Ethics Newsline®

As the United States struggles with its global reputation in the wake of a Newsweek article that inflamed Muslim sentiments, it’s worth asking how capable we are of foreseeing ethical crises.

First, some context. Looked at from overseas, the United States falls victim to a pair of stereotypes: as a land of limitless promise, and as a place of persistent Puritanism. The first view arises historically from an apparently endless frontier, shaping the American sense of life as perpetually rich with possibilities and of the future as a friendly place. The second view reflects the religious roots of the European settlers, who founded a nation on the idea that the greatest happiness for all lies in promoting the moral lives of individuals.

Taken to extremes, these twin characteristics produce a United States that the cynics love to hate, where an impudent moralizing is wedded to an imprudent optimism. Taken in moderation, however, these characteristics help explain why on one hand Americans are so willing to experiment, to probe the future, and to push the limits — and, on the other, why the issues of character, integrity, and ethics are increasingly of such great concern.

Surprisingly, the United States hasn’t yet braided these twin strands together. For a people so fascinated by the future — from sci-fi movies and hurricane patterns to market forecasts and revenue projections — we’re surprisingly inept at foreseeing ethical challenges. Despite having an educational system well ahead of other nations in the fields of both future studies and practical ethics, we have yet to apply the former to the latter.

Yet the dangers of a failure of ethical foresight are all around us. Consider, for example, a single sentence by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay: “The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”

You can be forgiven for thinking that this sentence applies to Newsweek magazine’s recent minuet. Such a dark threat seems appropriate from a congressman who might well be outraged about the magazine’s brief item mistakenly accusing interrogators at Guantánamo Bay of flushing a Koran down a toilet to unnerve Muslim detainees. After all, the Newsweek story violates three powerful canons of journalism:

1. You don’t single-source a story, especially when

2. you aren’t willing to name your source, and when

3. your story has the potential to be immediately and seriously inflammatory.

To be sure, a case can be made that anonymous, one-source stories are sometimes important. But Newsweek’s defense, comparing its “Periscope” item with a story of a corporate whistle-blower, just doesn’t wash. Most whistle-blowers are on their way to going public, which Newsweek’s government source probably is not. And few corporate stories are blamed for impacting national security and producing deadly riots in foreign capitals.

The real problem, however, is the failure of ethical foresight — an unwillingness to look over the moral horizon and contemplate the damage that might be done by our ethical lapses. Had Newsweek’s editors done that, they might have seen that there was no compelling purpose (beyond their own pride in scooping the competition) in publishing the story immediately, rather than checking more sources and doing it later.

Given the public’s growing distrust in journalism, DeLay’s idea that “the men responsible for this” should “answer for their behavior” strikes a chord.

But wait: That’s not what DeLay was discussing. His words were aimed not at journalists but at judges. His threat was directed at members of the judiciary who had determined in March that the feeding tube of a severely brain-damaged Florida woman, Terri Schiavo, should be withdrawn in accordance with her earlier wishes. DeLay was not criticizing the journalists whose words may have left at least 16 dead during riots in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He was criticizing judges — three of whom have now suffered deadly attacks by vengeful citizens in courtrooms in Chicago, Atlanta, and Tyler, Texas.

Last week, in a stirring statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Joan Lefkow argued that such “harsh rhetoric” from public figures (including members of Congress) “can only encourage those who are on the edge or on the fringe to exact revenge on a judge who displeases them.” She was speaking from the heart: In February, her husband and mother were killed in her Chicago home by an out-of-work electrician whose case against the government she had dismissed last year, and who was stalking her in revenge.

Journalists and members of Congress can, of course, try to hide behind the veil of deniability. No one can actually prove that DeLay’s words incited deadly attacks, or that Newsweek’s reporting provoked overseas riots. But that’s not the point. What’s missing is a culture of rhetorical responsibility among our thought-leaders. There needs to be a clear recognition that highly visible positions carry with them a requirement to assess the ethical consequences of one’s language. Justice Holmes’ famous dictum that “the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic” reminds us that with the right of free speech comes the responsibility for its tempered use. Unless our leaders learn to contemplate the ethical impact of their words, it’s hard to see how they can help create a genuinely ethical future.

