We are currently in an era where the profession of public relations is widely viewed as being “spin doctors” and hype can often eclipse reality. Most individuals see public relations as people who manipulate the public mind, rather than tell the truth. We are often accused of distorting reality, propaganda and withholding information. With these circumstances, you could have thought that “ethical public relations” was an oxymoron. Although not everyone is in tune with today’s public relation’s world, it is critical to assert a practitioners' beliefs of ethics in the practice of public relations. Being an ethical public relations practitioner is fundamental, especially when it is your duty to build trust and enhance stakeholders’ reputations. …show more content…
To become a well- respected and trustworthy practitioner we have to be aware of how we deal with media and portray our clientele. Even though you may view something as ethical someone else may disagree, which could be the result of the person having a deontological or a consequentialist ethical view. Even though there is a list of ethical views I wanted to focus on two, in particular, deontology and consequentialism. Deontology and Consequentialism can be extremely similar philosophical views as they focus on doing the greater good. However, both contain key factors that make each idea unique and different. It could be said that both theories arrive at the same conclusion but through the way of different paths. Though, beyond the surface each of these ethical ideologies, they begin to differ …show more content…
Therefore, a morally right action is one that produces a good outcome or result and the ends justify the means. This would mean that a consequentialist person would make their ethical decisions based on costs and benefits, so the morally right action is one of the best overall consequences. The benefits of this approach are that you have to take into consideration all alternatives and think about what consequences will follow your actions. Like deontology, there are problems with having a fully consequential ethical view. It is important to note that with the positives there are also problems that can arise with this point of view. The major problem with this approach is how can you efficiently calculate the greatest good? as you are required to guess the benefits of the outcome of your choice?. One example of this could be what if a solution drastically harms a minority group, would it is considered ethical if the majority group benefited from the consequential decision. It is important to realize that this would negate the goal of public relations which is to build relationships and trust with all stakeholder groups. Grunig states that this is a faulty line of reasoning when he suggested that “We believe, in contrast, the public relations should be based on a worldview that incorporates ethics
Newsom, D., Turk, J., & Kruckeberg, D. (2013). This Is PR: The Realities of Public Relations
Deontology diverges from consequentialism because deontology concentrates on the rightness or wrongness of the actions themselves instead of the consequences. There are different types of deontological theories. According to Kant, theoretical reasoning helps us discover what we should believe whereas the practical reasoning tells us what we should do. Morality falls under theoretical reasoning. In Kantian deontology, motives matter. Rather than consequences, it is the motive of an action makes that action morally right or wrong. Likewise, if an action intends to hurt someone, but eventually it benefits the other person, then it does not make that action morally right. All in all, deontology comes down to common-sense: whether it is a good action or a bad
According to consequentialism, not deontology, the doctor should and must sacrifice that one man in order to save for others. Thus, maximizing the good. However, deontological thought contests this way of thinking by contending that it is immoral to kill the innocent despite the fact one would be maximizing the good. Deontologists create concrete distinctions between what is moral right and wrong and use their morals as a guide when making choices. Deontologists generate restrictions against maximizing the good when it interferes with moral standards.
Ethics is not a concept that is thought about often, but it is practiced on a daily basis. Even while unconscious of the fact, people consider ethics while making every choice in life. There are many theories to which people allude, but two radically different theories that are sometimes practiced are deontology and utilitarianism. Deontology deals with actions in a situation while utilitarianism examines the consequences of those actions. While polar opposites on the broad spectrum of ethics, deontology and utilitarianism are bioethical theories that can be applied to nursing practice and personal life situations.
According to consequentialist theory, a right action is one that maximizes the good. Utility, or the greatest happiness principle “holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” The greatest happiness principle also holds that the right action increases total amount of utility in the world: “the happiness which forms the utilitarian standard of what is right in conduct, is not the agent 's own happiness, but that of all concerned” (Mill 5). The principle of Utility states that “…happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain…” (Mill 2). An action is right if it maximizes the good, that being happiness, as it is the only thing that is
ABSTRACT: Recently, unrestrained consequentialism has been defended against the charge that it leads to unacceptable trade-offs by showing a trade-off accepted by many of us is not justified by any of the usual nonconsequenlist arguments. The particular trade-off involves raising the speed limit on the Interstate Highway System. As a society, we seemingly accept a trade-off of lives for convenience. This defense of consequentialism may be a tu quoque, but it does challenge nonconsequentialists to adequately justify a multitude of social decisions. Work by the deontologist Frances Kamm, conjoined with a perspective deployed by several economists on the relation between social costs and lives lost, is relevant. It provides a starting point by justifying decisions which involve trading lives only for other lives. But the perspective also recognizes that using resources in excess of some figure (perhaps as low as $7.5 million) to save a life causes us to forego other live-saving activities, thus causing a net loss of life. Setting a speed limit as low as 35 miles per hour might indeed save some lives, but the loss of productivity due to the increased time spent in travel would cost an even greater number of lives. Therefore, many trade-offs do not simply involve trading lives for some lesser value (e.g., convenience), but are justified as allowing some to die in order to save a greater number.
