Since the early 20th century, advocates of public relations professionalism have mandated that practitioners serve the public interest making it an ethical standard for evaluating the morality of public relations practice. However, the field has devoted little research to determining just what it means for practitioners to serve the public interest. Most research suggests practice-oriented solutions. This article focuses what practitioners must do to serve the public interest. It reviews theories of the social contract and the public interest to identify (...) an approach to serving the public interest that will help practitioners reconcile moral obligations to themselves, their client organizations, and the public. It concludes that combining superior individual interests with John Dewey's public philosophy will contribute to the moral development and improvement of practitioners and the public. (shrink)

Whistleblowing is the act of disclosing information from a public or private organization in order to reveal cases of corruption that are of immediate or potential danger to the public. Blowing the whistle involves personal risk, especially when legal protection is absent, and charges of betrayal, which often come in the form of legal prosecution under treason laws. In this article we argue that whistleblowing is justified when disclosures are made with the proper intent and fulfill specific communicative constraints in (...) addressing issues of public interest. Three communicative constraints of informativeness, truthfulness and evidence are discussed in this regard. We develop a ‘harm test’ to assess the intent for disclosures, concluding that it is not sufficient for justification. Along with the proper intent, a successful act of whistleblowing should provide information that serves the public interest. Taking cognizance of the varied conceptions of public interest, we present an account of public interest that fits the framework of whistleblowing disclosures. In particular, we argue that whistleblowing is justified inter alia when the information it conveys is of a presumptive interest for a public insofar as it reveals an instance of injustice or violation of a civil or political right done against and unbeknown to some members of a polity. (shrink)

In this article, the authors investigate the applicability and usefulness of three alternative perspectives on corporate issues management: issue life cycle theory, legitimacy theory, and stakeholder theory. Each perspective makes certain as- sumptions about the nature of issues management activities and certain general predictions about corporate social responsiveness. The authors test the relative applicability of the three theories through a case study of the issues management activities of four large forestry companies in Finland and Canada. The authors conclude that all (...) three perspectives have value but differ in the level of analysis and time frame to which they apply. (shrink)

Přes rozšířené používání pojmu společné dobro byla mezi antickými a středověkými mysliteli pozoruhodná nejednota o jeho konkrétním obsahu. Někdy bylo společné dobro chápáno jako dobro zúčastněných jednotlivců, jindy jako dobro společenství jako celku. Jakmile politická filozofie začala být stavěna na individualističtějších základech, společné dobro jako pojem ustoupilo do pozadí. Společné dobro by mělo mít dvě vlastnosti: jde o dobro a navíc společné. Dobro však není vnitřní kvalita o sobě, nýbrž subjektivní hodnocení člověka. Zda považujeme určité jednání či situaci za dobré (...) či špatné, záleží na našem hodnocení. Základní vlastností každého hodnocení je jeho subjektivita. Subjektivita v pojetí dobra je hlavním problémem společného dobra. Společné dobro může být společné pouze, když jde o cíl, který je sdílený všemi rozumnými aktéry uvnitř politického společenství. Má-li společné dobro být cílem regulujícím politické úvahy a zdrojem loajality ke společenství, muselo by být všemi sdíleno. To však v praxi je nesmírně obtížné zaručit. Neutrální hlasovací mechanismus, který by rozhodl, co je společné dobro, neexistuje. Společné dobro je příliš vágní pojetí, aby bylo užitečné v politické teorii a praktické politice. Veřejný zájem musí být posuzován partikulárně a lokálně, vždy s ohledem na zvláštní doby a místa. Co vytváří obecný zájem či "společné dobro", nevyplývá z filozofické teorie, ale praxe. Ačkoli společné dobro může být užitečné v politické i církevní rétorice, jeho vědecký smysl je omezený, nebo dokonce nulový. (shrink)

Worried that the current paradigm of political corruption (individual corruption: the misuse of public office for private gain) is too narrow to protect democratic institutions from private interests, the political theorist Dennis Thompson resurrects the premodern notion of institutional corruption, which refers to practices that undermine the purpose of political institutions. From the lenses of institutional corruption, practices such as money in political campaigns, lobbying, or wealth inequality are to be condemned and eradicated to protect democratic institutions. The goal of (...) this paper is to provide reasons against resurrecting the notion of institutional corruption in the realm of policy for three main reasons. First, it is baseless: there is no empirical evidence that the sole presence of money alters democratic results. Second, it is unnecessary: individual corruption can be used to condemn and sanction illegal actions that undermine democratic decision making. And third, it is unclear whether policies against money in politics are beneficial or detrimental to electoral competition. In the light of empirical evidence, I conclude, we should not resurrect the unnecessary and potentially misleading idea of institutional corruption. Empirical studies, in fact, show that liberal electoral democracies, at least in developed countries, are more responsive to the voters’ will than Thompson believes. (shrink)

Microfinance aims to better the livelihoods of the bottom of the pyramid by providing them with financial services. However, recent studies show that microfinance can have adverse effects, leading clients into over-indebtedness. This dissertation argues that microfinance clients are by default vulnerable and offers ways to rethink microfinance as client-centered, presuming a responsibility for client protection. Part I discusses the vulnerability of clients and the centrality of their protection. Part II analyzes the causes and consequences of overindebtedness and suggests state (...) regulations, financial literacy programs, and soft law standards for its mitigation. Part III introduces the concept of responsible microfinance, which claims that not only microfinance institutions but also other stakeholders, such as states and transnational and international organizations, have a responsibility to protect microfinance clients. Part IV accepts that over-indebtedness has to be addressed from several angles and considers how public and private actors may enhance its alleviation and develops an encompassing multi-stakeholder framework of responsible microfinance. Developing this framework includes a thorough evaluation of the suitability of ten novel strategies, such as behaviorally informed consumer protection regulations, educational soap operas, and Smart Campaign’s Client Protection Principles, to further the mitigation of overindebtedness. (shrink)