Page 120 - Between One and Many The Art and Science of Public Speaking

Chapter 4 Ethical Speaking and Listening 87

Be Truthful

James Jaksa and Michael Pritchard of Western Michigan University have de-
veloped a set of ethical norms for speakers. Three of these seem particularly
rele vant to us. The fi rst is the norm of truthfulness, which is fundamental to all
17
communication. The speaker caught in a lie loses his or her credibility and the
goodwill of the audience, which are essential to belief. As domestic diva Martha
Stewart learned, sometimes the lie can be worse than the initial offense. Ironi-
cally, Martha Stewart was convicted not of insider trading, a crime for which
she was never charged, but for lying to investigators about her well-timed sale of
ImClone stock. Had she simply told the truth, no matter how painful, she would
never have been charged with a crime. 18
Of course one does not have to tell an outright lie to deceive listeners. As
we discuss in more detail in Chapter 15, distortions and omissions can some-
times be as harmful to the truth as outright lies. If you doubt that, we invite you
to check out the “facts” in many political ads. A useful Web site for checking
the truth of political ads is the University of Pennsylvania’s factcheck.org, which
provides researched assessment of political ads. Although most are based on a
kernel of truth, often what’s left out changes the whole meaning of the ad. We
recall one political challenger who showed a video clip of the incumbent saying,
“I’ll do anything to get reelected.” What the ad failed to mention was that the
incumbent was playing the part of the challenger! The video clip was edited to

reflect the exact opposite of the meaning intended by the incumbent. Of course
the ad didn’t lie outright—the words were actually said—but because the context
was omitted, the result was the same as a lie.
A speaker who is unsure of the facts must learn the truth before speaking.
Even a speaker who is simply misinformed, not consciously lying, must be held
accountable. History is full of examples of people who were given the chance to
speak and pass on information they believed to be factual but later was proven
wrong. The most recent involved the claim by politicians that Saddam Hussein
could launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes and that he was
in league with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. Both claims turned out to be
mistaken, although each was repeatedly stated in public as if it were irrefutable.
This is not to say that the removal of Hussein wasn’t positive, but not all of the
reasons given as justifi cation for his removal turned out to be true.

Show Respect for the Power of Words

Another norm cited by Jaksa and Pritchard is respect for the word. The power
19
of words is undeniable. If you doubt this, just ask radio shock jock Don Imus and
Michael Richards, who gained fame as Kramer on Seinfeld. Imus lost his radio
and television shows when he was heard making racially disparaging remarks
about the Rutgers women’s basketball team. Even more dramatic was the widely
circulated video of Richards at the Laugh Factory in West Hollywood, as he
yelled one racial slur after another at two African American audience members
who had heckled him during his routine. Many comics are heckled by audience
members and many experienced comics have been known to cut hecklers “off at
the knees.” Richards, however, overstepped the bounds of common decency and
was punished for his ethical lapse.