http://www.prmatters.co.nz/no-lipstick-please/ fresh thinking - influential communication Wed, 30 Nov 2011 22:56:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.prmatters.co.nz/no-lipstick-please/comment-page-1/#comment-49 Simon Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:02:38 +0000 http://www.prmatters.co.nz/?p=52#comment-49 I think it would be great for PRINZ to start a similar initiative – if it helps in boosting its own profile as communications leaders in NZ at least. I'm not sure how relevant it actually would be though or if clean and fair is the right name for the group. You can be ethical and unfair at the same time. It's unfair to John McCain for Obama to capitalise on the current economic crisis for votes but it's entirely ethical for Obama to attack him and his record in television ads over it. Also character attacks are simply a normal part of politics and reporting that have always been around. While comments or attacks about race, gender or appearance are always just plain idiotic and transparent, attacks about judgement, experience, past associations or investments of political candidates are legitimate. The ‘lipstick on a pig’ comment by Obama that recently came up in the media was not a character attack on John McCain nor was it a reference to Sarah Palin as some channels portrayed it (unfairly) as. I already feel that Mcain, Obama, Clark and Key are already reasonably ethical in their communications but the media will always be unfair. If the PRSA initiative and its Facebook group objectives are to facilitate discussion about ethical communications then they may have achieved that however I don’t think it will have any effect on what does actually comes out of candidates or the media. A political campaign without character attacks or misleading ads with incomplete information would be just plain boring. I think it would be great for PRINZ to start a similar initiative – if it helps in boosting its own profile as communications leaders in NZ at least. I’m not sure how relevant it actually would be though or if clean and fair is the right name for the group. You can be ethical and unfair at the same time. It’s unfair to John McCain for Obama to capitalise on the current economic crisis for votes but it’s entirely ethical for Obama to attack him and his record in television ads over it. Also character attacks are simply a normal part of politics and reporting that have always been around. While comments or attacks about race, gender or appearance are always just plain idiotic and transparent, attacks about judgement, experience, past associations or investments of political candidates are legitimate. The ‘lipstick on a pig’ comment by Obama that recently came up in the media was not a character attack on John McCain nor was it a reference to Sarah Palin as some channels portrayed it (unfairly) as. I already feel that Mcain, Obama, Clark and Key are already reasonably ethical in their communications but the media will always be unfair. If the PRSA initiative and its Facebook group objectives are to facilitate discussion about ethical communications then they may have achieved that however I don’t think it will have any effect on what does actually comes out of candidates or the media. A political campaign without character attacks or misleading ads with incomplete information would be just plain boring.

]]>