Aug. 12, 2024
On the Edge of Ethics
The player is loading ...
That Solo Life Episode 261: On the Edge of Ethics
In this Episode
Has being edgy gone too far? In today’s episode of That Solo Life podcast, Karen Swim, APR and Michelle Kane discuss the controversial topic of sensationalized headlines and the impact they have on the dissemination of accurate information. The hosts discuss the fine line between grabbing attention and misleading the audience, especially in today's media landscape where clickbait headlines are prevalent.
Karen and Michelle discuss a recent example of the Olympics and the false narrative surrounding a boxer from Algeria to highlight how sensationalized headlines can lead to misinformation and even incite hatred towards individuals. They emphasized the ethical responsibility of PR professionals and journalists to present accurate and fair information to the public.
Public Relations professionals should all be concerned about the current trend of compromising truth for entertainment value in news reporting. The hosts reflected on the implications of this trend on future generations, particularly in an era where social media and instant information sharing can lead to the rapid spread of misinformation.
This episode also touched on the importance of self-reflection and avoiding biases in communication strategies, urging Solo PR Pros to stay honest and forthright in their work.
Overall, this episode served as a thought-provoking discussion on the evolving landscape of media, the importance of ethical journalism, and the role of PR professionals in upholding truth and accuracy in communication.
Episode Timeline
- 00:00:00 - Introduction and Discussion on Provocative Headlines
- 00:05:30 - Impact of Misinformation and Ethical Responsibility
- 00:09:06 - Concerns about Younger Generations and News Consumption
- 00:12:05 - Compromising Truth for Entertainment
- 00:13:35 - Challenges of Different Versions of Truth
- 00:15:04 - Encouragement for Self-Reflection and Audience Engagement
- Enjoyed the episode?
Please leave a review here - even a sentence helps. Share and tag us (@SoloPR, @SoloPRPro) on social media so that we can thank you personally! Your support helps us keep bringing you insightful content every week. Thank you for tuning in!
That Solo Life Episode 261: On the Edge of Ethics
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [00:03.038]-[00:17.524]: Thank you for joining us for this episode of That Solo Life, the podcast for PR pros and marketers who work for themselves. People like me, Michelle Kane with Voice Matters, and my ever steady co-host, Karen Swimme with Solo PR Pro. How are you, Karen?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [00:18.607]-[00:23.150]: I am doing fantastic, Michelle. Happy August. How are you?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [00:23.150]-[01:26.362]: August. I'm doing well. We made it through. We're midway through August. The Olympics just wrapped up by the time this hits everyone's inboxes and social sites. So it's just kind of an interesting time, right? Lots of information going around, as usual. But what we thought we would talk about today, just because it just seems to be hitting, I don't know, I doubt that it's hitting more frequently, but it just seems more pronounced, right? You know, how news outlets, everyone's trying to be edgy, grab the attention. I won't use the word clickbait, but, you know, trying to use these headlines that really betray the actual information and as PR pros, you know, does it do us or our profession well to join, you know, in being that provocative? Does it pay to be provocative? And to what end?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [01:26.362]-[02:13.456]: I agree. It's, you know, again, media outlets have always been, they go for the attention getting headlines. Right, right. Which is fine. You do need to grab people's attention. We as PR pros, we do that. We strive for that in our writing as well. We want to grab people's attention and bring them in. Email subject lines. This is what we do. However, can you be so edgy that you blur the lines of accuracy more that you inspire people to consume the information and make it inaccurate. So are you pushing it so far that people can infer something that's not true from what you're feeding them?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [02:13.456]-[03:06.414]: Right, right. I mean, case in point, and I'll say before I get into that, just the notion that how many of us just scan the headlines? Because we're all pressed for time, we scan it, we go, oh, oh, wow, okay. And we take that as our news when really the crux of it might be in the fourth or fifth paragraph. So, you know, case in point, the issue with the Olympics and the boxer from Algiers or Algeria. I'm not going to say anything correctly. I'm just going to say I'm guessing on the country. But, you know, whether or not this woman was a man. And it just caught fire. And next thing you know, it's like we're talking about a human life here. who hails from somewhere where that kind of thing is not just a brush-off topic and it could have a serious impact.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [03:06.414]-[05:06.250]: It was very unfortunate the narrative that sprung up around edgy headlines because, as you noted, people often don't have time or they just don't read. Let's be honest about it. The American public is not reading, they're skimming. And they took that headline and they ran with it and went after this woman, went after the, you know, the International Olympic Committee. They were on fire and they made it all about transgender. And it just, it, it was, it exploded when in reality, this woman is not transgender. She's intersex.
