically. The US First Amendment defining freedoms under the constitution and adopted in 1791 has inspired legislators all over the world, and, in many ways, still serves as an inspirational national credo. Freedom of expression is written into the constitutions of most Western democracies, such as that of the author’s native Norway (adopted in 1814).

John Stuart Mill remarked that freedom of the press is a prerequisite for truth, and truth is a prerequisite for democracy. He argued that “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind” (Mill, 1859, p. 33).

While free speech’s legal and political base largely remains unchallenged in Western democracy, there are some areas where legislatures and judicial systems target controversial expressions, in efforts to achieve the greatest possible good for as many people as possible, in accordance with teleological ethics. One such controversy occurred in 2005–2006, after the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands‐Posten had published cartoons of images of Muhammad, the prophet and founder of Islam. Some politicians and diplomats panicked and to some extent apologized for freedom of expression in Europe. In 2015, the world was shaken by attacks on Charlie Hebdo, a Paris‐based satirical weekly. Political reactions were then more mature than in 2006: leaders from most European nations marched side by side in Paris, demonstrating that freedom of expression was an unquestionable right. Racist speech or slur is a criminal risk zone in many jurisdictions, while criticism of religion is a cornerstone of the idea of free speech. The dividing line between racial slur and legitimate criticism was questioned in the 2005–2006 and 2015 cases.

Some jurisdictions ban certain advertising, i.e. targeting minors during certain hours. The marketing of hand weapons, illegal drugs, and alcohol and tobacco products is generally outlawed, and usually not considered to be a case of limiting freedom of expression.

Legislators may regulate the media and other industries structurally, in terms of financial and organizational laws, but, in Western society, rarely media content. Russian privately owned media are expected to support the incumbent regime; if not, they may be shut down. One‐party states, such as China, Cuba, North Korea, and many developing countries, give few or no publishing opportunities to oppositional views.

In societies with weak civil sectors, members of minorities may find themselves at risk of political suppression, and subjected to social control and cultural biases. Sàmi people in Northern Scandinavia, descendants of African slaves in the Americas, members of LGBTQ communities, religious minorities, and millions of women share a history and experience regarding lack of freedom of speech. Cheryl Glenn (2004) has written on unspoken and unheard voices, especially on minority and gender issues, and about the role and uncertainty of living at other people’s mercy.

Normative Ethical Theory

Teleology, derived from the Greek terms telos alludes to end or consequence, and logos, in this context, to the study of words or communication. The term is therefore used to describe usefulness of actions toward the happiness the public relations procedures will create. Here, the outcome, or consequence of the action or the communication practice, will be the most important perspective when judging whether or not the relevant conduct is ethically acceptable. For a summary of this and other theories used in ethics, see Table 5.1.

The moral philosophy of John Stuart Mill is based on the principle that humans should strive for happiness as an outcome when planning a certain practice. Mill ranks happiness that is a consequence of actions in the categories high and low, on a continuum, not a dichotomous scale. A high level of intelligence, mental happiness, and health are examples of high‐grade happiness. For low‐grade happiness, Mill adds ignorance, stupidity, selfishness, laziness, and physical pleasure. Mill’s moral philosophy, utilitarianism, usually ranks friendship, loyalty, and justice high in the high end category.

Mill also remarks that the birthright to free expression is a prerequisite for truth, and truth is a prerequisite for democracy. Mill’s grounds of freedom of expression are arguments for liberal Western democracy. The US First Amendment (1791) precedes Mill (1806–1873); it is a document developed to realize the spirit of the Age of Enlightenment.

Deontology, from deontos, Greek for duty, points to the human duty to respect the rights of others and to treat others according to those rights. Supporters of deontological ethics assess conduct according to the conduct itself, not according to the happiness that is the outcome of the conduct. Attitudes and perceptions about what is ethical, and what is unethical, therefore vary with community standards.

