Do PR Folks Have a “Conflict of Interest” Blind Spot?
Mary Beth West:
In The #PRethics Community over on LinkedIn, our discussions often delve into topics concerning the whistleblower journey of standing up to misconduct in businesses and organizations.
Without question, one of the truly vast arenas of misconduct that I’ve personally witnessed and directly experienced in the PR industry – to an excessive degree – is that of conflict of interest.
While most PR practitioners seem to grasp what “conflict of interest” is notionally, I remain stunned on literally a daily basis with how few of our industry’s top leaders grasp the reputational risks of it, functionally.
Or, even if they do grasp it, their decision-making behaviors otherwise belie that they simply don’t care – which is a whole other discussion entirely, of course.
The Ethics & Compliance Initiative (ECI) in Washington, D.C. has defined the term “conflict of interest” as: “A set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgement or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest.”
ECI breaks down the definition of “conflict of interest” into several buckets of consideration:
“Primary Interest: The principal goal or duty of an employee, professional, or public official.”
“Secondary Interest: A separate personal, financial, or social factor that could compromise objectivity.”
“The Risk Factor: The definition emphasizes that an actual unethical outcome is not strictly necessary for a conflict to exist; the risk or appearance of bias is enough to require disclosure and management.”
ECI has reported for many years that – across industries and sectors – workforces’ observations of interest conflicts in their own workplace ranks among the top misconduct issues that exist, globally.
At its core, interest conflicts hinge on whether one is going to use (and thus abuse) their power and influence, at others’ expense, for the culprit’s own self-gain – particularly in ways that leverage intentional lack of disclosure / concealment and / or communicating outright falsehoods (otherwise known as “lying”) to others about a veiled interest, to the culprit’s benefit.
Clearly, this critical communication aspect of lying about a conflict of interest – by willful acts of commission or omission – resides squarely in the wheelhouse of PR. We in the PR industry must exhibit enough competence to know when we are manipulating messages and the channels of communication to participate in any way in an observable conflict of interest, either involving ourselves or the organization we represent.
For context, it’s important to glean what’s actually going on out there, in our own global industry.
Here are some real-life (but anonymized) examples of grave interest conflicts that I’ve directly witnessed in the PR industry over my some 30-year career (and with copious documentation underpinning each example):
The volunteer governance chairperson of a major PR industry trade association board begins “winning” key awards for their own for-profit PR firm, as presented by the chairman’s own trade association.
A major PR industry association adopts an “anti-disinformation” campaign as its national / global PR-advocacy cause célèbres, while simultaneously and aggressively engaging disinformation and whisper-campaign tactics to silence and intimidate critics.
A high-powered law firm with strong federal government connections is hired by numerous for-profit PR firms within a tight bevy of collusive PR agencies, whose own key executives also serve on their PR industry association board – while this same law firm also is hired by the PR industry trade association itself – but without ever disclosing to the association’s own rank-and-file membership multiple behind-the-scenes legal-representation conflicts of interest, which easily and foreseeably undercut less-powerful members’ own rightful legal interests vis-á-vis their trade association to which they pay expensive member dues.
A high-powered law firm runs a “Legal Helpline” service for a PR trade association, but with no disclosure on the front end to association members that the law firm already represents key for-profit PR agencies / conglomerates – some of which are known to be at the center of widespread employee-discrimination and harassment accusations for which the so-called “Legal Helpline” is specifically marketed by the trade association to “help” rank-and-file members who have been discriminated against / harassed… but with no foreknowledge that they may be set up via the “Helpline” to seek “help” from the very law firm representing their abusers.
The spouse of a PR entity leader (who also works in the same industry) is well-known in regional industry circles over prior years / decades to sexually harass young subordinates with little power, who, in turn, are rendered helpless to report their harasser for fear of career-ending retaliation from the powerful PR entity leader / co-spouse.
The PR vice president of a large banking corporation – which itself has incurred documented legal violations resulting in billions paid in government fines – is appointed by a PR trade association body to serve on a PR academic accreditation council, in a position of power that foreseeably silences academic communities from protesting either the PR trade association’s corruption or the corrupt banking corporation that also transacts billions in for-profit banking business with universities.
A rogue government regime well-known for breaking international laws and weaponizing every form of retaliation – from assassinations to sextortion to other forms of terrorism – plants its own contracted collective of so-called “PR” firms within one or more well-known PR trade associations, in order to subvert the impacted trade group(s) to the will of the rogue regime (e.g., disinformation campaigns-for-hire, internal trade group politics, contrived honors / awards, etc.).
The chairperson of a major PR association appoints their own personal and long-time “mentor” as the association’s all-powerful “complaints” chair, such that any inbound member complaints about the chairperson themselves (or members of their collusive leadership team) will be “managed” by the “complaints” chair in a way beneficial to the chairperson (e.g., ignored / stonewalled / trashed without explanation or adjudication, surreptitious counter-attacks registered against “complainers,” etc.).
The paid staff administrative assistant of a major PR industry non-profit association leader previously worked for a for-profit PR industry tycoon prior to their existing post. It is later credibly alleged (with documentation, but without follow-up investigation) that the prior industry-tycoon employer had paid for a house and pension for the administrative assistant prior to the admin taking post at the trade association, in order to “buy silence” permanently about the tycoon’s shady dealings and undue influence within the trade association itself, leading to rife, long-term abuses of power also concealed from the members.
Clearly, conflicts of interest in the PR industry can come about in many shapes, sizes, and forms.
What do they all have in common? ABUSES OF POWER, with deeply disturbing ramifications and impact points, inflicted on real human lives.
Conflicts of interest can render devastating consequences to the careers – and even to the very existence – of human beings. Sadly, the PR industry has chosen all too often to cede its role as a front-line of ethical compliance, bending instead to the veiled and conflicted / collusive interests of powerful figureheads.
Positive change can most quickly come about, by the industry rank-and-file voting with their feet and their pocketbooks not to fund or directly work with (or for) known culprits of such practices.