And even when I saw discussions on my community pages and someone raised the question about, you know, should there be a category for intersex athletes so that they have the opportunity to compete as well? And they were asking it as a question, not an attack. And people went completely bananas and other people were like, I'm like, people don't even know what intersexed means. They are just seeing transgender and they're seeing this from the American political lens only. And it got really ugly.
And so you have to think as communicators, we know that we have an ethical responsibility, right? We can go and everybody, it's always a good idea to review that PRC. code of ethics, we have an ethical responsibility not only to our clients, because our publics are not just our clients, to our public, to our audiences, to present information that is accurate and that's fair. And in this case, I would say to those journalists who really pushed the envelope, was this ethical? Because you really incited a narrative and a lot of hatred towards this human being who didn't deserve that.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [05:07.149]-[06:00.877]: Completely, completely. And, you know, if anything, what a wonderful opportunity to learn something, right? To realize, you know, I, I confess I did not read their entire post, but someone in science who knows this topic well said, you know, I'm going to chime in here. Here's how your chromosomes work and here's what happens. And I thought, Oh, that's kind of fascinating. And rather than getting excited about it, you have people digging in their heels of just like, no, and really all, that really comes down to the problem that we have currently in our country. And if you saw the rioting in the UK this weekend, it's not just us, but we just dig in our heels about our ideology and what makes us, I guess, unafraid about the world around us. It's like, really, you're fine. Your cornflakes are still going in your bowl.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [06:00.877]-[07:53.812]: I love that. I love that you're 100 percent Right. I don't like this trend, though. I mean, I love a good, snazzy, sizzling headline. I do. I love it. We play around with them a lot here on this podcast as well. But I hope that we never write or are responsible for anything that causes people to be misinformed, to spread mis-, mal- or disinformation in any way. If we have ever done that, call us out on it so that we can correct it because we're human beings too. And so I'm all, you know, I'm all for giving grace for something that came from the right intentions and maybe you missed it because we're human and we make errors. But I'm not okay with this being something that the business side of news is pushing for because this is not the journalist. Let's be clear about that. And when I say journalist, I really mean journalists. I'm not speaking to every content writer. I'm talking to journalists. We know, we see you and we understand that you do have ethical standards, that you really enjoy reporting and you enjoy reporting the facts and digging into things and even presenting opinions, but stating that they are opinions. I enjoy reading those pieces from journalists that lend like, here's what I see, or, hey, this is me, I grew up this way, or I'm from this place, and, you know, coloring it with some of their, but you know, it's their opinion, you know, it's their experience. So we know that it's nothing. It's money. And I'm starting to see how many ways money ruins things.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [07:53.812]-[09:06.960]: Yeah. How true is that? I mean, I long, I point back to way back in the 90s when hard copy was out, right? And that was at least as far as I could see the beginning of the infotainment of, you know, really kind of co-opting, compromising, Hard news, which I know it's boring. But it's just making it a little more dazzling or salacious. It's just like, I, you know, the way it's evolved, it almost feels dirty in a way because you're like, really? You're going there now. Come on. You're better than that. Try to be better. Now, I will say to the credit, and again, at the risk of being inaccurate, I think the Boston Globe was among the papers issuing an actual absolute apology to the Olympic boxer, which was fantastic. Props to the Globe. But it's been a slow, slow slide. And it's unfortunate, but I'm grateful that at least we are aware of it and we can play a part in doing something about it.