Levinas’s Ethical Imperative

Emmanuel Levinas discusses ethical issues of encounters between the “I” and the “Other” (Levinas, 1969). Such encounters place a burden of ethical conduct on the “I,” who cannot escape an assumed responsibility for the Other. A responsible person, or institution, cannot act indifferently when encountering the Other, or the Others. Levinas did not merely discuss live or physical encounters. His philosophy is applicable in the abstract; in mediated and virtual settings. Images of suffering brought to us by mass media or online might define such encounters with the Other. Levinas’s moral philosophy places a universal moral responsibility on humans that they cannot outrun. The “I” cannot not assume responsibility for the suffering and must do as much as possible to alleviate it.

A logical consequence of adapting Levinas’s moral philosophy is that it is ethically indefensible to inflict any form of suffering. The infliction may be symbolic, like a picture uploaded in a media channel, a taunt in a text message, or an intimate video posted on social media channels.

Levinas's ethical imperatives for people in modern society are indeed extensive. Victims of natural disasters and hunger, the unemployed and poor are no longer faceless masses. Their images show up on billions of screens globally. From time to time, the world mobilizes when disaster strikes. Then again, the magnitude of knowledge of world suffering may overwhelm private citizens and leave them indifferent.

Levinas was a twentieth‐century European, of Lithuanian Jewish origins and naturalized French. He was captured by the Nazis and his Lithuanian family was murdered in the Holocaust, an unspoken brutality and human degradation for which there are no words. Members of ethnic, sexual, and religious minorities may be perceived as representing a deviation from an imaginary social norm. As such, minorities may be subjected to notions of powerlessness, being in someone else's power, having their very existence subjected to the approval of the majority.

Levinas’s philosophy is often discussed in contemporary Europe, for instance on migration issues. Despite its recent past, Europe demonstrates a general lack of pity for Asian and African migrants, thousands of whom drown in the Mediterranean before reaching hostile European shores. Contrary to the generosity shown during the post–World War II period, when Europeans opened their homes to unfortunate relatives trapped on the wrong side of new borders, there is a notion that Europe is full; don’t come here.

Norms related to the Other can be interpreted as expressions of a universal, self‐centered meta‐norm: “Do not do unto others what you do not want them to do unto you.” The norm is applicable to almost any imaginable situation where people must decide whether to do something that may have consequences for others. We can also imagine a proactive meta‐norm with a more assertive imperative: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

While the focal point of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity is on the individual, as member of a community, the philosophical foundation of Buddhism, Confucianism, teaches that communities rank above individuals. Collective views are prominent in other Eastern religions, such as Shintoism and Hinduism. It must be said that the essence of meta‐norms will be recognized as a central ethical principle for a large number of people, almost regardless of religious or value justification.

Truth as an Ethical Requirement

Most people know media content or expressions to be true or false, accurate or inaccurate. It is important to know what “truth” is, to be able to detect deviation from truth. Ethical behavior and ethical expressions depend on truth as a prerequisite, meaning that public relations practitioners and strategists must have access to truthful information in order to make good choices. It is therefore important to be able to separate true from false.

The definition by Aristotle (b. 340 BCE) of falsehood and truth is objective: “To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true” (Metaphysics 1011b25). If you claim that white snow is not white, you lie. Claiming that grass is green will, in many instances, be true. Separating truths from lies can be readily appreciated in trivial contexts, as in the color example. To think, that is, to hold something to be true, must sometimes be accepted. Laws and legal systems also take into account the qualifying element of expressing something in good faith.

However, there must be an ethical imperative that practitioners within the field of strategic communication and public relations must seek truth by checking facts and arguments presented as facts, checking sources, and comprehending research. If not, the consequences of non‐truth or false claims can be passed on to others.

Post‐truth?

In her essay “Covering politics in a ‘post‐truth’ America,” Glasser (2016) discusses new aspects of truth in contemporary discourse and uses the modern term “post‐truth.”

