For more information, see this week’s Research Report.

by Rushworth M. Kidder

Moral culture is like fine cheese: It ages slowly but well. It’s taken a full year for the financial panic engendered by the collapse of Lehman Brothers to mature into a serious search for moral correctives. At last, I sense, we may be ripe for solutions.

To get to this stage, the ethics recession had to pass through three earlier phases: recognition, outrage, and analysis. The first phase was typified last December by New York Times columnist Tom Friedman’s assertion that “we don’t just need a financial bailout; we need an ethical bailout.” The second phase erupted in January, as the public seethed about excessive Wall Street compensation, incomprehensible financial instruments, and the machinations of Bernie Madoff and AIG.

Third came analysis: By April, Vanguard founder John C. Bogle, writing in the Wall Street Journal, was decrying “a shift from moral absolutism to moral relativism.” As a nation, he argued, we had declined from “a society in which ‘there are some things that one simply does not do’ to one in which ‘if everyone else is doing it, I can too.’”

Now, with autumn upon us, we seem ready for a fourth phase: correction. In a New York Times column last week, David Brooks noted that in the run-up to the recession the nation had abandoned its historic standards of thrift and restraint. Instead, in the face of affluence, we collapsed into “indulgence and decline.” Today’s still-grim economic numbers, in his view, “are the outward sign of a values shift” that won’t be corrected simply by better numbers. “If there is to be a correction,” he observed, “it will require a moral and cultural movement.”

A similar theme emerged earlier in September from noted Harvard Business School ethicist Lynn Paine. Writing in the HBS Alumni Bulletin, she pointed out that the nation’s response to the recession was so far little more than a glut of new rules. The result, she argued, risks “driving up reliance on regulation far beyond anything that is rationally sustainable.” While “external regulation can discourage certain well-defined types of bad behavior, it cannot ensure good behavior,” she noted. “Nor can it guarantee the good judgment and sound decision-making that we so desperately need from today’s financial and other business institutions.”

If we’re ready to explore solutions, the columnist and the professor have staked out the territory. It lies at the intersection of Brooks’s “moral and cultural movement” and Paine’s “sound decision-making.” These two points are inexorably linked in a kind of virtuous circle: Decision by decision, we build our moral culture — which, as it strengthens, in turn shapes the decisions we make.

To get that wheel turning, however, we need to start by correcting a misconception about the kind of decisions that need to be made. We have a notion that values-driven decision makers spend their time choosing between right and wrong. If that were true, we of course would want more rules and require more compliance. But our toughest decisions are never about right versus wrong. They’re always dilemmas that stretch us between two right courses of action, each undergirded with powerful moral arguments.

So the corrective we need has nothing to do with compliance. It goes much deeper. At fault is our propensity to address issues of right versus right in the language of right versus wrong. Every significant policy argument today slams together two right points of view that are intellectually valid and morally compelling: Think of the congressional health care debate, the tension over troop deployments to Afghanistan, the global economic relationships raised by the G-20 in Pittsburgh, and the rest of our first-intensity problems. Yet every avenue of public discourse froths with the insistence that one side is entirely right and the other dead wrong: Think of how we talk in the blogosphere or on talk radio, not to mention the diatribes that can gush from press, party, and even the pulpit.

Simply put, we’re facing a collective conversational failure. The modality of our discourse doesn’t match the nature of our problems. Little wonder we misconstrue our challenges and make poor decisions: We don’t know how to talk about them without getting mad. It’s a bit like describing the cosmos in the language of plain geometry, or addressing human psychology by talking about phrenology and the four humors. It’s not that we’re bad people. It’s that our discourse lets us down, and in frustration we lash out like bullies.

If we’re to reach a level of conversation that fits the sophistication and complexity of the problems we face, we need to upgrade our mode of decision making. Too often, we trap ourselves in an inverted pyramid of rationality: We start at the tip, seize an opinion, and then thrash around trying to pulverize the other side. Good decision making, by contrast, flips the pyramid. Beginning with a broad-based examination of the moral arguments on all sides, it climbs steadily upward toward the higher right. In the end, it comes to a single conclusion; pyramids don’t have two pinnacles. But it doesn’t start at the pointy end of opinion. Instead, it earns its way there.

