“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” -Martin Luther King, Jr.
The sun shone brightly on the library lawn as students went about their day, engrossed in their studies or leisurely conversations. Among them, Pistol Pete strolled, his presence exuding the vibrant spirit of Oklahoma State University. Suddenly, a commotion drew his attention to a figure standing on a soapbox, fervently preaching his beliefs to a gathering crowd of students.
It was Preacher Bob, known for his fiery speeches and confrontational style. Pete observed as Preacher Bob’s words turned from passionate to hostile, his voice rising in volume and his demeanor becoming aggressive. Pete’s heart sank as he witnessed his fellow students being subjected to a barrage of insults and derogatory remarks.
With a sense of duty and a desire to stand up for his peers, Pete approached the scene. His footsteps were purposeful, his eyes focused, and his voice filled with conviction. Taking a deep breath, he stepped forward, drawing the attention of the crowd and Preacher Bob.
In a calm and composed manner, Pete addressed Preacher Bob, acknowledging his right to freedom of speech while emphasizing the importance of respect and understanding within a diverse community. He encouraged open dialogue and the exchange of ideas without resorting to demeaning or offensive language.
Pete’s words resonated with the students gathered around, who had felt disheartened and attacked by Preacher Bob’s inflammatory rhetoric. They listened intently as Pete reminded them of the values they held as a university community – inclusivity, empathy, and mutual respect.
As the crowd absorbed Pete’s message, a wave of understanding and unity washed over them. They began to engage in a peaceful and constructive dialogue, countering prejudice with thoughtful questions and rational arguments. Pete’s presence had diffused the tension, providing a platform for open-mindedness and fostering an environment of tolerance and acceptance.
In that moment, Pistol Pete demonstrated the power of his role as a unifying figure. By respectfully addressing Preacher Bob’s actions while defending the rights and dignity of his fellow students, he created an atmosphere where diverse perspectives could be heard and respected.
As Pete walked away from the library lawn, he knew that the impact of his actions extended far beyond that moment. He had empowered his fellow students to stand up against prejudice, to engage in meaningful conversations, and to foster an inclusive community that celebrated the richness of different backgrounds and beliefs.
With a renewed sense of pride, Pistol Pete continued his journey, knowing that his presence would always be a beacon of unity, respect, and unwavering support for his fellow students at Oklahoma State University. How do ethics play a role in your daily communication?
*Pistol Pete scenarios are all based on hypothetical events and were written with the use of Chatgpt and careful editing by Speech Communication faculty.
Every day, people around the world make ethical decisions regarding public speech. Is it ever appropriate to lie to a group of people if it’s in the group’s best interest? As a speaker, should you use evidence within a speech that you are not sure is correct if it supports the speech’s core argument? As a listener, should you refuse to listen to a speaker with whom you fundamentally disagree? These three examples represent ethical choices speakers and listeners face in the public speaking context. In this chapter, we will explore what it means to be both an ethical speaker and an ethical listener. To help you understand the issues involved with thinking about ethics, this chapter begins by presenting a model for ethical communication known as the ethics pyramid. We will then show how the National Communication Association (NCA) Credo for Ethical Communication can be applied to public speaking. The chapter will conclude with a general discussion of free speech.
The word “ethics” can mean different things to different people. Whether it is an ethical lapse in business or politics or a disagreement about medical treatments and end-of-life choices, people come into contact with ethical dilemmas regularly. Speakers and listeners of public speech face numerous ethical dilemmas as well. What kinds of support material and sources are ethical to use? How much should a speaker adapt to an audience without sacrificing his or her own views? What makes a speech ethical?
Elspeth Tilley, a public communication ethics expert from Massey University, proposes a structured approach to thinking about ethics (Tilley, 2005). Her involves three basic concepts: intent, means, and ends. The graphic above illustrates the Tilley pyramid.
According to Tilley, the first major consideration to be aware of when examining the ethicality of something is the issue of . To be an ethical speaker or listener, it is important to begin with ethical intentions. For example, if we agree that honesty is ethical, it follows that ethical speakers will prepare their remarks with the intention of telling the truth to their audiences. Similarly, if we agree that it is ethical to listen with an open mind, it follows that ethical listeners will be intentional about letting a speaker make his or her case before forming judgments.
