You are right, Richard. It is steady process – demonstrate the truth. We are new affiliate in Edelman network. PR market in Lithuania is also young. But we are very familiar with propaganda because of our history. Now is very important to show for the public that information management is not the same as propaganda was. We are trying very hard to collaborate with journalists to show that in the public eyes we both – media and PR are on the same side. Especially when we are talking about faithful facts, information. It is interesting to read that some problems are similar in let’s say old and young democracies. Maybe we could share our experience. And I hope it could be very useful for network where one can find so different experiences from so different cultures so different countries.

Hello Mr.Edelman,

I am writing from Bulgaria. Not surprisingly, PR experts get excited over the same issues all over the world.

This is why I jumped at the following idea you wrote:

"Fourth, we need shortly an enforcement mechanism for sanctioning misbehavior"

I personally absolutely agree, even though we have been arguing a great deal here in Bulgaria of how to come up with such "an enforcement mechanism" and make it work. I believe an international discussion should be started on this subject. It is possible that somewhere someone has found an answer.

Thinking about mechanisms sanctioning misbehavior, an earlier blog of yours reminded me of my visit to ancient Olympia in Greece. Like you, I was also impressed by the way ancient Greeks punished cheaters. Not only were their names inscribed on the base of each statue of Zeus but they were also made to pay for the making of the statue itself. The names of their parents and the village they came from were also inscribed. For everyone to feel ashamed... And do you know what? In 7 centuries of Olympic games, there were only 16 cheaters!

P.S. Pardon my poor command of English. It is not my native language.

Mr. Edelman... as a public relations practitioner, I strongly agree with your five rules on how to do our jobs.

However, I don't necessarily feel that the criticism pointed at our profession is much different than it has in the past. From your perspective, has something changed (e.g., the intensity of the criticism) or is it that we've never really addressed the need for greater accountability, transparency, etc.?

Thank you for your thought-provoking posts.

Rob Berick

Richard is entirely correct if we don't rally as a profession to embrace ethics and our role within PUBLIC dialogue someone else will do it for us. We need to behave more like the legal profession - and that's beyond those who too easily throw around phrases like "acting as advocates for our clients in the court of public opinion."

That's a bunch of crap. And so is the thought that what we do as PR people is somehow protected by the first ammendment and therefore not subject to scrutiny, liability, lisence or in some cases shame. That needs to change.

If there is no punishment for bad actors I fear we can't really call ourselves members of a profession. Agencies and corporate PR departments must be willing to fire those who behave unethically and perhaps (if the lawyers will let us) say out loud why these firings have taken place. We must teach ethics to our young hires as fervently as we teach media relations. We probably won't - it's not a billable behavior, but we must.

Richard

Great blog. You are, of course, right on in your assessment of the situation our industry faces and the lack of organized response or reaction from those very trade groups organized to think along the lines you propose. Just imagine for a second if the PR industry put out an RFP, seeking to hire a crisis communications firm to help it emerge from this period of credibility attack. All of the big firms would be scrambling with swat teams of global mega-experts, offering brilliance and flair and hardcore advice. But here we are, an industry being pummelled in the press and in Washington and you are the only leader of our top firms willing to speak of solutions, of accountability and of getting our house in order. There are more speeches like Klein's coming our way...which are read by clients and legislators alike. I for one have been calling for an industry summit on these issues that will shape the course of our profession in the years to come.

Elliot

Excellent post. The public and the media have a right to hear something from the PR field about what is and isn't acceptable behaviour, and what the implications are of ethical lapses. I don't think anyone cares what the initials are of the organization that stands up and makes a statement. Your idea that it should be ALL organizations, working together makes a lot of sense.