Can we upgrade our conversations? In a media culture that idolizes instant opinions and gurgles happily over fractious opinion makers, it won’t be easy. But September’s winds are blowing us in the right direction. At last we’re talking about deep correctives.

©2009 Institute for Global Ethics

Find this and previous weeks’ commentaries online as a podcast titled Ethicast™ now available on iTunes. Subscribe today!

Questions or comments? Write to newsline@globalethics.org.

We received many emails about last week’s commentary, “Cheating Your Way through the Ethics Class,” in which Rushworth Kidder noted that one of his books on ethics was the subject of several academic papers being sold by an online site.

As Dr. Kidder noted, in addition to the irony of offering a pre-written paper to ostensibly cheat one’s way through an ethics class, the site guarantees its papers to be “plagiarism free,” having passed a test with plagiarism-detection software. Not surprisingly, readers were unanimous in their condemnation of the site.

Many of those who responded offered additional insights.

One noted that the nature of the Internet complicates enforcement: “The Internet has proven extraordinarily difficult to regulate. The Communications Decency Act of 1998 was ultimately shot down by the Supreme Court. It was unenforceable. I think Brandeis said that unenforceable law breeds contempt for law. Sites can be located in any one of 200 countries and can float from one country to the next.”

Several readers surmised that education, today, is being viewed as a means to an end, prompting users of the paper-recycling site to feel that their ends justify the site’s means.

The most important factor driving this is “the perception of ‘all or nothing’ that many in our society feel,” argued one respondent. “In other words, ‘if I don’t get the degree, the promotion, or the contract, I will be a failure.’ I think this … factor is driven by shrinking opportunity for less educated and capable people in our society, as well as a reduced sense of obligation among the more fortunate in our society.”

In a similar vein, another reader pondered the motives of those who would use such a service. “I think it would be fascinating to hear from one of these plagiarists,” he wrote. “It might be fruitful to hold a discussion (online or otherwise) in which students who had plagiarized in the past could tell their stories: Why did they do it? Were there complicated personal factors involved that the professor didn’t seem to care about? Did they feel a crushing sense of inadequacy about their abilities and knew that, if they failed the course, they’d never have the kind of futures they desired?”

Another reader speculated that that the root of such a scenario is “the lack of authenticity in so much of what we do, and who we are striving to become. The lack of ‘look in your eyes’ conversation. The benevolent ‘it’s a tough time out there’ with the lack of realization that the ‘out there’ is our neighbors, friends … and we lack any sense of urgency to change it. The strength of people stepping forward to say that an injustice is wrong, and we have to face it and step up to be against it, seems to be overwhelmed at a crucial time of need for courage.”

If there was a common thread woven through all of the emails, it was the view, as one person expressed it, that the firm offering the papers deserves “a public spanking.”

One reader began and concluded his letter with quotes, the first from Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

He ended the letter citing Václav Havel: “The first careless lapse in this constant vigilance means the certain beginning of the end.”

– Compiled by Ethics Newsline® editor Carl Hausman

Please note: Letters appearing in Ethics Newsline reflect the opinions of the letters’ authors, not necessarily those of the Institute for Global Ethics or its staff. The Institute for Global Ethics reserves the right to edit published letters for length and clarity.

“The message here is that there were problems with the integrity of FDA’s decision-making process that have solutions.”

– Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, principal deputy commissioner at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), talking to reporters recently about the agency’s decision to revisit approval of a medical patch for injured knees.

The patch, known as Menaflex and manufactured by ReGen Biologics Inc., was rejected repeatedly as unsafe by the FDA’s scientific reviewers. Following “extreme,” “unusual,” and persistent pressure from four New Jersey Democrats, FDA managers overruled the scientists, approving the patch for sale last December. “All four legislators made their inquiries within a few months of receiving significant campaign contributions from ReGen, which is based in New Jersey, but all said they had acted appropriately and were not influenced by the money,” reports the New York Times.

The Times notes that the FDA “has never before publicly questioned the process behind one of its approvals, never admitted that a regulatory decision was influenced by politics, and never accused a former commissioner of questionable conduct.” Former FDA commissioner Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, who became unusually active in the approval of Menaflex, according to a new FDA report, says he had acted properly.

Sources: New York Times, Sep. 25.

