Ethics in Public Relations
Kyle Aarestad
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater

Abstract
Communication, today, is built on a two way model (Fitzpatrick, K. & Bronstein, C.
2013). Messages are sent and received by publics via practitioners, but a door must be open for publics to return such communications; practitioners must be open to receive these as well as send them. This simple framework is developed around a mutual trust between a business and its publics, and without such trust, proper communication collapses. In order to prevent this collapse, all communication must be developed ethically. Without proper ethical consideration, this trust will quickly dissolve and the framework that all communication is created around today will fall apart. Therefore, proper ethics in the art of communication is of the utmost importance.
The role of ethics in public relations is to ensure that all practitioners will be responsible advocates for those they represent (Fitzpatrick, K. & Bronstein, C. 2013). The communication field can create distinct and difficult ethical dilemmas and it is important that practitioners understand the significance of good practices when handling these situations to guarantee competent, fair communication with publics and ensure the preservation of trust. Without an understanding of upright ethics, a practitioner can run the risk of damaging the reputation of not only themselves as a professional, but also that of the clientele they represent. This can also dismantle the established mutual trust. Simply put, ethical practices in public relations secure the reputation and credibility of those represented as well as those doing the representing. Public
Relations Society of America (PRSA) believes that, “successful Public Relations hinges on the ethics of its practitioners” (PRSA, 2013). In partnership with the preservation of the public’s repute, poor ethical practices may have legal implications for all parties involved. In essence, all
Public Relations programming must have a solid, ethical foundation before being put into play and because of this, ethical understanding is crucial amongst communicators. However, despite

the heavy emphasis on the importance of ethics in the communication world, poor ethics do still occur.
Ethical Models and Codes
Poor ethical practices can transpire accidentally and a communication professional may not always be accountable for such. The simplest formula to determine whether a person can be held accountable for faulty ethics is divided into three facets. The first is the person functionally and/or morally responsible for an action? The second, has some harm occurred due to that action and third, does the responsible person have a legitimate excuse for their actions (Fitzpatrick, K.
& Bronstein, C., 2013)? If a professional, for example, has a legitimate excuse or is not found functionally responsible, then the ethical responsibility cannot fall on their shoulders. While this simple formula can be used to determine the accountability of a professional regarding already in play programming, ideally professionals engage in self-policing prior to commencing an action.
This policing is completed in order to deter malfeasance, to enforce the morality, and to ensure that professionals will engage in what one writer calls “right conduct” (Fitzpatrick, K. &
Bronstein, C., 2013). Of course, the main goal of such self-monitoring is to protect the clients of professional communication practices. However, ethical monitoring also protects the professional franchise and maintains the essential public trust as well as helps to support professional privilege. In order to assist and encourage practitioners to self-police, several professional organizations have developed codes of conduct and ethical frameworks.
Ethical models are created to assist and guide communication professionals when solving ethical problems that arise with regularity. With the world so rapidly evolving and expanding, these models must be both dynamic and responsive as new ethical plights are created every day.

Perhaps the most widely known and accessible PR ethical model available today is the Code of
Ethics created by the PRSA.
PRSA Code of Ethics
The PRSA’s Code of Ethics is designed to “anticipate and accommodate, by precedent, ethical challenges that may arise” (PRSA, 2013). The code begins by outlining its members statement of professional values: “Advocacy, honesty, expertise, independence, loyalty, and fairness” (PRSA, 2013). As communication practitioners, it is dire that virtuous ethics be practiced in all of these areas and the PRSA elaborates on the importance of each.
Professionals must be responsible advocates of those they represent, adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth when advancing the interests of those represented, and responsibly utilize their specialized knowledge and expertise.
They must provide objective counsel to those represented and take accountability for their actions. Professionals must also remain loyal to those they serve while maintaining their obligation to serve the public’s interest and deal fairly with all those involved in the communication process (PRSA, 2013).
In order to see to that professionals adhere to all of these values, the Code continues on with an elaborate provisions of conduct. The Code delves into guidelines regarding: “the free flow of information, competition, disclosure of information, safe guarding confidences, conflicts of interests, and enhancing the profession of public relations” (PRSA, 2013). Each section lays out specific guidelines that must be followed by practitioners in order to keep programming within the bounds of responsible ethics.
Other Codes
While the PRSA’s Code of Ethics is perhaps the most well-known guide regarding proper ethics and the art of communication, there are several other models from which practitioners can build programming. The Board of Ethical Standards and Practices (BEPS) works to create

