Communication Ethics: Social Responsibility And Crisis Communication

In the last decade, the growth of natural and manmade disasters has created unprecedented choices for people. As individuals, they must decide how to protect themselves and their families. As citizens, they must decide which policies best serve the nation’s desire for safety, economic growth, and social cohesion. Without good information the public may find that they have been denied alternative choices, and the lack of access to critical information may further complicate an already difficult situation. Risk perception also affects risk communication. Risk is a social construct which cannot be objectified and that an effective public communication system is essential for preventing and managing a crisis involving threats to the public. Risk and crisis communication is a persuasive based process that takes place in a context of fundamental ambiguity, confusion and speculation, conflicting beliefs and interests, and collective arousal. Considering the context, the persuasive based process could change fast in a concealed one, or to be perceived as such. Officials may sometimes see a greater advantage in concealment than exposure. They will engage in a specific form of impression management called ‘masking’: not telling the full story, downplaying the seriousness of threat, concealing sensitive aspects of the crisis management response. This study tries to evaluate the ethics of risk and crisis communication strategies from social responsibility point of view, and to point out the challenges that decision makers and their PR confront during the public communication process.