COM 530 2-1 Final Project Milestone One
I was particularly interested in the codes of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists and the Institute for Advertising, specifically because in my past two courses, we have been discussing the phenomena of “fake news” and unethical advertising. Neither of these concepts is a new invention (or we likely wouldn’t have professional codes of ethics to address the issue), but perhaps they’re brought to better light in the more recent proliferation of self-publication media outlets, the contributors of which do not necessarily consider that it is their duty to create ethical content.
The code of ethics for the Institute of Advertising (found here) makes for rather interesting reading: rather than the cut-and-dried list of codicils I was expecting, the document uses rich and engaging prose to deliver its message, not only listing each principle (there are eight), but adding commentary and examples to provide context. The code heavily emphasizes the mandate for truthfulness in advertising, and for the distinguishing between advertising and news, including situations in which endorsements and sponsorship take place. There is also discussion around privacy matters (especially in light of programs that track and record an individual’s activities online to better target advertising), legal compulsions, and the fairness of advertising relating to the “nature of the audience,” that is to say, vulnerable populations such as children. The last (eighth) principle concerns an instrument for internal discussion of matters of ethical concern, which is intriguing considering the various attitudes present in society at large concerning “whistleblowers.” On the one hand, whistleblower protection schemes, such as that overseen by the U.S. Department of Labor (United States Department of Labor, n.d.) do exist to encourage compliance with ethical and legal standards, and the reporting of those who do not comply; on the other, who by now has not been exposed to the furor over and fallout that was the result of Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing activities? (Roth & Shetty, 2016)
The Society of Professional Journalists, on the other hand, maintains a much more succinct, peremptory code of ethics (found here). Their ethics fall under four main mandates: to “seek the truth and report it,” to “minimize harm,” to “act independently,” and to “be accountable and transparent.” A number of examples are included for each umbrella, such as the need to identify sources appropriately and the prohibition against favors to advertisers and other “special interest” groups.
Considering how often the ethical considerations of these two groups cross paths (the freelance blogger who engages in “native advertising,” for example (Federal Trade Commission, n.d.)), I found it interesting to compare and contrast the codes of ethics of these two organizations.
The two codes of ethics share a number of common elements. Both organizations mandate that their members follow high ethical standards and adhere to the truth in their work; both organizations require that advertising be distinct and separate from news reporting. The SPJ specifically demands that news and advertising be distinguishable, that a melding of the two should be avoided, and that any sponsored content be labelled accordingly. The IoA has practically exactly the same mandate, with an increased emphasis on the labelling of sponsored and endorsed content, including the evaluation of “free” goods and services to review.
This next similarity between the two codes may be a bit of an extrapolation on my part, but it seems to me that the IoA’s fifth principle, to “treat consumers fairly based on the nature of the audience” resonates rather strongly with the SPJ’s mandate to “minimize harm.” Though the contexts are somewhat different—the IoA seeks protection for widely acknowledged vulnerable audiences, such as children and those reliant on pharmaceuticals; whereas the SPJ takes both a much broader and more individual view of the issue, urging compassion when balancing the need to protect the news subject and the somewhat more ambiguous right of the public to the news itself. Both principles seek to prevent harm to vulnerable targets.
Though beyond the scope of this paper, it bears stating that for all their similarities, there seems to be one concrete point on which the two codes differ: the matter of privacy. Whereas the SPJ seeks to protect privacy only when harm would be caused by violating privacy, and then also as more of a function of private individuals rather than those who have opted to live a public life, the IoA, surprisingly enough (to me, at any rate), includes the right to privacy as one of their guiding principles, calling on its members to “never compromise consumers’ personal privacy in marketing communications.”
The following are the best practices I glean from my analysis of these two codes of ethics:
- Prize truthfulness above sensationalism or marketing interests.
Both codes of ethics call for truthfulness in communication, specifically to guard against sensationalism to promote the sale of news, products or services. A contemporary example may include the proliferation of pharmaceutical commercials in various media today, which seem to focus more on the benefits and enhancement of quality of life… and gloss over the potential side effects. In fact, in 1997, the FDA’s rules changed to allow companies to list only the most “significant potential side effects.” (Spiegel, 2009) This is a clear example of prizing marketing outcomes over truthfulness.
- Be transparent regarding sponsorships, endorsements, and other potential conflicts of interest.
Again, both codes of ethics mandate that sponsorships and conflicts of interest be clearly outlined in the interests of full transparency and reliability. Consider the native advertising on this webpage: https://www.buzzfeed.com/dove/10-skin-care-tips-every-woman-should-know?utm_term=.ifbyDbvMax#.vr3Ql16M9R. This is a blog that is maintained by Dove, the iconic skincare line, and this particular article does have some very helpful tips. While this is an example of native advertising, the article goes to some lengths to be transparent: Dove identifies itself distinctly below the introductory paragraph as “Brand Publisher.” While the article uses product placement (Tate 30) in that same paragraph, Dove does try to steer away from endorsing its own products elsewhere in the article; even when it does suggest products to use, specific brand names are not mentioned.
- Seek to minimize harm.
This best practice comes mainly from the IoA code of ethics, though there’s plenty of extrapolation from the SPJ as well. The Institute itself uses children as an example of how advertising targeted to this segment may well bring harm to a vulnerable population, as children’s brains are not fully developed and lack the cognitive skills to evaluate the credibility and reliability of advertising.
- Treat news subjects and target audiences with compassion rather than derision or aggression.
This best practice comes specifically from the SPJ’s code of ethics. It is striking to see how much emphasis there is on compassion and fair treatment. An example of this would be the treatment of the victim of a crime, and the need to balance the community’s right to information regarding the crime (if only to protect community members from the perpetrator, and perhaps to aid in the apprehension of the perpetrator) against the perhaps greater need to protect the victim from further harm, possible embarrassment and trauma.
References:
Federal Trade Commission. (n.d.). Native Advertising: A Guide for Businesses. Retrieved from Federal Trade Commission: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/native-advertising-guide-businesses
Shetty, K. R. (2016, September 15). Pardon Edward Snowden. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/opinion/pardon-edward-snowden.html
Spiegel, A. (2009, October 13). Selling Sickness: How Drug Ads Changed Health Care. Retrieved from NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113675737
Tate, Marsha A. Web Wisdom, 2nd Edition. CRC Press, 20091117. VitalBook file.
United States Department of Labor. (n.d.). The Whistleblower Protection Programs. Retrieved from Occupational Safety and Health Administration: https://www.whistleblowers.gov/