©2005 Institute for Global Ethics

“The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”

–U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), promising retribution against the judges who ruled against reinserting the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo earlier this spring.

* * *

“They’re destroying the fabric that holds our nation together. Over 100 years, I think the gradual erosion of the consensus that’s held our country together is probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings.”

– U.S. televangelist Pat Robertson, criticizing the federal courts recently on ABC television

* * *

“We need your help in tempering the tone on the debates that concern the independence of the judiciary. I have come to know scores of judges during my 22 years as a magistrate judge, bankruptcy judge, and district judge. Whether a liberal or conservative, I have never encountered a judge in the federal judiciary who can remotely be described as posing a threat as Mr. Robertson said, ‘probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings.’”

– U.S. federal judge Joan Lefkow, rebuking members of Congress and other public figures at a Senate hearing last week for using harsh rhetoric against members of the U.S. judiciary. Lefkow’s husband and mother were killed in February by an irate former plaintiff whose case she dismissed.

(All above from “From Chicago Judge, a Plea for Safety and Softer Words,” New York Times, May 19)

WASHINGTON
Newsweek magazine last week retracted a controversial story alleging abuse of the Koran by U.S. interrogators, saying their source could no longer confirm the story, leaving the magazine no choice but to backtrack.

The allegations first appeared in the magazine’s May 9 issue, which said that an upcoming military report was expected to charge that interrogators had flushed a Koran down a toilet to unnerve tight-lipped detainees.

The 10-sentence news blurb spread quickly in the Muslim world, fueling anger at U.S. forces already distrusted in the wake of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere, reported the Associated Press.

Some sources blamed the Newsweek story for anti-U.S. rallies that erupted in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where more than 16 people were killed when protests turned violent. Others, including the senior commander in Afghanistan, blamed the protests on national politics, noted the New York Times.

Newsweek said that the story’s source — a “senior government official” who had been reliable in the past — told the magazine that a forthcoming report would document abuse of the Koran by military interrogators at Guantánamo Bay.

As Newsweek came under increasing fire for the story, the source backtracked, eventually saying he may have read about the charges somewhere other than in the expected report.

That lack of clarity required Newsweek to retract the story, said editor Mark Whitaker, who rejected charges that the magazine had used slack standards when publishing the material.

Whitaker noted that the original story had been read by two Defense Department officials, neither of whom challenged the allegations involving the Koran.

“There had been previous reports about the Koran being defiled, but they always seemed to be rumors or allegations made by sources without evidence,” Whitaker said. “The fact that a knowledgeable source within the U.S. government was telling us the government itself had knowledge of this was newsworthy.”

“We relied on sources we had every reason to trust and gave the Pentagon ample opportunity to comment,” Whitaker told the Washington Post.

The Pentagon said an internal investigation of the charges has found no evidence that U.S. interrogators have desecrated the Koran.

KUWAIT CITY
In a surprise move, the Kuwaiti National Assembly last week reversed course and granted full political rights to the country’s women, angering conservatives who said the move will damage the nation’s religious purity.

The unexpected vote to rewrite the country’s election laws comes only two weeks after parliament members had moved to restrict women’s suffrage, blocking them from taking part in city council elections.

Kuwait’s prime minister, Sheik Sabah al-Jaber al-Sabah, is believed to have forced the reform measure through the National Assembly ahead of a planned trip to Washington, noted the New York Times.

The country’s decision to grant suffrage rights to women brings Kuwait into line with other Arab countries that practice democracy. The lone hold-out is Saudi Arabia, according to a report from the Christian Science Monitor.

While last week’s reversal was welcomed as historic by many women, some were less enthusiastic, including a young Kuwaiti professional who worried that the vote could adversely impact women’s rights overall.

“The Bedouin have more wives” than do the educated, urban elite, she told the Monitor. “These women will vote on tribal lines and we’ll have more tribes in parliament.”

While conservative Islamic lawmakers were angry over last week’s move, they succeeded in amending the measure to require that “females abide by Islamic law” — language that has unclear ramifications, noted the Times.

While last week’s granting of suffrage rights was good news for many, the first time that Kuwaiti women will have the opportunity to vote and run for office will be the 2007 parliamentary elections, according to the Monitor.