Surely the danger of not acting far outweighs any inconvenience or loss of control an association might feel if they have to work together with others.

im doing a career portfolio for an assignment in my Buisness class, and i've always wanted to be a PR specialists and it just so happened that when i took a career cluster test, PR was in that. I just wanted to comment and ask if you have to live in some huge city like New York to follow a career such as PR. Thanks for even taking the time to read this.
email me at mrssheckler15@aol.com

Let's push for it, not just with blogs but by getting PR Week or another neutral party to host and on a specific date
This cannot wait

What is that a famous patriot said during the American Revolution (I think it was Sam Adams) either we hang together or we will surely hang separately. Thanks for writing

Ken
I am more optimistic than you are
Self preservation is an even more powerful motive than short term greed We have to remember that we have license to operate only by conducting our business in an ethical fashion We will destroy all the gains made by this industry in the past twenty five years by continued short sighted behavior I for one will continue to point out ethical breaches and inappropriate behavior And will call for an industry summit with agencies and top corporate guys like you where we agree on a code of behavior and teeth for enforcement Thanks for writing

Something has changed
We have become front page news and not in a good way How...because some of the major PR companies are now entangled in domestic political fights...Armstrong Williams was a really bad thing for our industry And now down the slope we go to VNRs We have to reverse the momentum and not wait for the cycle to play itself out Why Because we now have an amazing opportunity to expand the PR business and take share from advertising We are the next generation vehicle but only if we are trusted So I am calling for an all industry group summit perhaps hosted by PR Week It has to happen Thanks for writing Say hi to Scott Chaiken please he is a good man

Ivanka,
How exciting to get the full story on the statues at Olympia Paid by the families of the cheaters!! And only 16 in history.
We will overcome this issue but only if we work together as an industry

Linas,

Propaganda is evil and unacceptable no matter what country is victimized. Thanks for writing. And give my best to Veronica Moiseeva who is a terrific PR professional herself.

Richard - the PR industry has never been regulated. There is no barrier to entry, no licensing procedures, no enforceable standard of ethics, and no one trade organization that has both the respect and the teeth to enforce a set of professional standards.

At one point, the PRSA's APR meant something, but is now an industry joke. Neither PRSA, IABC nor the Council have done anywhere near an effective job of gaining the respect of the industry sufficently enough to promulgate a code of conduct that will be respected and obeyed.

While a conference on the subject may be called for, it will be just another gathering until the practionioners of PR - both corporate and agency - agree to hold themselves to a set of standards. And agree on some policy of enforcement.

Arnie
The purpose of such a meeting would be to agree on a set of standards We cannot allow this situation to fester Thanks for reading my blog.

Richard

Arnie/Richard:

An interim step might be for each major PR agency to develop their own code of ethics that are discussed and agreed to with clients. Potential clients can then decide who they want to represent them based on the firms' committment to high ethical standards. By leading the way one agency will then force another to play catch-up and the entire industry will be elevated. The difficulty with an industry-wide standard is that there is no clear consensus on what PR is. To some, it is merely getting your name in the paper or painting an elephant blue and marching it down Times Square blasting the name of a new product. As a counter to Ketchum, an agency should institute and promote its strict ethical practices that could be a model for the industry. Richard, if you do get PR Week to sponsor such an event, then unveil Edelman's new ethical practices standards and invite people to discuss it in this blog.

It seems that everyone is open to creating a standard for ethics in PR and I applaud that. I am interested to get your opinions on the impact of search on PR... Like someone said there is no barrier to entry, no set of standards!

Since there are over 160 million internet users in the US and a lot of them use the search engines to form opinions, how will this impact how your jobs are done? How can you incorporate search into your new initiatives for better control? And how can this be measured and who will do the measuring? I'm hearing peers and setting up an advisory group, is that realistic?

Justin,

Anybody using search knows about ways to bias the result through search engine optimization and other techniques. I do believe we need a group session to discuss. Want to be a part of this?

Richard

Richard,

I appreciate the opportunity to be included. Let me know what I can do!

Hello,
How interesting to hear the PR industry reflecting on their ethics. As an outsider, may I share these thoughts and ask for your feedback?

