Notes on Ethics, Standards, Greenwashing, Image Manipulation, and Undercover Leadership in Public Relations

Money Market Discussion and Regulatory Context

• The opening mentions a money market issue where a lawsuit or settlement required paying every potentially eligible party. The exact details are unclear, but the point is that such legal actions can lead to settlements that aim to compensate those who might be affected.
• Tension noted between legal action and reputation: such actions could be used to win favor or potentially steer customers toward another company (perceived strategic motive in some cases).
• Takeaway: legal/regulatory actions can have reputational and strategic implications for firms, beyond the monetary settlement.

Code of Professional Standards and Advocacy

• The instructor directs students to consult the Code of Professional Standards, specifically the Advocacy Code of Professional Standards.
• Resource mentioned (as stated):
  • ccPRS.ca/advocacy-code-of-professional-standards (note: transcript uses a spoken/abbreviated form; verify exact URL from your institution’s portal)
• Purpose: familiarize with ethical guidelines that govern advocacy work and professional conduct in communications.
• Practical note: always verify current standards from the official code to ensure alignment with expectations and avoid misinterpretation.

Numerical Claims and Integrity: When to Say Nothing

• Guideline: If you are not sure about your numbers or there is no counterparty with similar results, do not publish the number.
• Rationale: publishing uncertain numbers violates ethical standards and the principle of integrity.
• Explicit reference to a specific rule: this action “violates number 8” (and integrity). The use of 8 here signals a numbered principle within the Code of Professional Standards.
• Additional rule: Never launch or publish something if you’re not sure about it.
• Practical application: Always seek corroboration, triangulate data with independent sources, or refrain from posting until verification is obtained.

Greenwashing: Concept, Debate, and Practical Examples

• Definition: Greenwashing is presenting an environmental impact as more favorable than it actually is.
• Classic question discussed: Is avoiding straws (the straw-ban movement) truly reducing impact, or is it greenwashing?
• Perspectives shared:
  • Some view straw bans and similar actions as greenwashing when the claimed environmental benefit is exaggerated or marginal compared to overall impact.
  • Others argue such actions can be legitimate environmental steps even if imperfect, as part of broader sustainability efforts.
• Nuanced discussion: There are arguments that some actions are effective signals of environmental responsibility, while others believe focusing on a single behavior can be a cosmetic or misleading tactic if not part of a broader strategy.
• A caveat noted: not all environmental actions are purely greenwashing; the effectiveness depends on scope, scale, and evidence of actual impact.
• Real-world framing: In PR and corporate communications, be transparent about limitations and avoid overstating benefits; provide context and measurable outcomes where possible.

Image Manipulation in Public-Facing Content: Ethics and Gray Areas

• The group discusses extensive use of Photoshop in fashion and website content, acknowledging that much of what the public sees is edited.
• In political contexts, doctored images (e.g., altering a public figure’s hands or height) raise concerns about misrepresentation and manipulation.
• Key point: Enforcement of rules and standards is often the challenging part; even if content is edited, the ethical implications depend on intent, context, and disclosure.
• Gray areas highlighted:
  • Distinguishing acceptable retouching from deceptive alteration that changes perceived reality.
  • Whether edits constitute misinformation or simply aesthetic enhancement.
• Takeaway: When content is public-facing, consider transparency about edits, the potential for misinterpretation, and the impact on audience trust.

Undercover Boss and the Ethics of Brand Humanization

• Concept: A show or initiative where the CEO or top leadership goes undercover to work among employees to humanize the brand.
• Potential benefits:
  • Can humanize leadership and reveal organizational realities to customers and employees.
  • May boost morale and demonstrate commitment to employees.
• Ethical concerns:
  • Active deception: disguising leadership presence can be seen as misleading; there is a tension between transparency and strategic storytelling.
  • Public perception: if audiences feel deceived, it can damage trust and tarnish the PR industry’s credibility.
  • Risk of negative downstream effects: what happens if information from such programs is disclosed or misused by competitors, or if the narrative is manipulated after the fact?
• Alternatives proposed in discussion:
  • Focus group discussions to gather employee and customer insights.
  • Anonymous tip lines to surface issues without front-facing deception.
  • Image-management tools or forms that balance transparency with strategic communications.
• Additional considerations:
  • If engagement with a journalist is ended or reversed, there could be reputational harm or strategic leakage.
  • The broader message: ethical communications should avoid compromising core values like honesty and transparency, even if there are potential short-term gains.

Practical Implications for Public Relations and Ethics

• Transparency vs. manipulation: Striking a balance between authentic storytelling and brand-building while avoiding deception.
• Accountability: When using provocative formats (e.g., undercover leadership), ensure disclosures are clear and align with professional standards.
• Data integrity: Always verify numerical claims with credible sources; avoid fabricating or selectively presenting data.
• Content authenticity: Be mindful of when editing crosses into misrepresentation; consider disclosure and context.
• Real-world relevance: These discussions connect to ongoing debates about corporate responsibility, environmental claims, and how organizations communicate with diverse publics.
• Ethical frameworks in practice:
  • Deontological perspective: adhere to rules, duties, and honesty (e.g., do not mislead, keep promises, disclose conflicts).
  • Consequentialist perspective: weigh outcomes for stakeholders (employees, customers, investors, public) when choosing communication strategies.
  • Foundational PR principles: truthfulness, transparency, accountability, and respect for publics.

Quick Reference: Key Rules and Concepts (summary)

• Do not publish numbers unless verified by reliable sources or third-party corroboration: aligns with 8 and integrity.
• Avoid greenwashing by providing accurate, contextual, and evidence-based environmental claims.
• Use disclosures and ethical boundaries when employing image edits or deceptive storytelling; prefer transparency and alternative methods when possible.
• Consider the reputational and ethical implications of tactics like undercover leadership or staged content; prioritize long-term trust over short-term gains.
• Always connect communications to foundational principles and real-world consequences for publics.

Break Schedule (class context)

• There is a scheduled 15-minute break after these topics to allow students to reflect and discuss informally.