The most relevant area for consideration of ethical issues at the moment is public relations and information policy. Often within the framework of this discipline, the PR manager is faced with difficult dilemmas requiring the use of an ethical framework. The situation of a pandemic in which it seems difficult to objectively assess and disseminate information about the members of society affected by it seems to be an important and relevant ethical issue for the PR sphere. The theory of utilitarianism, if properly adjusted, seems to be acceptable for application in the framework of solving this ethical issue.
Communication during a crisis is always a necessity to keep a company afloat. The role of the public communicator in modern times is particularly complicated by ethical precepts that require careful language selection to avoid misinterpretation. The coronavirus pandemic affects almost everyone due to social or economic complications, but the question remains how to make sure that the voice of everyone in need is heard (Savulescu et al., 2020). The ethical paradigm of utilitarianism implies that choosing actions and words should be guided by the principle of the greatest good for the majority of people. But it is in the context of the pandemic crisis that this attitude demonstrates its precariousness and relativity.
The complexity of the real implementation of this position lies in the ambiguous understanding of what the majority means and which demographic areas require real support. Worrying about the majority, PR people risk making a major ethical mistake, that is, ignoring those who need it the most. Ignoring the most painful and rarely discussed issues is unacceptable, especially considering that by attracting sponsors to a problem, one can receive money for its solution. For example, by drawing the attention of the general public to the discriminated and especially the poor in the minority, the PR agency is able to prove that it has a progressive vision. The presence of vision and purpose is the most valuable and attractive factor for the consumer or shareholder in the post-pandemic era.
Therefore, the utilitarian principle must be applied more judiciously in such a way as to expand the sphere of influence. Despite the desire to do as much good as possible, a PR company cannot be guided by this principle accurately enough to make strategic decisions. Utilitarianism can only be used as an evaluation of the outcome, not of the decision-making process itself. However, the very fact that the company demonstrates the desire for this particular principle is able to attract the attention of the audience and thus allow more stories to be told about those whose voices are not heard. The principle of utilitarianism eventually manifests itself in the fulfillment of its original task, that is, to help as many people as possible.
Thus, the principle of utilitarianism in the PR sphere contradicts the modern ethical paradigm because it cannot fully provide the ability to make decisions. One needs to make allowance for the fact that modern ethics should primarily focus on helping those most in need and not on serving the interests of the majority. Despite this, the tasks that utilitarian ethics sets itself are quite relevant. The very service of a purpose in modern PR justifies the use of the utilitarian principle, despite the ambiguity of using this paradigm in the ethical decision-making process.
Reference
Savulescu, J., Persson, I., & Wilkinson, D. (2020). Utilitarianism and the pandemic. Bioethics 34(6), 620-632. Web.