Years ago, I met a fellow who was speechwriter to the chairman of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. I remember wondering how he could write for such a client. Didn’t he know tobacco kills?
I hadn’t thought about that fellow for a long time, but yesterday morning I sat down to breakfast with the head of a local PR agency and we talked about the moral decisions we make about the clients we take.
She mentioned that her firm does not take work from companies in the tobacco, liquor and gaming industries. I added that as a Catholic I wouldn’t write speeches for the head of Planned Parenthood or anyone in the pornography business, for example.
But other companies or industries pose dilemmas that are less clear-cut. When in doubt, turn to your internal guide, your conscience.
For example, what about American companies that locate their headquarters in a tax haven country to avoid paying U.S. taxes? What of companies that exploit illegal immigrants? How about companies with bad or questionable records on the environment, such as logging, mining or chemical companies?
What about companies thick in the fray of health care reform? Could you write for leaders in the insurance or pharmaceutical industries if you personally oppose their positions on health care reform? How about writing speeches for an elected official with questionable personal or ethical behavior?
I think these are not easy questions to answer, and are complicated by an economy where reduced opportunities for freelance or corporate speechwriting may make it harder to turn down potential work.
But at the last, I know we all want to feel proud of what we do. We want to be true to ourselves and our value systems. We want to make a positive difference in the world.
Are we confident enough in ourselves, in our belief system and in our talent to know that even if we say “no” today there will be positive opportunities to accept tomorrow? I think we have to be. Living in the truth is, after all, the only way to live.
What do you think?
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
If you’re a speechwriter on a corporate payroll, as I was for both a chemical company and a mining company, I think you have to believe in the overall mission and worth of the enterprise. I did in both instances, and I would submit that anyone reading this on a computer (or a piece of paper, for that matter) wouldn’t be doing so unless chemical and mining companies existed.
Both companies I worked for had a fair number of critics, but I believe both companies operated ethically, fairly and responsibly and improved the quality of life for millions of people. Certainly they made mistakes. Certainly they bristled from time to time at their critics, and that’s all the more reason they needed good speechwriters and good PR people on staff - not to craft the next shot at the critics but to help see that critics get a fair hearing and that the companies make measured, intelligent responses to critics.
You say that living in the truth is the only way to live, and never have truer words been said. The truth, however, is that our world, most of the time, doesn’t divide neatly into black and white, good and evil. Good speechwriters and good public relations people help people on all sides understand that and, when possible, get past their grudges and prejudices to find some common ground to work together.
Each of us has to draw a personal line. There are industries I wouldn’t work for. However, the longer I’ve been around, the less likely I am to judge people who make decisions different from mine.
Thank you Cynthia for prompting comments on the moral implications of speech writing. I agree with Peter’s take on things—the importance of keeping an open mind in exercising our respective truths. I regularly celebrate the freedom of choice. I can choose who to vote for, what lane to drive on the highway, and what jobs to take. However, in making those choices, I must be careful not to judge the choices of others. The concept of finding “balance” has been bastardized of late, but at its essence, it still holds true.
Cynthia,
I make the decision on a case by case basis. I’ve worked successfully with politicians from the party I’m not part of, but I’ve had to tread lightly with others. Sometimes, depending on their personal beliefs and positions I could work for them. Sometimes not.
I’m not willing to make sweeping judgments about politicians based on their party affiliations, just as I’m not willing to make sweeping judgments about companies. But based on what I can find out about them, I do make judgments about them. I don’t try to defend my judgments as universally true. I’m just content to say I can or can’t work with certain people or companies.