I am a graduate student in public administration (PA) in Portland, Oregon, USA. I am currently studying organizational ethics which is how I stumbled across your blog. I was handed a copy of the Edelman Trust Barometer by a fellow student who had attended a seminar delivered for the Port of Portland. It is a fascinating study, one I had not heard of previously. It so happens I am also doing research for a course assignment, an innovation paper to address a local city bureaus public relations problem. My innovation idea was for this public agency, which has lost the publics trust, to hire a PR firm instead of handling public relations in-house. Having worked for this agency for three and a half years I am familiar with their current public involvement practices. They are sadly inadequate in this area of doing the publics business. This organization has been severely plagued with poor PR since 2000 and the consequences are a lack of ability to get the public on board for some critical Capital Improvement Projects. City infrastructure is aging and must be replaced. Without community buy-in the agency is floundering in mistrust. The impact will be paid for by future generations of rate payers.
I hear the same issues of institutional mistrust whether in the private or public realm. Personal and professional integrity has been peeled off organizations like layers on an onion. I am not sure what kind of catalyst began this transgression but the impacts are costly. What do you suppose will swing this tide in the other direction? History teaches us we usually take notice when in crisis. Our traditional organizational structures, highly hierarchic in design, don?t flex much unless dislodged by disaster. Are there any organizational historians out there who can pick up on this thought?

Keep up the thought provoking exchange. I am listening,
SL

Shelley,

You have made an important point in your post--which is institutional tendency to maintain status quo until crisis hits. Outside PR firm would have less obligation to play that game. Best practice is to offer community a chance to co-create rather than impose decisions made in smoke filled room. This is only achieved through a transparent process where consumer comment and continued dialogue is core to ultimate achievement of unified purpose.

Richard

Mr. Edelman -

I discoverd your blog tonight and really appreciate the thought you put into your comments. I lead a small PR shop where a great deal of our expertise is in open technology systems. I have religion about transparency (in all facets of public society) as a result.

I have begun a blog that I am hoping will evolve into an open source project (of sorts) that looks at the intersection of blogging, journalism, and PR. The purpose of the project is a more transparent media universe that is brought about by a process that separates the more credible (read: transparent) publishers of content from the opaque to the mutual benefit of information consumers and credible publishers.

I am wondering if I can borrow your notes below as part of this project and possibly as part of the prospectus I've been asked to write for a local university's j-school.

"...Gladstone of NPR took issue with this idea of a "trust advantage" for traditional media. She contends that Jon Stewart of the Daily Show is the most trusted newscaster because he is transparent, mixes news with entertainment and because his bias is quite evident."

I think the point about Jon Stewart drills the message that transparency can be fun, it can be serious, it can help expose the truth very broadly, and importantly it can be very profitable.

Usher,

Note my blog of this morning on speech by Jon Klein of CNN If J Stewart is voice of truth for the national media, then it is a wake up call to the others Note that Klein's speech to National Assn. of Broadcasters cites serious bias in 7 of 10 stories on Fox News versus 1 in 10 for CNN (which he still thinks is too high) Objectivity leads to trust

Richard, if i may be so bold,

I came to your blog with some preconcieved notions. I can't say that I feel better about VNR's from ANYONE when it is not made clear that it is not a report done by a reporter who investigated this independantly. Having said that I am impressed with your insights into this issue. I think that there is a solution to this issue but I don't know that we can leave it up to the industry to fix it itself. Let me explain what I mean:

People like yourself who are trying to find a solution need to be commended, but as we have seen there are big issues with trust on all parties. I think that efforts within the industry are a good idea and carry some weight, however it is not enough to bring trust back. The american people have this attitude, such as I did 5 monutes ago, that all PR firms are propoganda machines. The only way to get past this trust issue is if there is an impartial voice that the public trusts involved.

A good start might be for the reputible firms to call out the firms that are doing these government VNR releases without proper disclosure, or maybe the new organization that is basicly plagerizing the material.