BOSTON
Harvard University last week said it will invest at least $50 million over the next 10 years to bolster the role of women on its faculty, acknowledging that it was lagging in reforming a culture built to favor men.

The announcement follows months of internal arguments and debate over the role of women at Harvard, much of it prompted by a statement from President Lawrence Summers in January that the lack of women in the fields of science and engineering might be caused partially by “intrinsic aptitude.”

Summers’ comment caused a firestorm and sparked the formation of two task forces, which released their reports last week and called for a series of reforms to improve the numbers and security of female and minority faculty.

The two reports shared an introduction, which opened by noting, “In spite of more than three decades of concern, Harvard has made only limited progress in its efforts to create a genuinely diverse faculty.”

Last year, women received only four of the 32 tenure offers made by Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, its central body, reported the Associated Press. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences passed a symbolic no-confidence vote in Summers in March.

Reports from the Associated Press and Boston Globe noted that Harvard has fallen behind other premier U.S. universities such as Duke and the MIT in conducting a thorough review of gender issues on campus.

Summers last week conceded as much, saying Harvard would adopt immediately some of the task forces’ recommendations — establishing a senior administrative post to promote faculty diversity, for example — and evaluate others for strategic implementation.

“The objective is not just (to put forward) a set of recommendations, but to bring about a set of very important cultural changes,” Summers told the Globe. ”Universities like Harvard were designed a long time ago by men and for men. To fully succeed on these issues, we’re going to have to address issues of culture.”

SEATTLE
Saying a better example needs to be set, 141 of the nation’s mayors have agreed to meet the demands of the Kyoto treaty on global warming, urging the Bush administration to change course and follow suit.

The mayors say they will adhere to Kyoto’s call — reducing carbon dioxide emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels within seven years — due to the threats that global warming poses to their citizens, environment, and economies.

The Kyoto protocol, rejected by the Bush administration as flawed, took effect last February after Russia tipped the balance back in its favor, saying it would sign on to the deal, which aims to halt the potentially catastrophic effects of global warming by requiring developed nations to cut their emissions.

The United States is the world’s largest producer of such emissions — a fact that compelled Seattle Mayor Greg Nickles to say he would not sit on the sidelines as global warming threatened to dry up needed rains and nearby glaciers that provide Seattle’s drinking water.

Nickles said he would answer Kyoto’s challenge and asked other mayors to do the same. Last week, he said 141 mayors from both political parties have joined the effort, representing more than 30 million people in 35 states, reported the Associated Press.

Participating cities include Los Angeles, New York City, Salt Lake City, and New Orleans, which have adopted tactics that include buying wind power and switching municipal auto fleets to hybrid technology, reported the New York Times.

While the joint action may have some small environmental effects, its value also lies in its symbolic challenge to the federal government’s approach to climate change, Nathan Mantua, assistant director of the Center for Science in the Earth System at the University of Washington, told the Times.

“It is clearly a politically significant step in the right direction,” Dr. Mantua said.

WASHINGTON
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) faces the dual threat of internal systems vulnerable to fraud and dishonest people willing to exploit the agency in the chaotic aftermath of disasters, lawmakers were told last week in a hearing on mismanagement following last fall’s hurricane season.

FEMA, which is charged with helping disaster-stricken areas recover quickly, gave away $31 million in Miami-Dade County without adequate diligence in the wake of Hurricane Frances last September, according to a new federal audit.

Even though Miami-Dade was only mildly hit by Frances, FEMA declared the county a disaster area before assessing its damage, leading to $31 million in disaster relief to 12,000 residents, according to the audit.

In some cases, payments were made to individuals based only on verbal claims, with no FEMA verification of the injuries or damage, Department of Homeland Security inspector general Richard Skinner concluded.

Suspect claims included $9 million in unsubstantiated rental assistance, $720,000 for unverified property damage, and nearly $16,000 for three funerals without any proof that the deaths were hurricane-related.

“It was a pay first, ask questions later approach,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said at last week’s congressional hearing on FEMA’s practices.

Skinner said FEMA’s claims system is “susceptible to potential fraud, waste, and abuse” due to “programmatic, system-wide weaknesses” that date back at least a decade, reported the Associated Press.

The problems “we found here are just indicative or representative of the problems we have on a nationwide basis,” Skinner said. “The problems we found were across the board.”

