By Mary Beth West, APR
It happens about once or twice a year, it seems: one of the most prominent multinational public relations firms is exposed for unethical practices, and the whole profession is faced with yet another perceptual mess to clean up about how public relations should be conducted without resorting to sleight-of-hand.
This past week, it was Burson-Marsteller’s work for Facebook, where according to The Wall Street Journal’s initial report, “Facebook hired (Burson-Marsteller) to try to plant stories harshly criticizing Google’s privacy practices. The efforts backfired when the firm approached a blogger who not only declined the assignment, but also went public with the exchange.”
The ethics breach hinges on Burson-Marsteller’s alleged failure to disclose the client’s identity behind their efforts, which runs opposed to the Public Relations Society of America’s Code of Ethics “disclosure of information” provision.
The provision states as its intent to “build trust with the public by revealing all information needed for responsible decision-making,” and that “revealing the sponsors for causes and interests represented” is a requirement.
From the reports I’ve seen, it appears Burson-Marsteller’s management is passing the buck, indicating that the strategy employed for its client came as a result of “Facebook (requesting) that its identity remain secret,” and that Burson-Marsteller “admits that violates its own policies” – inferring that perhaps some rogue element within the firm went off the reservation to do a client’s nefarious bidding. As of late this past week, Burson-Marsteller and Facebook have parted ways, not surprisingly.
I myself am a Harold Burson Summer Internship alumnus through the firm’s New York office in the early 1990s, and while I remain grateful to Burson-Marsteller for the learning opportunities I received, this incident just irks me, and I’m sure I’m not the only one with previous or current company ties who feels that way.
For well more than half a century, Harold Burson himself – now in his 90s and a fellow native of Tennessee – has been a stalwart proponent of what I consider to be the profession’s most noble aims and ethics-based best practices. His fierce intellect and thought leadership continue to provide some of the greatest sources of direction to the entire profession. I can only imagine that it frustrates him a great deal to witness this incident. Members of the internal team involved in the Facebook account might be reminded to have some respect for the man whose name is on the door.
So on to my point:
Public relations firms of all types, from the locally based or boutique level (like mine) to the multinationals, should be setting the examples of best ethical practices, because the media spotlight scrutinizes these companies the most, driven by their volume of work. And of course, the larger the firm, the more intense the spotlight.
When any single firm makes a clear-cut ethical misstep – particularly one resulting in the level of media attention driven by a behemoth like Facebook – it reflects poorly on the profession as well as the entire agency sector. Further, it sets back efforts to achieve long-term public and business-community understanding about the critical role of ethics in communications strategy.
This reality should factor into every agency’s own ethics policy, and agency employees at all levels should understand the implications for themselves, their firms and the profession itself if they veer away from the basic standards put forth by the PRSA Code of Ethics.
On a final note, agencies must demonstrate some backbone when dealing with any client that suggests (or mandates) a strategy or tactic that doesn’t pass the smell test. Claiming “My client made me do it!” is downright lame and demonstrates no serious commitment on an agency’s part to keep their ethics m.o. in check.
If an agency is in business long enough, and certainly if it employs scores, hundreds or thousands of people, mistakes in judgment will happen. I’ve made a fair share of mistakes in my own career, particularly in the very early years. Recovery from mistakes is possible if one takes a serious approach, such as we would advise a client in any crisis.
I hope that internally within Burson-Marsteller, this situation will result in a silver lining with renewed management-to-front-line awareness-building and practical focus that is in keeping with The Harold Burson Way.
Some of the best insights we’ve integrated into our clients’ communications strategies have come from input gathered in focus groups.