Thanks for your time and I will bookmark you blog so that i can get your perspective on things in the future.

-matt

Matt
Thanks for writing
I am going to push for an industry summit latest after Memorial Day We have to agree on standards on VNRs and some enforcement mechanism with teeth Appreciate your taking another look at PR as an industry

I read with interest your proposal for an industry wide agreement on standards, but I'm confused. The Public Relations Society of America, on whose board of directors I sit, went to great lengths to host an industry wide summit of PR practitioners and professional organizations last month in New York, and yet Edelman did not participate, despite being asked.

What will your summit accomplish that the summit already held by leaders in the industry did not?
PRSA has had a code of ethics and professional standards for more than 60 years, and there are significant barriers to effectively "enforcing" such standards beyond being a moral compass.

(My blog/podcast is at http://lubetkinsotherblog.blogspot.com or RSS feed at http://feeds.feedburner.com/lubetkinsotherblog)

Steve,

Thanks for sending me a note
Edelman should have sent a person to the confab on ethics...i am not sure we knew about it PRSA has taken a leaderhip position for sure But there are other initiatives on going such as Council of PR Firms et al If we have a cacaphony at the end, nothing is improved That is what I was trying to avoid.

Richard

Richard, I don't think we had a cacaphony at all. From the documents I have, you were invited personally to attend on behalf of Edelman. Why you don't recall the invitation, I can't say.

Council of PR Firms was there, as were leaders of many major PR firms, including Ray Kotcher, Tom Hoog, Larry Moskowitz from MediaLink, and even journalists, represented by Kevin Smith from SPJ.

We had all the players in one room to discuss the issue.

It's one thing for a PR industry leader like yourself to miss the opportunity to be at a true industry-wide summit on PR ethics because of missed communications. These things happen. So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

But then -- without doing any basic fact-checking that would have told you that there already HAD BEEN a PR industry summit on ethics -- you posted a blog entry suggesting that somehow the industry was ignoring this issue. You made it sound like you are going to wave a wand and call a summit to fix the problem. Well, pardon me, but that's just a little ingenuous, and it's the kind of factually inaccurate hyperbole that raises credibility problems for us all. That's why I commented on your blog posting.

We'd love to have you on-board in this industry-wide initiative. Please join forces with us. We will all be more credibile if we can achieve alignment on ethical behavior throughout the industry. It's not going to happen in the blogosphere.

Steve, I accept Matt H will be my proxy as he is running our ethics task force I don't want to be a pain or to solve this in blog land I do want to tell you that the Council of PR Firms for one is going its own way We want to be part of the solution for sure Thanks for making sure we are in

Thought you might be interested in my commentary on the subject from last Sunday's Los Angeles Times:

ABSTRACT:

The silly 'are bloggers journalists?' debate continues to rage. In this Los Angeles Times commentary, Rory O'Connor suggests we should be debating instead how our newly
transformed news environment can best function.

Call Them What You Will, Bloggers Won't Shut Up


By Rory O'Connor, Rory O'Connor is president of Globalvision, an independent international media company.

It's nothing less than astonishing that the mainstream journalistic community continues to debate the silly question: "Are bloggers journalists?"

Such online analysts as PressThink's Jay Rosen and Slate's Jack Shafer declared the debate dead months ago, but David Shaw's recent Media Matters column in The Times
raised it from the grave. Shaw grumpily declared blogging "a solipsistic, self-aggrandizing journalistic-wannabe genre" that is not entitled to 1st Amendment rights enjoyed by "professional" journalists. If courts allowed bloggers "to invoke the privilege to protect confidential sources," Shaw puffed, "the public will become even less trusting than it already is of journalists."

And the courts are addressing the issue, which is at the core of a trade-secret suit filed by Apple Computer: Must bloggers who write about leaked product data disclose the identities of their sources at Apple or its contractors?