The distinguished Oxford Dictionaries chose the adjective “post‐truth” as the 2016 word of the year. Remarking on this, cultural commentator Neil Midgley wrote that the term, although not new, got its spin during the campaigns leading up to the 2016 British referendum on continued membership of the European Union and in the 2016 American election campaign. Oxford Dictionaries (2016) defines the term post‐truth as “related to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” What publics like to hear, or wish to be true, is more important to public opinion formation than opinion formation based on objective, observable reality. Before the June 2016 vote on Britain’s continued membership of the European Union, rumor had it, and management of the Leave campaign stated, that a Brexit would release 350 million pounds each week, funds that could be channeled into the National Health Service, the British underfinanced public health system. If Remain won, it was said in the same breath, poor migrants from Central and Eastern Europe would flood the island kingdom in hordes of biblical proportions. Both claims were at best half‐truths. They were, however, effective in the sense that they may have mobilized voter segments that were uncomfortable with abstract arguments on European values and shared culture, and historical references.

Donald Trump's campaign was, according to the New York Times, Washington Post, and a majority of the community of analysts and observers, a near endless series of post‐truth claims. Voters flocked around emotional slogans like “Make America great again,” or “Lock her up,” aimed at Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton, and “Build that wall.” Trump supporter and CNN commentator Jeffrey Lord said fact‐checking is just another “out of touch, elitist media‐type thing,” i.e. elements of and qualities of media presentations in discourse alien to common people.

Industry Associations’ Codes of Ethics

In this last section of this chapter, the need for a a global code of ethics will be discussed as a topic needing to be further addressed by public relations theorists working with ethics and ethical practice.

Codes of ethical conduct are usually general, developed by and for public relations consultants and their clients. Industry associations usually take on the task of developing ethical guidelines for use within professional communities in order to establish common grounds. Guidelines are usually a set of self‐imposed restrictions that members are expected to adhere to. Working in public relations requires neither certification nor authorization. It attracts candidates from a wide variety of backgrounds: academics from advertising and the humanities, journalism and law, to mention some. Given the industry’s diversity, the aim is to establish sets of broad ground rules for its members.

In Western Europe and North America, ethical guidelines for public relations focus on abstract key attitudes to meet client and community standards embedded in industry practice: they usually include codes of integrity and confidentiality, as well as requiring practitioners to possess relevant, adequate aptitudes and skills. Industry associations pledge to raise awareness in their membership about such issues.

The Global Alliance (GA) for Public Relations and Communication Management, a confederation of major public relations and communication management associations and institutions, represents 160,000 practitioners and academics around the world. In the preamble to its section on codes of ethics, GA stated that ethical awareness and ethical thinking are at the very core of its mission to raise professional standards (Global Alliance PR, 2016). Practitioners must possess, acknowledge, and adhere to those standards:

• mastery of a particular intellectual skill through education and training;
• acceptance of duties to a broader society than merely one’s clients/employers;
• objectivity;
• high standards of conduct and performance.

GA values are, in the words of the association on its website, “the fundamental value and dignity of the individual free exercise of human rights, especially freedom of speech, assembly, media, essential to the practice of good public relations.” Hence, its goal is to work for “better communication, understanding, and cooperation among diverse individuals, groups, and institutions of society,” principles that could be written into the United Nations or the European human rights declarations. The GA key values are concretized into members obliging to conduct themselves professionally, with integrity, truth, accuracy, fairness, and responsibility with client publics, as well as with an informed society.

The following from the GA website in 2016 provides further elaboration of the organization’s perception and practice of ethics in meeting clients, clients’ clients, and society:

• Advocacy: to serve client and employer interests by acting as responsible advocates and by providing a voice in the marketplace of ideas, facts, and viewpoints to aid informed public debate.
• Honesty: to adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth in advancing the interests of clients and employers …
• Integrity: … to conduct business with integrity and observe the principles and spirit of the Code in such a way that [our] reputation and that of [our] employer and the public relations profession in general is protected.
• Expertise: … to encourage members to acquire and responsibly use specialized knowledge and experience to build understanding and client/employer credibility. Furthermore, … actively promote and advance the profession through continued professional development, research, and education.
• Loyalty: … to insist that members are faithful to those they represent, while honoring their obligations to serve the interests of society and support the right of free expression.