While FEMA needs reform, blame also falls on individuals trying to cheat the agency during chaotic post-disaster days, said FEMA chief Michael Brown, who lamented that “in every disaster there will be those who attempt to abuse or defraud FEMA.”

MADRID
One of Spain’s most powerful unions last week urged lawmakers to grant labor rights to the country’s prostitutes, saying it is the best way to protect them from abuse in an industry that is booming.

Comisiones Obreras said Spain’s sex workers — estimated at 300,000 to 400,000 — face harrowing conditions of physical and mental abuse that exist largely under the radar.

Without legal rights to fight mistreatment, the union warns that the women — more than 90 percent of them immigrants — will face continued exploitation under slave-like conditions, reported the Reuters news agency.

Comisiones Obreras is hosting a May 26 conference focusing on the plight of prostitutes, bringing together politicians, legal experts, sex workers, and sex-industry union representatives from other countries, reported the BBC.

WASHINGTON
Revenge, not money, is the most frequent motivation of workers who sabotage their company’s computer networks and infrastructures, according to a federally funded report released last week.

The study, released by the U.S. Secret Service and researchers at Carnegie Mellon University, found that saboteurs most often were wreaking havoc to avenge perceived wrongs like missed promotions or layoffs.

Assaults included deleting software vital to conducting business, posting pornography on the company’s website, and crippling computer networks, with damages ranging from less than $20,000 to more than $10 million.

The study of 49 computer attacks between 1996 and 2002 was funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and examined only publicly disclosaed attacks on firms — banks, utilities, defense contractors — critical to national security or the economy, reported the Associated Press.

Reports noted that computer sabotage is likely underreported since many firms do not disclose when they have been hacked, fearing bad publicity and a hit to the bottom line.

From the Partnership for Public Service:

“The first survey of the ‘Class of 9/11′ — the first college class to have gone through four years of college affected by the events of that day — reveals that it will take more than an appeal to patriotism to inspire their generation to government service.

“The survey … finds that 83 percent of the members of the Class of 2005 describe themselves as patriotic and nearly half — 43 percent — of them say that the events of 9/11 made them more so. However, while 84 percent of those made more patriotic were instilled with a greater love of country and 50 percent were inspired to display the flag, only 20 percent of students said 9/11 made them more interested in government service.

“The findings come at a challenging time for the federal government. Just over half of the 1.9 million people in the federal government will be eligible to retire in the next five years, including about 70 percent of employees in supervisory positions. At the same time, the government is struggling to attract and retain skilled employees in a wide variety of fields — from intelligence to law enforcement to health care.

“When asked which event had a bigger impact on their view of the United States, the students were split evenly between the attacks of 9/11 and the war in Iraq. However, while 69 percent of those citing the attacks of 9/11 said it gave them a more positive view of the U.S., 85 percent of those citing the war in Iraq said it gave them a more negative view. And, while the vast majority — 69 percent — of the Class still expects a major terrorist attack in the next five years, as they prepare to leave school, a fear of being unemployed or going into debt far exceeds their fear of another terrorist attack. Perhaps because of the split over Iraq and these other concerns, a strong majority — 60 percent — reject the idea that they should have been asked to do more to help fight the war on terror.

“‘Our research shows that the patriotism surrounding 9/11 did not give the government a free pass in recruiting talent,’ said Max Stier, president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service. ‘We need a new call to public service, one that balances young people’s patriotism with two factors that are just as important to them: pay and prestige.’

“While members of the Class of 2005 did experience a sustained upswing in patriotism as a result of 9/11, most do not connect this greater love of country with serving in their country’s government….

“More than four in ten members of the Class — 43 percent — cited pay and benefits as the one reason that would make them most likely to consider a career in government. These seniors also expressed concern that the government cannot match the salaries the private sector offers and does not reward better performance with better pay….

“Whether a job is held in high regard is crucial to the Class’s career decisions. Yet two-thirds of seniors said getting a private sector job or starting their own business would make their parents prouder than getting a job in government. The highest academic achievers, those with ‘A’ averages, are the least likely to say that a government job would make their parents most proud….”

“Words, like eyeglasses, blur everything that they do not make more clear.”

– Joseph Joubert (French essayist and moralist, 1754-1824)