Corporate-media types contend that bloggers are inaccurate and irresponsible -- true in some cases. But what worries self-styled professionals most, I suspect, is the possibility that treating bloggers as journalists would either lower the profession's standards or make it easier for them to topple more Dan Rathers.

The inaccurate reporting of Rather and CBS News on President Bush's Air National Guard service --initially revealed by bloggers -- and the careless comments of CNN's Eason Jordan about U.S. troops "targeting" journalists in Iraq -- also unearthed by
bloggers -- did more damage to the profession than any blog I've read. And the fake journalist Jeff Gannon/James Guckert would still be lobbing softballs at Bush's news conferences if it weren't for such blogs as daily kos and AMERICAblog.

I'm a practicing journalist with three decades of experience -- who also blogs regularly. When I recently revealed on my blog (www.roryoconnor.org) that the corporate culture of the Swedish media firm Metro International is racist and sexist, and questioned why the New York Times Co. would join such a firm in a multimillion-dollar partnership, was I a journalist or a blogger? The story was picked up by Associated Press and carried in numerous U.S. dailies, crossed the Atlantic and appeared in the Financial Times and Le Monde, and led to the
resignation of two top Metro executives, so it really doesn't matter.

What to say to the threatened members of journalism's professional priesthood? "No one owns journalism," blogging pundit Jeff Jarvis wrote on BuzzMachine. "It is not
an official act, a certified act, an expert act, a proprietary act. Anyone can do journalism. Everyone does. Some do it better than others, of course. But everyone does it." Jacob Weisberg, writing for Slate, suggested that we "disregard all such
self-interested whining. If you don't like this raucous clamor emanating from cyberspace, you're not really comfortable with democracy."

Rather than fruitlessly debating whether bloggers are journalists, we should ponder how our newly transformed news environment can best function. Newspapers have a huge stake in this debate. Young people no longer get their news exclusively from the
morning papers, evening network newscasts or other traditional outlets. Increasingly, they go online to find news ó and read bloggers that professional journalists deem so dangerous.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-op-journalist10apr10,0,4528179.story?coll=la-sunday-commentary

First, thanks for taking the step and getting out there. For some reason I prefer to contribute to someone else's blog rather than start my own. I will take off on a poignant comment someone added to your post of April 5: "The PR world needs more than just ethics, it needs new blood and some new symbols."

Public relations is about control - controlling the message, the method of delivery, the environment, the spokesperson, etc. We cannot control the result but our job is to control everything that we possibly can.

Blogs are about loss of control. Richard posts thoughts, I comment, I can say anything (thanks for the opportunity). Corporate communications is still largely under the illusion that it has the same manner of control that it used to. Not true. Employees - current and ex (I did work for Edelman, among others) - share information in a free flowing stream. That information gets to reporters and bloggers. There are few secrets anymore and that trend will only accelerate.

That said there is still an important role for traditional public relations and traditional media. Most bloggers still react to news that breaks through mainstream media. Bloggers add an essential and intimate reflection of that news - witness the great blogging that came out of Iraq at the onset of the war. I can't imagine that I will ever tire of reading the print versions of The New York Times or Wall Street Journal, even though I get constant email updates from them in the course of the day.

So, how does PR lead this communication revolution rather than just idly comment? First, we jump into this new medium and expose ourselves, as we ask clients to do. Then we give up control. Knowing your message and how to deliver it is not about control. It is about preparation and leadership. Jump five years into future. Can we say that the way we have practiced public relations for the past 50 years will still be relevant?

Rory,

This is really a terrific and passionate piece. Blogging and traditional journalism are not antagonists. In fact they should be mutually beneficial. Blogs give first person connection--note the coverage of tsunami. Blogs are also additive--each additional post is a stone in the wall to create a building. Instead of the Leslie Stahl take on the blog world--that they are causing polarization, less factual reporting than traditional, why not be open to change? Quote the blogs that are credible. Make them a source, not an enemy.

