Welcome to the Business of Honesty: How much will your honesty cost?

Sepp Blatter answered honestly when questioned about racism in football and he is asked to resign. England captain John Terry is under investigation over allegations of racism and remains captain of our national side.

In the England Sweden pre-match press conference, Terry is asked for his own opinion on the racism matter, to which an “advisor” steps in and tells him not to answer the question.

Terry remains captain yet is constrained to silence. Blatter gives an, ill judged or not, honest opinion and is now called to resign.

So where does this leave the role of Public Relations in terms of providing honesty and truth? Is honesty the best policy? Clearly not for Blatter, but is Terry as bad for not being honest and taking the consequences?

Does Public Relations have a conflicting stance on ethics? Are they acting in the interest of the public or on behalf of the individual who has the most to lose? Is it simply bigger than the public obsession with gossip?

So many questions! So let’s get our teeth into it and have a go at getting to the bottom of what’s going on.

Sepp Blatter in a recent CNN interview was asked to comment on whether racism on the football pitch existed. His answer, which has been well documented since, as reported in The Times was: ‘There is no racism’ and if the issue should arise on the pitch, it should be settled with the ‘shaking of hands’. This coming from the ‘most powerful man in world football’ is clearly not the cleverest man in world football, which I think you’ll agree from comments such as that. Taking into account on the same day, Liverpool FC’s Luis Suarez was charged with racially abusing Manchester United’s defender Patrice Evra. A somewhat contradictory stance, but we thank you for your honesty Mr. Blatter.

His honesty landed Blatter a hostile reaction and calls for his head, metaphorically speaking I assure you. England International Rio Ferdinand expressed his disgust on social networking Twitter, tweeting that Blatter’s comments were ‘condescending’ and ‘laughable’, later tweeting again to ask if shaking hands with racist fans in the crowd after a game would resolve any issues. Still feeling powerful now Sepp? All this for an honest comment, is honesty paying dividends?

This wasn’t the end of it for Sepp Blatter. Several ex-professional footballers and The Professional Footballers association (PFA) called for time on Blatter’s reign over world football. Gordon Taylor, chief of PFA, said that it was ‘the straw that broke the camels back’, referring to other, not entirely well judged, spur of the moment remarks he had made in the past. Well not to worry too much Sepp, there may well be an opening at News International available in the not so distant future. I’m sure they could do with some honesty amongst their ranks. 

 In a blog I recently read by Rory Dixon about Tiger Wood’s fall from grace, Dixon argues that Wood’s personal issues should not have been as heavily scrutinised by the media, ending that it was a matter for ‘man’ and ‘wife’ to settle. I’m not sure I agree with this. This isn’t the 60’s folks. We live in a 24 hour media age; information is available to millions at the click of a button. A manager in 2011 wouldn’t set up his football teams’ strategy for a team they played in the 1970’s, so why do we expect the media to act differently and use out of date techniques?

David Cameron said in regards to social issues during the times of rioting earlier this year, that people are all too aware of their ‘rights’ but not of their ‘responsibilities’. It is an interesting point to make. I don’t think this is merely confined to members of the general public that Cameron was referring to. Can it be concluded that realisation of responsibilities is being suppressed by Public Relation practices? Clearing to most morally sound members of public who have seen John Terry play as captain of England, the right thing to do would have been to provide Fans, his professional colleagues and the media with an explanation, right? Our lion heart leader remained silenced. So, where does this leave the role of Public Relations in this case?

Terry was clearly silenced by his advisor during the pre game interview, but why? Was it part of the Public Relations code of ethics, which Parson’s comments ‘is there harm involved’? My question is; do no harm to whom?  Is it to the player's reputation? Surely the issue of racism in football is bigger than just one man, I would like to think so in an era where the government looks to sport as a medium for combating social issues.

The literature surrounding Public relations (PR) is wide and varied but in terms of a definition of ethics in PR the foundations of the answer surrounds understanding what is right and wrong. This seems rather logical and more common sense than an academic answer. The five pillars of PR ethics involves issues such as not misleading, not doing harm, and not making unfair assumptions. Innocent till proven guilty, an age old cliché but I would argue that in Terry’s case silence is going to lead to these assumptions, so in my opinion they are not unfair at all and are self inflicted, sack the advisor I say. Parson’s literature also asks ‘does it feel wrong?’. Well I would like to meet the person that believes even the suggestion of Terry racially abusing a fellow professional isn’t wrong given his profile and influence. How does this reflect on the organisations that are controlling the investigation? What does is say about their values as an organisation? Clearly providing truth and honesty isn’t high on the agenda, would it be fair to say that organisational reputation was more critical?

This leads me on to my next sticky point. The PFA and Football Association (F.A) have invested heavily in policies and projects such as Show Racism the Red Card in an effort to combat the issues of racism in football. So how good would it look on the controlling organisations, if a role model such as our national team captain, was charged with racially abusing a fellow colleague?

I think at this point it can be argued that a phone call was made to contain this situation and that the reputations of these organisations and the investments made, was at the heart of the solution rather than honesty, responsibility and transparency. Let’s not forget that reputation is a key driver in Public Relations. If a certain party’s reputation is at risk, then action must be taken to preserve it, the cost of a Public Relations advisor in the short term is surely less than the loss of a squeaky clean image in the long term, right? It could be argued that short term actions are for the greater good, for the bigger picture.

What do you and I, as members of the normal, low stakes world know? As hinted at earlier, maybe these issues are bigger than us. Honesty certainly hasn’t done Blatter any good, so a strategic approach may be the best way in achieving a greater good. It can be argued that this 24 hour media culture and obsession with celebrity gossip has aided the way, in which Public Relations can simply allow other news to cover up their issues. Play the short game correctly, tight lipped in Terry’s case, and watch more current news sweep your story under the Public Relations’ rug. Stories are breaking constantly with 24 hour news channels, social networking sites and newspapers, there is always something else to talk about, and that’s the point.

People will always read papers on the bus, magazines at dinner and chat amongst friends. Next time you are gossiping to your friends, just think, are you covering up someone else’s story, and what are they getting away with?

Honesty is a figure on the balance sheet, Public Relations its tool.

Welcome to the Business of Honesty.