8- Alexander, Larry, Alexander,. "Deontological Ethics." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
Deontology is a non-consequentialist theory. While consequentialism believes the ends always justify the means, deontologists claim that the rightness of an action should not be solely dependent on maximizing the good, even if that action goes against what is ethically right. For example, four critical conditioned patients in a hospital need a different organ to survive and a healthy man comes into the hospital for a check-up, would you kill the healthy man to save the four? According to consequentialism, the doctor should take the healthy man’s organs to save the others, thus maximizing the good. However, we all know that it is ethically wrong. Deontology objects to this way o...
Two ideologies that exist in ethics and apply to decision-making are utilitarian and deontological viewpoints. Ethical theories provide a systematic approach to decision-making toward the applications of standard principles. “In utilitarian ethics, outcomes justify the means or ways to achieve it” (Mandal, Ponnambath, & Parija, 2016, p. 5). Decisions made considering utility are based benefitting the greatest number of people. In utilitarianism, outcomes determine the moral nature of interventions. Some people are to experience harm, but the overall outcome is good for most individuals. Applying utilitarianism personally or professionally seems relevant when considering its ideology maximizes happiness and minimizes suffering. Utilitarianism
These are two ethical theories, they both have similarities and differences. While Consequentialism usually focuses on the moral worth of an act, deontological theories usually focus on judging the actual actions themselves. According to Peterson (2013) consequentialism usually focuses on the consequences of taking some decision or the results of a specific ethical decision that was chosen by an individual. It is about how many people will benefit from the act that will be taken by the police. This means if the police are making the decision, according to this theory, they need to ask themselves what exactly they want to do and who is the beneficiary of the action (Carlson, 2013). Deontology more less is the sense of morality, what is right and what is deemed wrong.
Utilitarianism is one of the best known and influential moral theories. There are two different meanings to two words but at times, they can be the same perspective. Utilitarianism is different from ethical theories it makes the rightness and wrongness of an act dependent to a person. The right thing can be done from a bad motivation. There are consequences including good or bad by the act. It is between an action and their happiness or unhappy outcomes depending on the circumstances. There is no moral principle only itself of utilitarianism. It balances the individuality and community of happiness. The purpose of the morality is by making life better and increasing that amount of good deed. “Another aspect of utilitarianism is the belief that
Furthermore, a public relations career is much more closely grouped with media relations these days than journalism. In the book, Making it in Public Relations: An Insider’s Guide, it is said that Media relations is the most dominant function of public relations. Its basic role is the origination of press information and the handling of requests from the media about a specialist’s subjects and activities. After all, the main goal of specialists is to present a positive public image of their client to the public (Mogel). The possible types of clients and fields vary wildly from each other. Some specialists can work in public relations consulting firms and hold campaigns for many clients. Other specialists can work in the advertising departments of major brands and w...
Normative ethics involves either a single rule or a set of principles to evaluate moral conduct. Teleology stipulates that acts are morally acceptable if they produce some desired result. Deontology on the other hand, focuses on the preservation of individual rights and on the intentions associated with a particular behavior. In summation, teleological philosophies consider the ends, or consequences, associated with an action whereas deontological philosophies consider the means (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2011). This is why teleology is commonly referred to as Consequentialism. In addition to the rule, deontology also cites individual absolute rights: freedom of conscience, freedom of consent, freedom of privacy, freedom of speech, and due process. Deontologist employ this set of freedoms because they believe certain rights should never be violated even if it is to produce a greater good (Ferre...
Today, public relations is a complex profession by thousands of thousands of people all the world to practice. Almost all large and small organizations have their own public relations department or they need to outsource their public relations to a company. Public relations practitioners work for schools and universities, companies, governments, professional and trade associations, hospitals, hotels, non-profit charities, and other else more (Grunig, 2001). Therefore, PR is an important department for organizations.
Public relations practitioners are often described as an organization’s voice, positioning messages in the media to ensure the organization is perceived as beneficial, relevant, and credible. According to Zoch and Molleda (2006), this role is defined as “media relations” and is a pivotal aspect of the public relations profession. Two theoretical frameworks, agenda setting and framing are at the core of effective media engagement. Agenda setting is the process determining which social issues dominate public discourse, and framing is the way each issue is presented to the public (Dearing & Rogers, 1996; Hallahan, 1999). First, public relations practitioners use agenda setting to garner media coverage for its organization and its stakeholders