The values do not essentially differ from ethical codes of other groups of professionals, such as lawyers, auditors, teachers, and journalists. Local PR ethics codes often stress that “integrity” also means that public relations practitioners should under no circumstances solicit third parties for personal and private advantage.

Many of the provisions have roots in Mill’s ethics of consequence. A staff member should be able to identify different scenarios that may arise as a consequence of the action planned. Relevant and foreseeable consequences should be taken into consideration when developing public relations strategies for clients.

The GA code went on to specify concrete skills and mindsets:

• Acknowledge that there is an obligation to protect and enhance the profession.
• Keep informed and educated about practices in the profession that ensure ethical conduct.
• Actively pursue personal professional development.
• Accurately define what public relations activities can and cannot accomplish.
• Counsel its individual members in proper ethical decision‐making generally and on a case‐specific basis.
• Require that individual members observe the ethical recommendations and behavioral requirements of the code.

Individuals, organizations, NGOs, or corporations that solicit and buy services from public relations practitioners should be able to take it for granted that providers of such services are aware of ethical standards to optimally serve the customer. In the practical world, clients must be able to trust that public relations practitioners, like other businesses, have their customers' best interests at heart. Practitioners must not invoice for services not rendered or overbill clients. Professional ethics must be understood in light of the society in which they are exercised and the moral and ethical codes and values that form the norms of that particular society.

A major concern in all economic and organizational activities is the reciprocal requirement of confidence, a requirement crucial to all provider/customer relations to varying degrees, inspired by the universal, self‐centered meta‐norm. Someone who buys a ticket to see a movie expects the theatre staff to do their best to deliver the appropriate product. A butcher should be able to look his customer in the eye after the meat that he sold has been consumed. A person who consults a doctor must be able to trust that the doctor wants to do her best. Similar requirements apply to the field of public relations. A client should never have to doubt that the provider has the relevant ethical awareness.

The burden of professional responsibility needed to establish and maintain this confidence lies with the supplier. In a value chain, the supplier must establish a good working environment and secure mutual trust throughout the relationship. It may be too big a task for an unexperienced customer to get an overview of the number and competencies of public relations market actors, let alone to assess representatives’ academic and professional excellence. Even the most diligent customer will probably not check diplomas, transcripts, and references from previous employers.

Client/professional initial trust is therefore based on assumptions: The client must be willing to bear the risk by handing over all or part of their communication and public relations activities to people they assume will handle them well. The assumptions may be founded on their own or others' experiences and the capacity the customer thinks they have to comprehend and understand the qualities of the public relations practitioners after only a short, maybe superficial encounter.

Nevertheless, customers may have exaggerated expectations of the results the provider can produce. Even the best public relations strategy plan has its limitations.

The Case of Volkswagen 2015

When a research team at the University of West Virginia tested emissions from two random Volkswagen (VW) diesel cars in 2015, results showed that emissions were far higher than in Volkswagen’s laboratory tests, reports of which were used in the auto manufacturer’s marketing strategies. The university researchers worked on behalf of the ICCT, the International Council on Clean Transportation, which had conducted similar tests in Europe and in some US states.

The US Environmental Protection Agency revealed after laboratory tests that Volkswagen had installed software designed to cheat testing programs in its diesel cars. The software was designed to recognize steering wheel and pedal movements typical for test situations, thus reducing emissions of environmentally harmful substances during tests. In normal use, the software feature would be turned off.