Mark,

Thanks for writing
No question that PR people will have to adapt. Question for me--will we lead the change or be rendered irrelevant. We have to move our clients toward a more activist position, where they take the risk of participating in the dialogue, rather than waiting to respond to a negative. As you note, we must move away from a control mentality.

Richard

Richard--I was at two of the events you mention and you have not only done a great job relating key points, you've set an exciting model for other communications professionals to follow.
Congrats, Susan Mernit

Susan,

Thanks for writing.
I am trying to prove the validity of blogs!!

Richard,

Me, too! As a former big media exec turned blogger and consultant, I also want to see blogs integrate into the mainstream and be used in a way that plays to their strengths--having someone with your scope disuss the issues makes a huge difference.
Thanks for writing.
Susan

I work for you in Brazil and prior to joining Edelman I used to work for Reuters as an online Editor covering a variety of subjects.
As I used to write a monthly music column for Reuters I decided to have a blog as my readers wanted me to be more opinionative and I felt I needed a space to publish what I could not include in the column.
Unfortunately when I joined Edelman I decided to quit on the blog as I felt awkward for a PR to write such informal things for mostly youngsters. I thought it could be something not very well perceived by colleagues or clients.
Apparently the acceptance of blogs is wider now but I still have lots of doubts about it, especially about pitching to blogs.
Blogs are so independent and yet seen as an underground network that in my opinion bloggers would only hear what we have to pitch if we did not openly say we are PR professionals.
I also have the impression that even experts representing companies would not be heard. I guess bloggers are more likely to hear other bloggers or ?ordinary? people rather than professionals.
So how can we pitch something without being misjudged as boring sales people?
How can we differentiate ourselves as credible sources since anybody can lie about anything on the Web? And how can we control the information and monitor the results since the messages are spread on the Web for thousands, sometimes millions of blogs, independent websites and other webchannels?
Finally, as we need to approve everything we send on behalf of our clients, how can we make them understand the informality of the language used on blogs versus its importance and efficiency as credible messages?
Thanks a lot for your attention.
Thiane Loureiro, Corporate Manager, Brazil

That's a very good assessment, Richard. PR as an 'honourable profession' is under real threat with the perceptions people (aka clients and influencers) have that are greatly shaped by events they see happening and stories like the FT's.

As good an example as any of this wretched downward spiral is the variety of comments to one of Jay Rosen's posts at the height of the blogosphere bruhaha about Ketchumgate in January. Consistent commenting there that PR is all about spin, lies and manipulation. Nothing else.

I think your three suggestions are just great. While numbers 1 and 2 may take a while to see the fruits ripening, number 3 is something that's relatively easy to address immediately.

I've been advocating for some time that one of the roles of the professional associations must be to be the torch bearer, so to speak, for ethics in the profession. PRSA in the US and the CIPR in the UK - to name just two examples - have codes of ethics. On an international level, IABC does. As a long-time IABC member, I believe its code is a benchmark of ethical responsibility that could form the basis for a universal code of ethics for the PR profession.

Until one of the professional associations steps up to the plate on ethics, the status quo you refer to will be the constant cross the profession has to bear.

PR people give some people the "weeby-geebies". Propaganda as a perjorative term is often used to describe the new "spin-doctors" of today.

I think your blog is one creative solution. Who gives a damn about some "Press Release" regurgitated into a reporter's story? In an industry that strangles creativity, and feigns "objectivity" much needs to change.

I'm sure you've heard the conventional wisdom of the day: "It's a scary world when people laugh at their newsmen and take their comedians seriously."

The market forces will continue to work on print media. While the Internet is a great place to read the news and do research, it is also a lonely galaxy. Nothing can change the contentment some feel at seeing ink printed on paper. However, being ready and able to compete in the new Online marketplace is only one of the challenges.

The PR world needs more than just ethics, it needs new blood and some new symbols.