Professional Standards Advisories (PSAs), which are considered to be a direct extension of the
PRSA code of ethics (PRSA, 2013). PSAs are created in order to keep the PRSA code of conduct timely via a formal process (PRSA, 2013). Each PSA contains an explanation of a particular ethical dilemma, details unethical routes regarding the issue, and provides clear, ethical solutions to the problem at hand. PSAs also provide professionals with links to additional resources regarding the issue as well as the contact information of the best practitioners in that specific area.
The International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) has also developed a code of ethics that its members must abide by. The IABC’s Code was developed around three
“different yet interrelated principles of professional communication that apply throughout the world” (IABC, 2013). The three principles are as follows: “professional communication is legal, professional communication is ethical, and professional communication is in good taste” (IABC,
2013). By recognizing these three principles, members of the IABC should engage in communication that is not only legal, but also ethical and sensitive to cultural values and beliefs.
They will also engage in truthful, accurate, and fair communication that facilitates respect and mutual understanding. The Code then divulges into a vast set of articles which further list
IABC’s members’ ethical responsibilities.
Yet another ethical guide available to professionals in the field was established by the
International Public Relations Association (IPRA). Similar to PRSA, IPRA has a very elaborate code of conduct that all members must adhere to. However, unlike PRSA, IPRA’s Code of
Ethics deals more with ethical predicaments that may arise on an international level. The Code specifies the proper ethical approach in 18 separate realms: “Observance, integrity, dialogue, transparency, conflict, confidentiality, accuracy, falsehood, deception, disclosure, profit,

remuneration, inducement, influence, competitors, poaching, employment, and colleagues”
(IPRA, 2013).
The IPRA, much like the PRSA, believes strongly that quality communication practices derive directly from good ethics.
Although different in many ways, all of the fore-mentioned codes share the same essential values: trust, accuracy, and respect. These three values are the key cogs of ethics in communication and should build the foundation around all programming. Without consideration for any of these values, the essential two way model framing communications today would fall apart.
Ethics and the Law
Codes of ethics created by professional associations are not always useful in determining the accountability of an unethical practitioner since these codes only apply to the individual members of each association. In order to combat this problem and reach all practitioners, regardless of their membership to professional associations, some countries have implemented occupational licensing. The idea of licensing professionals was originally advocated by the early communications pioneer, Edward Bernays: “In the entire history of professions, licensing standards and criteria and finally codes of ethics in public relations have been necessary...to exclude those who are not properly qualified” (Broom, G, 2013). By doing this, professionals acting unethically in the field run the risk of losing licensing, and thus, would essentially be removed from the profession which is very similar to doctors performing malpractice. In 1967,
Brazil implemented this plan and has celebrated much success since.
However, licensing professionals in the United States has been a topic of much controversy. Despite heavy arguments being made to implement such a plan, licensing

practitioners challenges three basic constitutional rights: “the right of freedom of expression, the right of the states to regulate occupations, and the right of individuals to pursue occupations without unjustified state interference” (Broom, G., 2013) In partnership with this, the courts of the United States have found no solid reason to regulate communication practitioners. In the court case, Adams v. Tanner, it was found that controversy alone is not sufficient enough cause to regulate the practice. In actuality, the courts of the United States tend to favor public relations and media that cause “vigorous public debate” (Broom, G., 2013). Because of the First
Amendment, unethical communication can be protected.
The First Amendment and Communication
The legal power of the First Amendment in the world of public relations is something all practitioners must understand, relish, and respect. Peterson and Lang (2013) point out that “even when the justices pointed out publicity practices they deemed unethical, they still emphasized the fact that constitutionally, such practices are protected alongside other contentious exchanges in the marketplace of ideas” (Broom, G.). In fact, practitioners that fully understand their clients’ rights under the First Amendment, can not only better service their clients, but also provide higher quality public relations counsel (Broom, G., 2013). However, This is not to say the first amendment is a shield for unethical practitioners to hide behind. While some unethical practices can freely pass into the market place of ideas via the First Amendment, the courts, for the most part, have established that commercial speech that is “false, deceptive, or misleading” is not entitled to First Amendment protection (Fitzpatrick, K., & Bronstein, C., 2013). The government has reserved the right to monitor and disseminate this communication and thus “ensure that commercial communication flows cleanly as well as freely” (Fitzpatrick, K., & Bronstein, C.,
2013).