The actual emissions were up to 40 times higher than allowed for nitrogen oxide gas. The program was installed in EA 189 diesel engines, developed for use in small to medium‐sized cars such as Polo, Golf (Rabbit or Caribe in North America), and Passat.

One of the world’s largest car manufacturers, the Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft group also owns the automobile manufacturers Audi, Skoda, and Seat, luxury brands Bentley, Bugatti, Porsche, and Lamborghini, and truck manufacturers MAN and Scania. It had installed 11 million software programs in passenger cars and vans marketed and sold globally. The group is one of the world's largest, with about 600,000 employees.

What Happened after the Revelations?

A couple of days after the news struck, the company's CEO, Martin Winterkorn, issued a statement in which he promised to give the matter the highest priority. He was then let go by the Volkswagen board of directors. The attorney general in Braunschweig (Germany) initiated criminal investigations against the company. It was revealed that a senior employee had tried to blow the whistle on the software fraud in 2011, without management listening, let alone taking action.

What was later coined the VW Abgas‐Skandal (exhaust gas scandal) had enormous ripple effects:

• Financial: VW's board immediately put aside 6.5 billion euros to meet costs for recalling and adjusting cars, and for future fines and expected compensation claims. Some independent analysts suggested that costs could reach as high as 60 billion euros, a sum not verified, nor has VW revealed an estimated total cost.
• Industrial: Although no other car manufacturers were immediately involved, the scandal cast a shadow over an entire industry. Opinion polls taken after the scandal gave no clear answers on the extent to which it had hurt the VW Group. An online survey conducted in September 2015 by Prophet, a management consultancy firm, showed that most Germans, 65% of the respondents, believed that the “scandal had been exaggerated and that VW still built excellent cars.” Furthermore, nine out of ten of the respondents in the sample, 91%, believed that other carmakers also manipulated omission tests, and “that VW was just the first to be found out” (Löhr, 2015). Thus, it might seem that the German public held the entire car industry responsible for something that only VW had done. Another survey, conducted by AutoPacific, showed that 64% of US car owners in the sample no longer trusted Volkswagen, and that a mere 25% held positive views of the company (PR Newswire, 2015).
• Political: On both sides of the Atlantic, the scandal triggered a political and public outcry and a demand for political action. An emerging issue was whether politicians should impose stricter requirements, even banning diesel cars in urban areas. In her speech to the pre‐election party congress of the Christian Democratic Union in August 2017, German chancellor Angela Merkel commanded VW to restore its reputation. She added that “large parts of the automotive industry have gambled away their credibility,” before adding: “Ehrlichkeit gehört zur sozialen Marktwirtschaft,” “Honesty is a part of the social market economy” (Automobilwoche, 2017; and for updates on the scandal, see Autobild, 2018). The reputation of Germany, Europe’s economic and political locomotive, was at stake.

Suggested Readings

1. Arnett, R.C., Deluliis, S. M, & Corr, M. Corporate communication crisis leadership: Advocacy and ethics. New York: Business Expert Press.
2. Cheney, G., May, S., & D. Munshi, D. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook of communication ethics. New York: Routledge.
3. Cooper, M. (2018). Decentering judgment: Toward a postmodern communication ethic. In J. M. Sloop & J. P. McDaniel (Eds.), Judgment calls: Rhetoric, politics, and indeterminacy. New York: Routledge.
4. Parsons, P. (2016): Ethics in public relations: A guide to best practice. London: Kogan Page.
5. Seib, P. M., & Fitzpatrick, K. (1995). Public relations ethics. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College.