"Apparently the acceptance of blogs is wider now but I still have lots of doubts about it, especially about pitching to blogs.
Blogs are so independent and yet seen as an underground network that in my opinion bloggers would only hear what we have to pitch if we did not openly say we are PR professionals."

I think traveling under false colors is the worst possible approach with bloggers. If you take the view that PR is honest work, then you should be eager to identify yourself as a PR pro. Pitch bloggers almost as you would any other news provider. Tell them why their readers would be interested in your client's story.

The most important thing is to find out which blogs your clients’ customers read.
http://technoflak.blogspot.com/2005/01/how-to-pitch-bloggers_30.html

Patrick,

I went to a fascinating panel discussion last night at Reuters NY office. Members of the new media world and old media world interacting One important conclusion--this is not a zero sum game. Traditional media and bloggers will both be better off in this new transparent environment Now that the public has a voice, all kinds of media should foster increased participation, offering chance for dialogue. Bloggers need to raise their game to self regulate to apply a sense of ethics before you are corrected by other bloggers, to commit to common sense, accuracy and fair play.

Neville,

Thanks for note. I think we have way too many overlapping groups in PR, each trying to set forth principles. Get the Arthur Page Society and the IABC and a couple of others at the table and hammer out something we can all live with. I would support you 100%. Nothing is more important to our shared future.

Thiane,

The blogsphere is a very self-correcting universe If bloggers spew out incorrect information, they will not have a following Or they will be corrected by those who have the facts. So I am much more positive than you about the more democratized media structure in the future That said, I am also convinced that smart people will look at both blogs and traditional media to be sure of truth

Public relations is looked upon with more skepticism than ever today, not so much because the practice of PR has fundamentally changed, but because consumers increasingly have the tools and sophistication to look behind the curtain and see how the worlds of PR and media interact. They're finding out how the soup's made, and realizing that a lot of fingers are trying to get into the pot every day.

The public -- finally -- has come to understand that the newspaper that plops on the front porch each morning is not some pure, objective "truth" on stone tablets. It is an imperfect product created through imperfect processes, where often the loudest voice -- inside or outside the news organization -- gets disproportionate attention. The media has always been a "squeaky wheel gets the grease" business, and PR firms squeak for a living.

Personally, I'm glad the public is figuring out how all of this works. And I think -- with or without towering figures to represent the industry -- the PR business will ultimately get what we deserve in the court of public opinion.

The only way a code of ethics will work in the PR industry is if the people of influence decide to invest in ethics education for employees before the employees get into the industry. I teach business ethics at a local university, and about half the class would do pretty much anything to make a buck, ethics code or not. A few have some scruples, but only about ten percent of the class knows what it means to act ethically in business and are prepared to do so. A code of ethics will not make substantially unethical people behave ethically. When the chips are down, only the ones with character will act ethically. The others will take their chances with the code of ethics, and if they are penalized by industry sanctions, well they can always go work for Clifford. As long as there are people like him who are prominent in the industry, industry sanctions won't deter people who emulate him. The only deterrent to unethical behavior most of my students seem to acknowledge is the law. That's got to be a pretty bad state of affairs. The situation is bleak, but not impossible. I think you'll find that the best place to find employees who are ethical is religious colleges and institutions. Usually such places still empasize the importance of living ethically not just through ethics classes but through the ethos of the institution.

Best,

Scott,

Note my blog of today covering Columbia University PR department's use of an exclusive with the NY Times that completely backfired. PR tactics must change or we are not going to be useful in changing public opinion.

Richard

Alice,

Never operate under the cover of night. We cannot allow any more of this sense that PR people are like CIA operatives. Transparency is the rule.

Richard

Gary,

If we have to regulate every transaction and every aspect of life, our economy will sink.
Countries with high trust levels perform better. We need to go back to a time when parents teach ethical behavior, where illegal downloading of music is unacceptable (just an example) and where manners matter. I believe in the power of self regulation but am smart enough to know that there must be sanction in the event of violation of rules.

Richard