Supporters of the famed director question why arrest occurred in such a long-dormant case; others argue that a crime deserves punishment regardless of timeline

LOS ANGELES
A constellation of ethics questions was arrayed around the arrest of famed film director and admitted child sexual abuser Roman Polanski last week, as various stories in the world press focused on the nature of forgiveness, the morality of Hollywood, and the implication that law enforcement pursued Polanski out of vindictiveness.

Polanski, now 76, fled the United States in 1978 on the eve of his sentencing for having sexually violated a 13-year old girl whom he had plied with alcohol. Since fleeing, Polanski has lived in France, which has an extradition treaty with the United States but had not acted on the case.

Polanski was arrested in Switzerland when traveling to a film festival in late September.

His detention immediately polarized factions who questioned why he was arrested after three decades versus those who noted that there was no statute of limitations on the crime in question, arguing that crime merits punishment regardless of the intervening delay.

The situation was complicated further by the fact that the girl Polanski abused, now in her 40s, had called for an end to the case, in part because she said she wanted a restoration of her privacy.

In a piece syndicated by CBS, commentator Benjamin Kerstein noted: “Polanski’s unexpected arrest has occasioned consternation on both sides of the Atlantic. French government ministers are up in arms, claiming that the long arm of American jurisprudence has maliciously seized one of their national treasures. Poland, which was home to Polanski for most of his youth and early adulthood, is equally outraged. These official voices have been joined by filmmakers and artists from around the world, as well as a few media outlets, who have protested both Polanski’s arrest and the manner in which it was accomplished.”

While those protesting Polanski’s arrest include such notables as Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, and John Landis, not everyone in Hollywood shares the view, reports CNN, and a backlash is building against such support.

Polanski supporters counter with the contention that there was substantial judicial and prosecutorial misconduct in the original case, according to various press reports. Supporters also claim that a recent documentary purporting to expose that negligence had embarrassed authorities and prompted them to seek revenge by moving on a case that had been dormant for decades.

That charge, in turn, was denied by Los Angeles’s top prosecutor, district attorney Steve Cooley, who said, according to the Agence France-Presse: “I don’t persecute anybody. It’s a matter of court processes being concluded.”

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger concurred, according to a BBC report, saying Polanski should receive no special treatment because of his status.

Sources: BBC, Oct. 2 — CNN, Oct. 1 — AFP, Oct. 1 — CBS News, Sep. 29.

For more information, see: Related Newsline Research Report, Oct. 5 — Related Newsline story, June 29 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 16, 2004 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 11, 2003.

Survey says surfers don’t want tailored ads based on their online habits; Obama administration outlaws texting while driving for federal employees; there’s debate over who should be protected under a federal ’shield law’ for reporters; David Letterman’s on-air admission about affairs provokes controversy

VARIOUS DATELINES
Several major reports last week examined various aspects of media and technological ethics. Among them:

• PC World reports that, contrary to the claims of many online marketers, most Americans don’t want Internet ads to be tailored to their particular interests based on their web browsing habits. According to a new study from the University of California Berkeley School of Law and the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, 86 percent of respondents objected to online advertisements based on results from tracking across multiple websites. PC World quotes the study: “Marketers have defended the practice by insisting it gives Americans what they want: advertisements and other forms of content that are as relevant to their lives as possible…. In high percentages, [U.S. residents] stand on the side of privacy advocates.”
• The Obama administration last week took on what has emerged as a prominent issue in ethics, law, and public safety: texting while driving. In an executive order, President Obama banned federal workers from texting while driving when using government cars or operating a vehicle on government business, the Christian Science Monitor reports. Many states currently ban texting while driving, and there are various pieces of proposed legislation to force all states to enact such laws, according to the Monitor.
• A federal “shield law” — legislation that among other things would prevent a journalist from being forced to reveal sources in many cases — is reportedly at the center of a dispute between the White House and Congress, according to newspaper trade journal Editor & Publisher. One issue is the White House’s reported objection to “sweeping provisions” in a current shield law version pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee that would provide, in the administration’s view, too many obstacles for forcing reporters to testify. According to the report, the White House wants to scale back journalists’ immunities in the event of leaks that could compromise national security. The Wall Street Journal reports that there’s another sticking point: whether the proposed shield law would apply only to journalists who are paid for their work or if it also would offer protection to bloggers who work without pay.
• Late-night talk-show host David Letterman stunned his audience last week by admitting that he’d had sexual liaisons with several female staffers on his program — an admission made after he became the target of a blackmail plot. While Letterman focused on his role as the victim in the alleged blackmail, the Los Angles Times reports that the incident, in the words of Times reporters Matea Gold and Scott Collins, also has “sparked impassioned discussion Friday about sex in the workplace and hypocrisy…. After years of mocking other public figures for their sexual indiscretions, Letterman, 62, is facing scrutiny for behavior that is verboten in many workplaces.”

