Is CSR mere “window-dressing”?

The more frequent question about CSR is whether it is good intentions turned into benefit for others or whether it is “window-dressing”.

As I wrote in my previous post (“Social conscience of good business”) CSR is often based on self-interest and profit-making.

Christian Aid puts the following point: “…companies make loud, public commitments to principles of ethical behaviour and undertake “good works”… The problem is that companies frequently use such initiatives to defend operations or ways of working which come in for public criticism.” (Moloney, K. (2006); Rethinking Public Relations: PR Propaganda and Democracy; p. 107).

Roberts thinks of CSR as of a new form of corporate self-presentation associated with PR, “of prosthesis… that repairs its appearance [corporate body] but in no way changes its actual conduct” (Moloney, K. (2006); Rethinking Public Relations: PR Propaganda and Democracy; p. 110).

These two statements support the idea that CSR is “window-dressing”. This means that “wrong” organization’s actions are masked-up by “good” deeds towards people. Pretending to care about the society the company in fact pursues its own ends that may be in variance with society’s interests. Corporations call it CSR and spend their money to please people and to make them unaware of their malicious actions.

Consequently I’m more likely to say that in addition to “window-dressing” activities companies are weakening their ethical grounding and decreasing their truthful social responsibilities. The only way to stop this tendency is to increase the meaning of PR people’s morals and develop the value of individual ethics. And it may be that CSR will regain its credibility if people will trust single PR practitioners whose ethical principles will lead companies’ businesses along the good and moral path benefiting the society.

War spin & propaganda

Hello!

I would like to share with you some of the ideas that came to me after having watched a War spin video in class on Wednesday.

I began to question myself whether PR profession is ethical enough. Unfortunately what I've seen in this video was that all those war stories, journalists' reports, news etc. are half fake! It is really shocking how much false information people can hear, watch on TV and believe in it and trust it.

From this perspective PR can be accused of being an immoral profession. Nonetheless ethical issues depend on PR practitioners' moral values. The latter are individual qualities that differ from one person to another but can define the character of actions that people undertake. This suggests that not every PR professional acts unethically. Consequently we cannot blame PR in general of immorality and cannot judge it by results of some group's depraved activities.

However PR can be identified as a really powerful tool to manipulate people, their mind and behavior. It is worrying how easy people are being mislead... Still it is their choice what to believe in, though it is PR's duty to create a wrapping, not forcibly an artificial one, but a story to present an idea in the best possible light.

The two books that I've read recently and that are very relevant to this topic are:

Moloney, K. (2006). Rethinking Public Relations: PR Propaganda and Democracy (2^nd edition) (London and NY: Routledge) and
Stauber, John S. and Rampton, S. (1995). Toxic Sludge Is Good For You: Lies, Damn Lies and Public Relations Industry (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press).

These books are interesting to read and raise very serious issues such as War time PR, Democracy and propaganda. So if you are interested in the question you should have a look at these books.