References

1. Autobild. (2018). Alle Infos zum Abgasskandal [All the information about the exhaust gas scandal]. Retrieved from http://www.autobild.de/artikel/vw‐abgasskandal‐aktuelle‐news‐und‐updates‐6077591.html
2. Automobilwoche. (2017, August 12). Abgas‐Skandal: Kanzlerin Merkel kritisiert Autoindustrie scharf. Retrieved from https://www.automobilwoche.de/article/20170812/AGENTURMELDUNGEN/308129984/abgas‐skandal‐kanzlerin‐merkel‐kritisiert‐autoindustrie‐scharf
3. Beeler, N. (2017, April 11). Purchase an upgrade to not be beaten unconscious. Columbus Dispatch.
4. Bowen, S. A. (2007). The extent of ethics. In E. L. Toth (Ed.), The future of excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 275–297). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Durante, T., Malm, S., & Boyle, L. (2013, February 13). Boss of Carnival cruise ship … MailOnline. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article‐2277914/Carnival‐Triumph‐CEO‐Micky‐Arison‐takes‐basketball‐game‐thousands‐suffer.html
6. Fawkes, J. (2012). Saints and sinners: Competing identities in public relations ethics. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 865–872.
7. Glasser, S. B. (2016, December 2). Covering politics in a “post‐truth” America. Brookings Essay. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/essay/covering‐politics‐in‐a‐post‐truth‐america/
8. Glenn, C. (2004). Unspoken: A rhetoric of silence. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
9. Global Alliance PR. (2016). Code of ethics. Lugano, Switzerland: Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communications Management.
10. Grunig, J. E. (2000). Collectivism, collaboration, and societal corporatism as core professional values in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 23–48.
11. Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
12. Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Habermas, J. (1990). Discourse ethics: Notes on a program of philosophical justification. In J. Habermas, Moral consciousness and communicative action (C. Lenhardt & S. W. Nicholsen, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Hammerstein, K. (2008). Schuldige Opfer? Der Nazionalsozialismus in den Gründungsmythen der DDR, Österreichs und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. In R. Fritz, C. Sachse, & E. Wolfrum (Eds.), Nationen und ihre Selbstbilder: Postdiktatorische Gesellschaften in Europa. Göttingen: Wallstein.
15. Holtzhausen, D., & Zerfass, A. (2012). Strategic communication: Opportunities and challenges of the research area. In D. Holtzhausen & A. Zerfass (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of strategic communication (pp. 3–17). New York: Routledge.
16. Leeper, R. V. (1996). Moral objectivity, Jurgen Habermas's discourse ethics, and public relations. Public Relations Review, 22(2), 133–150.
17. Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
18. Löhr, J. (2015, October 20). Two‐thirds of Germans still trust Volkswagen after emissions scandal. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/20/two‐thirds‐of‐germans‐still‐trust‐volkswagen‐after‐emissions‐scandal
19. McCann, E. (2017, April 14). United’s apologies: A timeline. New York Times.
20. McLeod, J., & Chaffee, S. (1973). Interpersonal approaches to communication research. American Behavioral Scientist (2017, March), 469–499.
21. Mill, J. S. (1859). On liberty. London: John W. Parker and Son.
22. NBC News. (2017, January 22). Kellyanne Conway: Press Secretary Sean Spicer gave “alternative facts.” Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSrEEDQgFc8
23. Oxford Dictionaries. (2016). Word of the year. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word‐of‐the‐year/word‐of‐the‐year‐2016
24. Porritt, L., & Jones, R. (2013, September 24). Carnival group anticipates three‐year recovery after Concordia disaster. The Guardian.
25. Pratt, C. B. (1991). PRSA members' perceptions of public relations ethics. Public Relations Review, 17(2), 145–159.
26. PR Newswire. (2015, October 1). Volkswagen's reputation takes big hit with vehicle owners. Retrieved from https://www.prnewswire.com/news‐releases/volkswagens‐reputation‐takes‐big‐hit‐with‐vehicle‐owners‐autopacific‐predicts‐tough‐road‐ahead‐for‐the‐brand‐300152504.html
27. Ryan, M., & Martinson, D. L. (1984). Ethical values, the flow of journalistic information and public relations persons. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 61(1), 27–34.
28. van der Vat, D. (2007, June 15). Kurt Waldheim. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/news/2007/jun/15/guardianobituaries.austria