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [09:06.960]-[10:45.062]: But I worry about the generation growing up in this era. I worry about those that consider TikTok a source of news, which When I say news, I really mean facts. I mean accurate information because everyone with a phone and a microphone is not necessarily accurate. And so I am inspired by people. I learn things from people that inspire me to go dig deeper. However, I wonder if our younger generation is even doing that. I mean, it's fine to listen to people. It's fine to read things, but please use your own mind to discern, to dig deeper, to look for facts, to research, to verify. And I think that I love that you use the word compromise because you are 100% right. And I think that because we do, we've entered, you know, we're firmly in that camp of compromising the truth for entertainment, for being provocative, for being edgy. It's why people don't trust institutions. I don't either. And I hate saying that as a PR pro, that there was a time that there were outlets that I read, and I just believed that the information that they shared was true. And it doesn't mean that I didn't read other things and compare and contrast, but I at least started with a baseline of trust. And now I start from a baseline of, eh, is that really what happened?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [10:45.935]-[11:28.330]: Right? I mean, it used to be just the tabloids, and I'm not talking about the National Enquirer, but usually, you know, the New York Post, that kind of tabloid journalism, right? It used to be just those, but now it's, you're right, it's the stalwarts of our journalism that you would say, oh, well, let me see what this outlet says, and then I'll know. But yeah, it's happened there, and it's so true. I mean, it is. It's what is it, the businessification of news? I mean, it's all about the bottom line and clicks and, well, truth, figure it out. And I agree, you know, the younger generations, I don't know, because they don't have that baseline.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [11:28.330]-[12:04.673]: And those are our future journalists, by the way, and media company owners, because Some of these owners eventually do get so old that, or they die and they have to, you know, sell the company. But those, they are our future. And I wonder what that looks like in the future. What is going to pass for news? Are we just, have we completely lost that? Are we, are we done? Should we just give up the ghost and admit that era is long gone? And how sad that we think of truth as boring.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [12:05.398]-[13:35.008]: Oh, right? I mean, I hope we're wrong. I hope, you know, pendulums do tend to sway or swing. So hopefully it will sway back in a better direction. I mean, I remember at the, you know, at the height of the Daily Show, and I think Jon Stewart probably still says it, it's like, oh gosh, don't get your news from us. Because people were, I mean, sure they were showing, you know, actual news clips, but I understood what he meant. But I think truth should be paramount. And, you know, I get it. You know, I'm not saying as far as our intelligence operations, of course, we can't know everything that goes on, let's get real. But as far as public information, you know, if it's incorrect, and of course, with social media and the internet, it catches fire so quickly, the brush fire just goes whoosh. Next thing you know, it's, you know, the game of telephone is you've got the wrong answer so quickly now. You know, we're seeing it in some of the veep stakes. And by now we'll know who that is. But you know, living in Pennsylvania, our governor's under consideration, I'm seeing chatter online of, oh, he said this, and he did this. And it's, I look at the bios and I'm like, OK, well, you don't even live here. You're not living this. You don't know. You haven't vetted them as someone you voted for. And it's like, no. It's almost like I was there when it happened. No, no, no, no, no. You don't understand.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [13:35.008]-[13:57.089]: No, I do, because I was there. Yeah. But you know, and in some ways, doesn't that feel like what must be so frustrating and has been for, you know, centuries for police officers who can go to the scene of a crime and interview witnesses and every witness sees it differently?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [13:57.089]-[13:58.309]: Oh, how true.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [13:58.309]-[14:59.182]: Yeah. But that's like our whole life now. Like everyone has a different version of the truth. And so, you know, when you think about witnesses who were there, who witnessed it with their own eyes, were present and could truly say, I know what happened, Everybody, they don't talk about the suspects in the same way. Sometimes they have wildly different versions of who was at fault at something. And so I don't know what happens to our brains. I can't explain it elegantly. I do understand how perception and how biases can come into play with influencing the way that we see things. That's a good topic, Solo PR Pros, to explore a little deeper and make sure that you are not allowing your own inherent biases to color your communications on behalf of your clients and, you know, in your own marketing and branding.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [14:59.182]-[15:03.806]: That's so true. Yeah, that's another great topic for another day, right?