Other Laws
In the early 1990s, the United States Supreme Court made a decision regarding the way journalists can treat their sources for information. The decision made clear that “journalists must keep the promises they make to their sources...If a source suffers harm because the promise was not kept, judges will apply principles of fundamental fairness to hold the journalists accountable”
(Broom, G, 2013). This conclusion was incredibly beneficial to communication practitioners as it shielded them from potential misquotes and misunderstandings via the media. It also helped to further ensure ethical communication on the receiver’s side.
The most heavily regulated dimension of communication is that of political orientation.
Dozens of acts, such as the Freedom of Information Act of 1966, help to promote the complete disclosure of information from all branches of the government. However, as with the Freedom of
Information Act of 1966, only records or “tangible” information is subject to total disclosure. If the information presented is not yet recorded or “intangible,” agency professionals are not required to answer questions regarding such information (Broom, G., 2013).
Communicators in the realm of lobbying are subject to the heaviest regulations out of all political practitioners. Under the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act of 1946, lobbyists are required to submit any articles or editorials they have published which may have influenced legislation (Broom, G., 2013). This act creates a sort of ethical screen for lobbying to pass through and helps to both discourage and catch unethical practices. However, concern of the adequacy of this act eventually arose. In order to combat this concern and more effectively monitor lobbying, the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 was also enacted. This act updated the
Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act’s definitions, disclosure requirements, and restrictions. This

act further elaborated on what ethical practices were for lobbyists, lobbying firms, and lobbying contracts (Broom, G., 2013).
Ethics and The Online Environment
During the presidential elections of 2004, rumors of a reinstituted military draft ran rampant. Half of American individuals between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine fully believed the rumor to be true, when in fact, it was all fabricated by a liberalist activist group bent on unseating George W. Bush. The rumor was eventually squelched by the government, but not before it had circulated for nearly six months. Due to their savvy use of the internet, a small group of liberals was able to convince nearly half of the country of something fabricated from thin air (Fitzpatrick, K., & Bronstein, C., 2013). The internet today has changed the techniques and abilities of communicators by allowing organizations and individuals with minimal resources to reach global audiences. The internet’s power is boundless, and proper ethical practices are dire regarding its use.
No code of ethics created by professional communication organizations specifically mentions the use of the internet; however, they all concur that the same concepts brought forth in their codes apply to the online world. Outside of these codes, since 2001, practitioners have relied on one statement of online ethical practices for guidance. Issued by the Arthur W. Page
Society, the statement draws principles from the “pioneer public relations professional for whom the organization is named” (Fitzpatrick, K., & Bronstein, C., 2013). It is created around three ethical principles: “practitioners should tell the truth, minimize harm to others, and be accountable for their actions” (Fitzpatrick, K., & Bronstein, C., 2013). The statement creates fifteen guidelines for professionals to follow which can be grouped in to four categories:
“providing fact-based content, being objective advocates, earning public trust, and educating the

profession” (Fitzpatrick, K, & Bronstein, C, 2013). The Code is a good basis for online practitioners but it only outlines basic principles that should be followed when practicing both online or offline. In partnership with this, it lacks power to enforce compliance with its guidelines, and thus has no real bearing. Since its creation, no efforts have been made to create an internet specific ethical guideline.
Expected Ethical Trends in Public Relations
As the occupation of professional communication has aged, the importance of ethics has increased. With the power of social media and the online world growing stronger each day, it is dire that communicators understand proper ethics and utilize them in their practices. The world of communication continues to push the importance of ethics further each day. Collegiate courses now feature a much heavier emphasis on ethical practices, and the significance of becoming an accredited practitioner has dramatically increased. Today, professionals whom demonstrate proper ethics, commitment, knowledge, and skills are provided the most opportunity. Due to this, the weight of ethics in the world of communication will continue to rise. As Glen Broom writes, “Practitioners committed to high standards of ethics and professionalism will distinguish public relations practice from other skilled occupations and make it a calling serving the public interest” (Broom, G., 2013). In other words, by stressing the importance of ethics to upcoming practitioners, the art of public relations can become a larger, more esteemed profession.

Conclusion
In conclusion, public relations practices should always be built around an ethical framework. Ethical frameworks protect all of the parties involved from harm and allow all programming to be more efficient. Essentially, making sure programming has an ethical format is the most important aspect of communicating. By doing this, one can guarantee success and further build the profession as a whole.

Works Cited
Broom, G. (2009). Cutlip & Center's Effective Public Relations. (10th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Print.
Fitzpatrick, K, & Bronstein, C. (2006). Ethics in public relations:responsible advocacy.
London, England: Sage Publications Inc. Print.
International Public Relations Association. (2013,). Retrieved from http://www.ipra.org/about/ipra-codes, 23 Sept. 2013
International association of business communicators. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.iabc.com/about/code.htm, 23 Sept. 2013

Public Relations Society of America. “Public Relations Society of America Code of
Ethics.” http://www.PRSA.org, 23 Sept. 2013