One option for assessing intent is to talk with others about how ethical they think a behavior is; if you get a variety of answers, it might be a sign that the behavior is not ethical and should be avoided. A second option is to check out existing codes of ethics. Many professional organizations, including the Independent Computer Consultants Association, American Counseling Association, and American Society of Home Inspectors, have codes of conduct or ethical guidelines for their members. Individual corporations such as Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Intel, and ConocoPhillips also have ethical guidelines for how their employees should interact with suppliers or clients. Even when specific ethical codes are not present, you can apply general ethical principles, such as whether a behavior is beneficial for the majority or whether you would approve of the same behavior if you were listening to a speech instead of giving it.
In addition, it is important to be aware that people can engage in unethical behavior unintentionally. For example, suppose we agree that it is unethical to take someone else’s words and pass them off as your own—a behavior known as plagiarism. What happens if a speaker makes a statement that he believes he thought of on his own, but the statement is actually quoted from a radio commentator whom he heard without clearly remembering doing so? The plagiarism was unintentional, but does that make it ethical?
Tilley describes the you use to communicate with others as the second level of the ethics pyramid. According to McCroskey, Wrench, and Richmond (McCroskey, Wrench, & Richmond, 2003), “means” are the tools or behaviors we employ to achieve a desired outcome. We must realize that there are a range of possible behavioral choices for any situation and that some choices are good, some are bad, and some fall in between.
For example, suppose you want your friend Marty to spend an hour reviewing a draft of your speech according to criteria, such as audience appropriateness, adequate research, strong support of assertions, and dynamic introduction and conclusion. What means might you use to persuade Marty to do you this favor? You might explain that you value Marty’s opinion and will gladly return the favor the next time Marty is preparing a speech (good means), or you might threaten to tell a professor that Marty cheated on a test (bad means). While both of these means may lead to the same end—having Marty agree to review your speech—one is clearly more ethical than the other.
The final part of the ethics pyramid is the ends. According to McCroskey, Wrench, and Richmond (McCroskey, Wrench, & Richmond, 2003), are those outcomes that you desire to achieve. Examples of ends might include persuading your audience to make a financial contribution for your participation in Relay for Life, persuading a group of homeowners that your real estate agency would best meet their needs, or informing your fellow students about newly required university fees. Whereas the means are the behavioral choices we make, the ends are the results of those choices.
Like intentions and means, ends can be good or bad, or they can fall into a gray area where it is unclear just how ethical or unethical they are. For example, suppose a city council wants to balance the city’s annual budget. Balancing the budget may be a good end, assuming that the city has adequate tax revenues and areas of discretionary spending for nonessential services for the year in question. However, voters might argue that balancing the budget is a bad end if the city lacks these things for the year in question, because in that case balancing the budget would require raising taxes, curtailing essential city services, or both.
When examining ends, we need to think about both the source and the receiver of the message or behavior. Some end results could be good for the source but bad for the receiver, or vice versa. Suppose, for example, that Anita belongs to a club that is raffling off a course of dancing lessons. Anita sells Ben a ten-dollar raffle ticket. However, Ben later thinks it over and realizes that he has no desire to take dancing lessons and that if he should win the raffle, he will never take the lessons. Anita’s club has gained ten dollars—a good end—but Ben has lost ten dollars—a bad end. Again, the ethical standards you and your audience expect to be met will help in deciding whether a particular combination of speaker and audience ends is ethical.
Thinking through the Pyramid
Ultimately, understanding ethics is a matter of balancing all three parts of the ethical pyramid: intent, means, and ends. When thinking about the ethics of a given behavior, Tilley recommends asking yourself three basic questions:
- “Have I discussed the ethicality of the behavior with others and come to a general consensus that the behavior is ethical?”
- “Does the behavior adhere to known codes of ethics?”
- “Would I be happy if the outcomes of the behavior were reversed and applied to me?” (Tilley, 2005)
While you do not need to ask yourself these three questions before enacting every behavior as you go through a day, they do provide a useful framework for thinking through a behavior when you are not sure whether a given action, or statement, may be unethical. Ultimately, understanding ethics is a matter of balancing all three parts of the ethical pyramid: intent, means, and ends.
McCroskey, J. C., Wrench, J. S., & Richmond, V. P. (2003). Principles of public speaking. Indianapolis, IN: The College Network.
Tilley, E. (2005). The ethics pyramid: Making ethics unavoidable in the public relations process. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 20, 305–320.
developed by Elspeth Tilley; involved three basic concepts: intent, means and ends
to be an ethical listener or speaker, one must begin with ethical intentions; for example, if we agree that honesty is ethical, it follows that ethical speakers will prepare their remarks with the intention of telling the truth to their audiences
the tools or behaviors we employ to achieve a desired outcome
those outcomes that you desire to achieve