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [15:03.806]-[15:04.046]: Yes.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [15:04.619]-[15:55.047]: you know, check in with yourself. Just say, am I informing this in any particular kind of way that perhaps I shouldn't be? You know, or that that isn't, that doesn't serve the work in the way that it should, that doesn't keep it honest and forthright. No, I agree. Well, that's going to be a fun topic to dip into one day, but we also want to hear from you. What questions do you have? What would you like to see us cover? Because it's, You know, there's a big wide world out there and we want to know what's happening in your world of PR and marketing. So hit us up at soloprpro.com. If you receive value from this podcast, please share it around. Tell your friends. Make sure you sign up for the newsletter at soloprpro.com because Karen's always sending out great nuggets of information. And until next time, thanks for listening to That Solo Life.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [00:03.038]-[00:17.524]: Thank you for joining us for this episode of That Solo Life, the podcast for PR pros and marketers who work for themselves. People like me, Michelle Kane with Voice Matters, and my ever steady co-host, Karen Swimme with Solo PR Pro. How are you, Karen?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [00:18.607]-[00:23.150]: I am doing fantastic, Michelle. Happy August. How are you?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [00:23.150]-[01:26.362]: August. I'm doing well. We made it through. We're midway through August. The Olympics just wrapped up by the time this hits everyone's inboxes and social sites. So it's just kind of an interesting time, right? Lots of information going around, as usual. But what we thought we would talk about today, just because it just seems to be hitting, I don't know, I doubt that it's hitting more frequently, but it just seems more pronounced, right? You know, how news outlets, everyone's trying to be edgy, grab the attention. I won't use the word clickbait, but, you know, trying to use these headlines that really betray the actual information and as PR pros, you know, does it do us or our profession well to join, you know, in being that provocative? Does it pay to be provocative? And to what end?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [01:26.362]-[02:13.456]: I agree. It's, you know, again, media outlets have always been, they go for the attention getting headlines. Right, right. Which is fine. You do need to grab people's attention. We as PR pros, we do that. We strive for that in our writing as well. We want to grab people's attention and bring them in. Email subject lines. This is what we do. However, can you be so edgy that you blur the lines of accuracy more that you inspire people to consume the information and make it inaccurate. So are you pushing it so far that people can infer something that's not true from what you're feeding them?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [02:13.456]-[03:06.414]: Right, right. I mean, case in point, and I'll say before I get into that, just the notion that how many of us just scan the headlines? Because we're all pressed for time, we scan it, we go, oh, oh, wow, okay. And we take that as our news when really the crux of it might be in the fourth or fifth paragraph. So, you know, case in point, the issue with the Olympics and the boxer from Algiers or Algeria. I'm not going to say anything correctly. I'm just going to say I'm guessing on the country. But, you know, whether or not this woman was a man. And it just caught fire. And next thing you know, it's like we're talking about a human life here. who hails from somewhere where that kind of thing is not just a brush-off topic and it could have a serious impact.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [03:06.414]-[05:06.250]: It was very unfortunate the narrative that sprung up around edgy headlines because, as you noted, people often don't have time or they just don't read. Let's be honest about it. The American public is not reading, they're skimming. And they took that headline and they ran with it and went after this woman, went after the, you know, the International Olympic Committee. They were on fire and they made it all about transgender. And it just, it, it was, it exploded when in reality, this woman is not transgender. She's intersex.
And even when I saw discussions on my community pages and someone raised the question about, you know, should there be a category for intersex athletes so that they have the opportunity to compete as well? And they were asking it as a question, not an attack. And people went completely bananas and other people were like, I'm like, people don't even know what intersexed means. They are just seeing transgender and they're seeing this from the American political lens only. And it got really ugly.
