NGO Activism or Brand Destroyers?

When marketing gurus Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman realized that the same marketing principles used for products could be used for selling ideas, social marketing was born. The main obective here is to influence social behaviour not for the benefit of the marketer, read NGO, but for the benefit of the larger audience and general society.

Role of Social Marketers and Activists
As social change agents, activists try to nurture public consensus and act as an 'open system' which informs the public while at the same time learning from dialogue with stakeholders. It is therefore important to be seen as responsible citizens in order to win respect, acceptance and legitimacy from the majority of ordinary citizens who must be won over for movements to succeed. Social conditions and public policies that violate morally acceptable values are basically the main agenda when it comes to activism. The results being governmental policies being put in place to ensure such issues are accepted in political and judicial structures. However, some of these actions may not augur well with big corporations...

Stepping on large toes?
Corporations such as Nestle have had their share of "Corporate Crimes" highlighted by NGOs such as Oxfam and Greenpeace. The latest being the issue of palm oil being used in its products which is killing off orang-utans, all this after the issue with the Zimbabwe farm which claimed that Nestle Zimbabwe sourced 15 percent of its milk from a farm owned by the president’s wife, Grace Mugabe. All these crises as a result of close monitoring of activities of corporations by NGOs and Nestle has had quiet a rough time trying to manage their reputation and resorting to social media which hasn't worked much for them.

This video by greenpeace is the campaign against the destruction of the orang-utans' forest. Would you buy a Kit-Kat after watching it?

I thought not for most people...that's how powerful activists can be. Clearly, activism plays a big role in determining how organizations work. Pity that sometimes the environment will be destroyed in order to get people to travel as is the issue with the alarming rate of carbon prints.

References
Green peace UK, http://www.greenpeace.org.uk
http://www.techeye.net/internet/nestle-fails-at-social-media

Is ethics determined by sector?

A recent survey shows that 73% of respondents say that practitioners lie in course of their work. Only 38% say that PR is fundamentally honest, 27% disagree with this while there is 35% that are not sure. What is disheartening, is that this survey was conducted among PR practitioners.

There may be defining moments when the ethics of the profession have been questioned, but also true that the majority practice with honesty and try to be fair to both the organization they represent and to their 'external' audiences. Making consistent ethical decisions where cultures and values clash or vary is difficult. Where do you draw the line in terms of being loyal to your employer at the same time living with conscience?


To promote or not to promote?
PR Week featured an article that sought to collect views from different PR professions on how they felt about promoting some products. The tobacco industry has faced the most critism. How do you promote tobacco when the highly risky health issues are a reality? Well, the sector may well be legally regulated and allowed to sell, they employ thousands of people and contribute to the various economies. But is it worth the lives lost? The debate about how the only way to be ethical is to work in charity or voluntary sector, makes one wonder if the ability to be ethical lies within the type of sector one works for. Working in charity may help lower the chances of being unethical because of the nature of work involved. Established for the benefit of social good, we may assume that there is no reason to be unethical. But again, it also depends on the practitioners and what we define as right and wrong and on whose interest we are serving.

The ethical guidelines set by CIPR , PRSA, PRSK and other professional bodies all over seem to be experiencing problems about enforcement. The fact that there is the law and sometimes what is law may not necessarily be ethical doesn't help matters much. The onus is left to the practitioner to decide about what is considered ethical as per the company policy and the codes of conduct outlined by the professional bodies albeit their minimal clarity.

Am sure most practitioners are faced with the dilemma of defining what is ethical or morally upright given different scenarios and have to make decisions about what is best for the larger majority. It is arguable that utilitarianism is the most common approach to ethical decision making in business, because it takes into account the expected outcome when deciding on what is the right thing to do. However, we cannot always accurately predict future consequences (Cutlip et al. p.120)


References
Cutlip, S., et al. (2006), Effective Public Relations (9th ed.), New Jersey, Prentice Hall

PRWeek(2010), Professional ethics: should you promote these products? http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/983049/Professional-ethics-promote-products/ [Accessed 25/02/10]

PRWeek(2010), PR professionals believe 'spin' is entrenched in industry, survey shows.
http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/search/981450/PR-professionals-believe-spin-entrenched-industry-survey-shows/ [accessed 25/02/2010]