Sources: Los Angeles Times, Oct. 3 — PC World, Oct. 2 — Editor & Publisher, Oct. 1 — Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 1 — Wall Street Journal, Sep. 23.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Apr. 27 — Related Newsline story, July 13 — Related Newsline story, June 15 — Related Newsline story, May 18 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 22, 2005 — Text of study, “Americans Reject Tailored Advertising and Three Activities that Enable It,” Sep. 29.

Article in medical-ethics journal raises provocative questions about use of brain-boosting drugs as academic performance-enhancers

LONDON
A noted psychologist last week warned about the dangers of “academic doping,” raising speculation about whether star students someday will face drug tests in the same manner as today’s athletes.

The U.K. Guardian reports that Vince Cakic of the University of Sydney sparked the discussion in an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, writing that drugs that enhance mental performance are very attractive to students and virtually impossible to ban. Such drugs include those typically prescribed to treat attention deficit disorder, but which are used “off-label” by healthy students hoping to boost performance on exams and papers.

“High school and university are the primary competitive spheres of many people’s lives and ones that have significant bearing upon their lives, in terms of both career opportunities and future earning capacity,” he wrote, according to the U.K. Press Association.

“The pressure to succeed academically is very real,” Cakic continued, “and in a climate in which high-stakes public examinations have increased demand for private tuition, it is likely that all avenues for performance enhancement will be exhausted.”

Recent studies have shown that the use of off-label drugs, dubbed “nootropics,” is widespread among students in many areas of the world.

Cakic contends that urine testing of exam students is one possible method of curbing abuse, but he warns that the current erratic and ineffective system of sports drug testing shows that enforcement will be difficult at best, reports the London Daily Mail.

According to a report from the London Daily Telegraph, Cakic also rejects the notion that prohibiting performance-enhancing brain drugs would “level the playing field” because “there never was an even playing field to begin with.” He likens banning the drugs “to prohibiting private tuition, which also increases academic performance while exacerbating educational inequalities between social classes.”

Cakic recommends instead that academia study policies and approaches to make the use of such drugs safer.

Sources: Guardian, Oct. 2 — U.K. Press Association, Oct. 1 — Telegraph, Oct. 1 — Daily Mail, Oct. 1.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, June 22 — Related Newsline story, June 1 — Related Newsline story, May 11 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 16 — Related Newsline story, Dec. 15, 2008.

The latest incident is likely to hurt the company’s bottom line, says analyst cited by Reuters

LONDON
Britain’s Serious Fraud Office last week said it plans to prosecute BAE systems, Europe’s largest weapons manufacturer, on charges that it paid millions of dollars in bribes to secure contracts in Africa and Eastern Europe.

BAE consistently has denied all allegations of wrongdoing, according to TIME magazine.

This latest investigation follows a highly visible and controversial probe that was dropped in late 2006, MarketWatch reports. The previous unrelated case involved arms sales to Saudi Arabia and allegations that those sales were greased by bribes to Saudi officials.

That probe was abandoned after the government intervened, saying it could hurt national security and damage the British economy, according to the Times of London.

An analysis from Reuters notes that the pending prosecution may spell trouble for BAE’s dealings in the United States, where defense contractors are fighting harder for shares of a shrinking Pentagon budget.

Reuters quoted Lexington Institute defense analyst Loren Thompson: “The corruption charges will be a drag on BAE’s business at a time when it is facing a downturn in its considerable North American revenues.”

While BAE had enjoyed good relations with the Pentagon, Thompson warned that “the federal government does not go easy on companies that are under a cloud of suspicion. The fact that BAE is a foreign company is not likely to help that situation.”

BAE declined comment to Reuters on the effect of the pending prosecution.

Sources: Times of London, Oct. 2 — MarketWatch, Oct. 2 — New York Times, Oct. 2 — Reuters, Oct. 1 — TIME, Oct. 1.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, May 18 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 2 — Related Newsline story, Sep. 29, 2008 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 4, 2008 — Related Newsline story, July 21, 2008.