And so you have to think as communicators, we know that we have an ethical responsibility, right? We can go and everybody, it's always a good idea to review that PRC. code of ethics, we have an ethical responsibility not only to our clients, because our publics are not just our clients, to our public, to our audiences, to present information that is accurate and that's fair. And in this case, I would say to those journalists who really pushed the envelope, was this ethical? Because you really incited a narrative and a lot of hatred towards this human being who didn't deserve that.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [05:07.149]-[06:00.877]: Completely, completely. And, you know, if anything, what a wonderful opportunity to learn something, right? To realize, you know, I, I confess I did not read their entire post, but someone in science who knows this topic well said, you know, I'm going to chime in here. Here's how your chromosomes work and here's what happens. And I thought, Oh, that's kind of fascinating. And rather than getting excited about it, you have people digging in their heels of just like, no, and really all, that really comes down to the problem that we have currently in our country. And if you saw the rioting in the UK this weekend, it's not just us, but we just dig in our heels about our ideology and what makes us, I guess, unafraid about the world around us. It's like, really, you're fine. Your cornflakes are still going in your bowl.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [06:00.877]-[07:53.812]: I love that. I love that you're 100 percent Right. I don't like this trend, though. I mean, I love a good, snazzy, sizzling headline. I do. I love it. We play around with them a lot here on this podcast as well. But I hope that we never write or are responsible for anything that causes people to be misinformed, to spread mis-, mal- or disinformation in any way. If we have ever done that, call us out on it so that we can correct it because we're human beings too. And so I'm all, you know, I'm all for giving grace for something that came from the right intentions and maybe you missed it because we're human and we make errors. But I'm not okay with this being something that the business side of news is pushing for because this is not the journalist. Let's be clear about that. And when I say journalist, I really mean journalists. I'm not speaking to every content writer. I'm talking to journalists. We know, we see you and we understand that you do have ethical standards, that you really enjoy reporting and you enjoy reporting the facts and digging into things and even presenting opinions, but stating that they are opinions. I enjoy reading those pieces from journalists that lend like, here's what I see, or, hey, this is me, I grew up this way, or I'm from this place, and, you know, coloring it with some of their, but you know, it's their opinion, you know, it's their experience. So we know that it's nothing. It's money. And I'm starting to see how many ways money ruins things.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [07:53.812]-[09:06.960]: Yeah. How true is that? I mean, I long, I point back to way back in the 90s when hard copy was out, right? And that was at least as far as I could see the beginning of the infotainment of, you know, really kind of co-opting, compromising, Hard news, which I know it's boring. But it's just making it a little more dazzling or salacious. It's just like, I, you know, the way it's evolved, it almost feels dirty in a way because you're like, really? You're going there now. Come on. You're better than that. Try to be better. Now, I will say to the credit, and again, at the risk of being inaccurate, I think the Boston Globe was among the papers issuing an actual absolute apology to the Olympic boxer, which was fantastic. Props to the Globe. But it's been a slow, slow slide. And it's unfortunate, but I'm grateful that at least we are aware of it and we can play a part in doing something about it.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [09:06.960]-[10:45.062]: But I worry about the generation growing up in this era. I worry about those that consider TikTok a source of news, which When I say news, I really mean facts. I mean accurate information because everyone with a phone and a microphone is not necessarily accurate. And so I am inspired by people. I learn things from people that inspire me to go dig deeper. However, I wonder if our younger generation is even doing that. I mean, it's fine to listen to people. It's fine to read things, but please use your own mind to discern, to dig deeper, to look for facts, to research, to verify. And I think that I love that you use the word compromise because you are 100% right. And I think that because we do, we've entered, you know, we're firmly in that camp of compromising the truth for entertainment, for being provocative, for being edgy. It's why people don't trust institutions. I don't either. And I hate saying that as a PR pro, that there was a time that there were outlets that I read, and I just believed that the information that they shared was true. And it doesn't mean that I didn't read other things and compare and contrast, but I at least started with a baseline of trust. And now I start from a baseline of, eh, is that really what happened?