Ethical Decision Paper

No matter the situation, making an ethical decision is always the right one. According to LawSociety.org, “Ethics involves making a commitment to acting with integrity and honesty in accordance with widely recognized moral principles.” In this situation, George works at a consulting firm and just landed a deal with a big client who is running in a congressional campaign. Georges friend, the reporter has supposedly dug up some dirt on the other candidate who is in the running as well. The ethical dilemma in this specific situation is if George should use all the information he was given by the reporter and create a negative campaign ad against the candidate for the other party.

One of the biggest problems I currently see with this dilemma is where are the facts? The reporter has given information to George but where is there any proof that these are all 100% true. This is where George will start to run into trouble. With using the current information that has been given to George, he could possibly face charges of slander or libel unless he finds out they are all facts. The elements for a defamatory case to be legitimate are, a defamatory statement, falseness, the fact that it is communicated, and an injury. On the other side of things, he could take the chance and run a campaign solely based off of negative reports about the other candidate, but how does that make Georges clients campaign look. The fact that he isn’t just sticking to the facts of the campaign and has to talk bad about the other candidate could be a downside to some possible voters or seen as irrelevant. The final decision made is that George and his colleagues will decide against using the negative hearsays to form a congressional campaign against the opponent.

Considering the stakeholders is an important key in making the best decision possible for the campaign. Some of the stakeholders in this situation would be the community, colleagues involved with the campaign, government, the gay community, the opponent, the client, and the families of both. Those listed are just some examples of people who would be affected by the decision-making process. The main person to make the final call would be the client himself. He needs to carefully evaluate how this decision could create positives and negatives for his campaign. After making the final decision to go against using the negative reports about the opponent his campaign group needs to brainstorm ideas on how to better his own campaign without bashing his opponent. Different stakeholders would react to the use of a negative campaign add differently. For example, If the campaign decided to use the reports about his son and the gay community, they could possibly receive some backlash from many people, but especially the LGBT community. It’s hard to please everyone but the most important thing to keep in mind is the ethical decision is always the best one.

There are many alternative ways to boost ones’ campaign besides having to resort to negative campaign ads about the opponent. The first is to make the campaign about what the people want. Focusing the campaign on what the community wants and what really matters will make every stakeholder happy in the end. Sending out polls, rallies, just spending more time with the people and hearing their opinions to make the best ultimate decision. Another alternative is to stick with the facts. When rumors start to spread in campaigns no one knows who to trust or who they can believe.