Combating misinformation

November 2022 Ethics Column
Teresa Roof, APR

As PRSA members, we pledge adherence to PRSA’s Code of Ethics. As issues arise relating to the practice of communications, the PRSA Board of Ethics and Professional Standards provides guidance within the framework of the Code of Ethics and the PRSA Board of Directors announces these guidelines through an Ethical Standard Advisory (ESA). This month’s ethics column is focused on ESA #21 — Misinformation. It is important to note that the term misinformation includes disinformation and malinformation.

Since everything relates to information, what’s the difference? Below is how PRSA defines these terms:

• Misinformation is false information though not created with negative intent.
• Disinformation is false information specifically created to confuse, misinform, and harm a person or group.
• Malinformation is information based on reality but created deliberately to inflict harm on person or group.

While managing false information isn’t new for many of us, the increasing use of digital/social media only increases the speed misinformation can spread and the effects can be far-reaching with devasting impact. As strategy-focused public relations professionals committed to building trusted relationships, we must slow down and ultimately eliminate the exchange of misinformation. Public relations professionals are uniquely qualified to address disinformation and must shift from defense to offense, fulfill their ethical obligation and help consumers of news and information make better decisions both online and off.

Let’s take a deeper look with a few examples and solutions. 

• Misinformation with unintentional misinterpretation of research by a client. You write a speech for a client based on an interview with him about research findings on a specific issue. You realize the client misinterpreted a research study to include only findings that support a specific position. What should you do?
  
  First, share the full study with the client and correct the speech as needed. Explain that using only accurate information will help preserve the client’s credibility.
  
  
• Disinformation uses false information deliberately to confuse or harm. A grassroots nonprofit group eager to promote alternative treatments for COVID-19 interviews hospital chief executive officers who speak in favor of following science for treating any disease. The business development team at the nonprofit edits the videos to develop one-minute sound bites in which the hospital executives appear to endorse alternative treatments with no mention of science-based guidance. As the PR leader for the nonprofit, you must deal with the backlash from the media plus the hospital CEOs interviewed who demand the removal of the sound bites and release of accurate information from their interviews. What should you do?
  
  Using the PRSA Code of Ethics as your guide, share best practices in ethical communications. Then explain the legal and reputational danger in editing content to create inaccurate messages that damage credibility, tarnish the organization’s reputation, and fracture its relationships with the media and the public. You should also take down the sound bites from wherever they were posted, contact members of the media who requested an interview with your CEO and explain the situation. In addition, consider whether it is appropriate to post either a written or video apology from your CEO. It is also important to advocate for a seat on the content development and approval team for future statements released publicly. And don’t be afraid to ask for and confirm the commitment from leadership to ethical communications and agreement on what the organization releases publicly.
  
  
• Malinformation for financial gain. A potential new client approaches your PR agency and asks for representation. The company sells a supplement claiming to reduce cholesterol by 25 percent in six months. They are ready to establish a content development and promotional campaign. When you ask for peer-reviewed research and other data to support the claims, the client tells you the information doesn’t exist. They rely on outcomes from the people who use the product. The product website presents sales information and a few testimonials from consumers who say the product works and scientists making the same claim. What should you do?

Explain to the potential client that you follow PRSA Code of Ethics as well as best practices in ethical communications. You also know that the current information on the website lacks credibility without the requested peer-reviewed research and verified outcomes from users of the product. Therefore, you should seriously consider turning down the new business.

Additional information and recommendations on best practices can be found on PRSA’s ethics website or by visiting PRSA’s Voices4Everyone site.