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [10:45.935]-[11:28.330]: Right? I mean, it used to be just the tabloids, and I'm not talking about the National Enquirer, but usually, you know, the New York Post, that kind of tabloid journalism, right? It used to be just those, but now it's, you're right, it's the stalwarts of our journalism that you would say, oh, well, let me see what this outlet says, and then I'll know. But yeah, it's happened there, and it's so true. I mean, it is. It's what is it, the businessification of news? I mean, it's all about the bottom line and clicks and, well, truth, figure it out. And I agree, you know, the younger generations, I don't know, because they don't have that baseline.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [11:28.330]-[12:04.673]: And those are our future journalists, by the way, and media company owners, because Some of these owners eventually do get so old that, or they die and they have to, you know, sell the company. But those, they are our future. And I wonder what that looks like in the future. What is going to pass for news? Are we just, have we completely lost that? Are we, are we done? Should we just give up the ghost and admit that era is long gone? And how sad that we think of truth as boring.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [12:05.398]-[13:35.008]: Oh, right? I mean, I hope we're wrong. I hope, you know, pendulums do tend to sway or swing. So hopefully it will sway back in a better direction. I mean, I remember at the, you know, at the height of the Daily Show, and I think Jon Stewart probably still says it, it's like, oh gosh, don't get your news from us. Because people were, I mean, sure they were showing, you know, actual news clips, but I understood what he meant. But I think truth should be paramount. And, you know, I get it. You know, I'm not saying as far as our intelligence operations, of course, we can't know everything that goes on, let's get real. But as far as public information, you know, if it's incorrect, and of course, with social media and the internet, it catches fire so quickly, the brush fire just goes whoosh. Next thing you know, it's, you know, the game of telephone is you've got the wrong answer so quickly now. You know, we're seeing it in some of the veep stakes. And by now we'll know who that is. But you know, living in Pennsylvania, our governor's under consideration, I'm seeing chatter online of, oh, he said this, and he did this. And it's, I look at the bios and I'm like, OK, well, you don't even live here. You're not living this. You don't know. You haven't vetted them as someone you voted for. And it's like, no. It's almost like I was there when it happened. No, no, no, no, no. You don't understand.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [13:35.008]-[13:57.089]: No, I do, because I was there. Yeah. But you know, and in some ways, doesn't that feel like what must be so frustrating and has been for, you know, centuries for police officers who can go to the scene of a crime and interview witnesses and every witness sees it differently?
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [13:57.089]-[13:58.309]: Oh, how true.
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [13:58.309]-[14:59.182]: Yeah. But that's like our whole life now. Like everyone has a different version of the truth. And so, you know, when you think about witnesses who were there, who witnessed it with their own eyes, were present and could truly say, I know what happened, Everybody, they don't talk about the suspects in the same way. Sometimes they have wildly different versions of who was at fault at something. And so I don't know what happens to our brains. I can't explain it elegantly. I do understand how perception and how biases can come into play with influencing the way that we see things. That's a good topic, Solo PR Pros, to explore a little deeper and make sure that you are not allowing your own inherent biases to color your communications on behalf of your clients and, you know, in your own marketing and branding.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [14:59.182]-[15:03.806]: That's so true. Yeah, that's another great topic for another day, right?
Karen Swim, APR, Solo PR [15:03.806]-[15:04.046]: Yes.
Michelle Kane, Voice Matters [15:04.619]-[15:55.047]: you know, check in with yourself. Just say, am I informing this in any particular kind of way that perhaps I shouldn't be? You know, or that that isn't, that doesn't serve the work in the way that it should, that doesn't keep it honest and forthright. No, I agree. Well, that's going to be a fun topic to dip into one day, but we also want to hear from you. What questions do you have? What would you like to see us cover? Because it's, You know, there's a big wide world out there and we want to know what's happening in your world of PR and marketing. So hit us up at soloprpro.com. If you receive value from this podcast, please share it around. Tell your friends. Make sure you sign up for the newsletter at soloprpro.com because Karen's always sending out great nuggets of information. And until next time, thanks for listening to That Solo Life.