Top Public Relations Professionals Should Face Charges in Corporate Misconduct Cases

Public relations professionals are paid to build andTop organisations with major public relations resources
protect reputation ... so in cases where reputationthat have managed to get themselves into areas of
collapses and there is evidence of managementserious public misdemeanour read like a roll call of
misbehaviour, should the police or public prosecutors besome of the greatest organisations in the world. In
investigating what the PR boss said and did? I certainlyrecent years alone, organisations that have been
think they should. Public relations professionals shouldchallenged for practices that could never match any
have nothing to fear through being accountable. Onlyethical code - knowingly or not - have included the
those less competent should be worried. If we facedBBC, BP, British Airways, Coca-Cola, the European
legal investigation when a disaster strikes theUnion, Firestone, Ford, MacDonald's, Nike, Shell,
organisations we advise, maybe those weak andStarbucks and Wal-Mart amongst many others.
ineffective people in public relations would take theirThe problems are not limited to in-house professionals.
responsibilities more seriously? We all know who theySome analysts have claimed that more than half the
are, for any journalist will tell you who shrinks back intotop public relations consultancies have been linked to
the woodwork when trouble strikes.public relations disasters, including fake lobby groups,
And if one or two of our timid, lightweight or downrightfabricated evidence, misleading information and
useless brethren found themselves facing a spell in jail,conspiracy to keep issues quiet.
it might be the single most important motivator for usSome years ago in my best seller, Manage your
to improve our standards. It would also show what wereputation, I wanted to use, as an example, a solid
should be doing - checking, monitoring and advising oncompany name with a brand you could trust for its
what the organisation DOES, not just what it says. Avalues of honesty, integrity, reliability, safety and
jail sentence for a top PR adviser would also remindperformance. To illustrate that a brand makes
business mangers that we are (or should be)promises that means it is much more than just a
responsible and vital to corporate credibility.product, I commented that you would not expect Ford
Where were the public relations people and whatto make cars that could kill you. In the next edition, I had
were they saying or doing in major corporateto remove those words following the human death toll,
scandals? Remember when Ford fought Firestoneof around 100, through the problems with its Explorer
over the Explorer accidents, or when Nike wasvehicle. Questions still remain over who knew what
charged with using illegal child labour, when Enron,and when -rather like the current GSK product that
WorldCom, Global Crossing and others folded amidstmay have harmed innocent people.
accusations of gross corporate misconduct, theft andReputation depends on what the company does, not
fraud?just says
Incidentally, why do our professional bodies not seemAccording to the Chartered Institute of Public Relations
keen to take any action in such cases? Could it bein the UK, which has many but not all of the top UK
that our business is considered to be so unprofessionaladvisers in membership, their members are the
that an estimated 86% of practitioners are notcorporate custodians of reputation; few would argue
members of any professional body? Should awith this theoretical definition of the job.
commentator like myself risk corporate action forBut to accept that role and to do the job, they must
raising a few simple and obvious questions? For theknow what the company is doing. If they do not, then
truth is that corporate standards across too manythey are not really carrying out a public relations job - it
organisations are not high enough ... and, shockingly, themight more accurately be called media relations,
rate paid to the PR chief is no indicator of theinformation, communications, publicity or even a
standards applied.propaganda function. It would certainly not be about
Consider a more recent example. Global pharmacy'relations' so cannot be public relations. If practitioners
company, GlaxoSmithKline, stands accused ofdo know what the company is doing and it is pursuing
'economy with the truth' that they alone knew, in ashortcuts or even following outright dodgy practices,
current high profile case in Europe. Their bizarre 'leavesthen they must be complicit in this deception of the
on the line' delays in accepting their responsibility, yetpublics with whom they are supposed to building both
again raise questions over the role and the authority ofreputation and relations on behalf of their organisations.
public relations professionals; many claim 'director' orSurely the public relations person, above all, should
similar in their titles - and are supposed to becarry not just some responsibility but a primary
confidantes at board level - yet too often do not seemresponsibility? After all, their job is not to make sure the
to know what is going on under their noses. Ignoranceorganisation says nor does anything that would harm
of malpractice is no defence for company directorsits reputation or be any disadvantage to the publics it
and other senior executives. And, of course, neither isserves.
it for us in public relations. How can we take theThe top public relations professionals in every disaster
money and not the responsibility? Take the moneyshould be challenged both by the media and, if relevant,
and you should carry the can if it goes wrong.by the law. Did these professionals know about the
Legislation in the US, UK, Europe and other parts of thepractices that were taking place? If not, why not? If
world will put a fiercer spotlight on the top person inthey did, did they judge them to be unacceptable? If so
the PR job. According to a BBC report in the UK,what did they do about them? What advice did they
British government Ministers have promised to tightenoffer management? How forcefully did they present
laws requiring drug firms to disclose data from clinicalthis?
trials. It comes after the drugs regulator announcedPR professionals cannot allow malpractice
GlaxoSmithKline would not face criminal proceedingsThe rule must be simple. If any organisation is following
over claims it withheld information on their drugpractices that would damage its reputation if these
Seroxat. But they warned GSK should have beenwere discovered or disclosed, the public relations
quicker to raise the alarm on the risk of suicidalprofessionals must know about them if they are doing
behaviour associated with the antidepressant in thethe job. Their only duty must be to stop these. If they
under-18s.do not know, they are incompetent. If they fail to take
One question not yet asked, let alone answered, mustdecisive action, they are ineffective.
be what did GSK public relations professionals knowWhilst some public relations people may have taken
about what was going on? The story suggest thatthe silver shilling and others may simply be timid, good
trials had indicated the drug had potential dangers withpublic relations people are an example to us all and
young people but, many journalists claim, the companyhave great influence internally and externally on policy,
hid behind a defence, legal but rejected by thebacked by impeccable integrity. Look at the public
regulators, that the drug was not approved forrelations performance and recognition, for example, of
prescription to young people.Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, FedEx, GE, Johnson&
A tough new UK law on coronate manslaughterJohnson, Marks & Spencer, Toyota, Virgin and
becomes effective in April this year and will allow, forVodafone.
the first time, indivudal managers to be prosecuted forWe need to condemn poor performance ... and not
deaths that occur in their companies or through theirleave that just to journalists. And, equally, we must
company policies, products or activities.praise the outstanding. And if future legislation puts our
The power of public relations is undoubted in projectingwork in the area of corporate responsibility into
the messages it wants to put over, but what aboutsharper focus, that must be good for our business.
when the news may be bad - or corporate activityEven if it means a few of the poor performers suffer
may prove unacceptable if exposed?along the way.
Following recent criticisms of public relations integrity,The new generation of young professionals coming
UK newspaper Guardian columnist Peter Wilby tookinto our business will set higher standards, will work to
his own swipe at public relations by claiming that thebetter values and demand more integrity from
craft ... "at best aspires to a partial truth and, at worse,management colleagues. And it is the job of all of us in
to outright fabrication. PR far more than journalismthe business to encourage these new professionals
shapes the news agenda…At least half the news inand help them to find their feet in our craft. This means
papers is generated not by journalist, but by PRs orwe must offer training, development positions, work
spin doctors.”experience. And we must, as many do, support the
But with this power comes responsibility.work of the universities and colleges that are
The good, the bad and the uglyeducating these undergraduates to superb standards.