Speculation about what caused the unexpected Olympic Games award; newspaper looks at fallout from one university’s rise to athletic prominence; NFL gets a B in annual report on diversity in sports

VARIOUS DATELINES
The role of ethics in sports was the central theme in several major stories last week. Among them:

• Rio de Janeiro was named as the venue for the 2016 Olympic Games in a hotly contested selection process that itself was the venue for an ethics controversy. At issue are remarks by Chicago mayor Richard Daley, who publicly questioned Rio’s capability to accommodate the event, the Chicago Tribune reports. International Olympic Committee rules prohibit representatives of cities submitting bids from criticizing their rivals. A spokesman for the Olympic Committee said no formal ethics complaint had been filed. While Rio had to contend with its image as one of the most violent and crime-ridden cities in the world, Chicago also came to the bargaining table with some baggage, according to Politico.com: the Windy City’s reputation for corruption.
• Binghamton University, considered by many as the jewel in New York State’s university system, is being rocked by an ethics scandal. According to an editorial in the New York Times, the troubles began when the college recruited several student-athletes with histories of academic and legal problems. The situation worsened last week, according to the Times, when instructor Sally Dear claimed that she was fired after speaking out about what she said was pressure from the athletic department to make exceptions for players in her class. Binghamton University maintains it investigated the claims and found them to be untrue, according to the Times. The editorial’s take on the series of incidents: “Binghamton … has been on a slippery slope since it jumped from the casually competitive world of Division III college sports to Division I, which can have a win-at-all-cost attitude. This often leads to recruiting athletes who are not prepared for college and who cannot remain eligible to play without grade padding and preferential treatment.”
• The National Football League (NFL) received a an overall grade of B in its efforts to increase diversity, according to an annual report released by the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. The Center’s report cited “sustained progress” in improving diversity at the head coach and general manager position, but gave the league a C in gender-based diversity.

Sources: New York Times, Oct. 2 — Politico.com, Oct. 1 — Chicago Tribune, Sep. 29 — San Francisco Chronicle, Sep. 25.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Sep. 28 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 17 — Related Newsline story, June 15 — Related Newsline story, May 18 — Related Newsline story, May 11.

In other news, commemoration draws speculation about Gandhian ethics and their application to today’s society

MUMBAI
A seemingly incongruous tribute-cum-marketing plan has prompted an ethics controversy in India: the image of Mohandas Gandhi used to sell a luxury pen.

The Associated Press reports that the German pen-maker Montblanc launched a limited-edition commemorative fountain pen in honor of the 140th anniversary of the ascetic father of India’s independence. The price: $24,763.

According to the AP’s Erika Kinetz, “the decision to turn a man who shunned foreign-made products and pushed simple living to new extremes into a ‘brand ambassador’ — as one local website put it — for a global luxury goods maker has left some Indians puzzled and others angry.”

Critics say that Gandhi spurned both luxury and foreign-made goods during his lifetime, condemning the marketing campaign as inappropriate.

Montblanc has countered by saying the pen embodies Gandhi’s philosophies and is “a thing of beauty and simplicity,” the Financial Times reports.

Each pen in the series is made of white gold, and the edition is limited to 241 — the number of miles which Gandhi and his followers traveled by foot during the famous march against the British salt tax, reports the Times of India.

Gandhi’s birth anniversary was noted across the globe last week, including by a special home page on Google and by articles and analyses in a wide variety of the world press.

Of particular ethics interest was an analysis in the Jakarta Post by Putu Geniki L. Natih, that read, in part: ‘The Nobel economics laureate, Amartya Sen, argues that ‘the nature of modern economics has been substantially impoverished by the gap that has grown between economics and ethics.’ Gandhi’s writings on economics over six decades ago can be seen as a lengthy effort to bridge that gap and very much in tune with today’s worldwide concerns about sustainable development.”

“A Gandhian approach to the linking of ethics and economics could be useful in a number of ways,” Natih wrote. “Gandhi said villagers needed to be taught about the fundamentals that make for the quality of life — sanitation and nutrition. We observe similar concerns in Indonesia today, not only in villages but also in rapidly growing towns and cities.”

Sources: AP, Oct. 2 — Jakarta Post, Oct. 2 — Financial Times, Oct. 1 — Times of India, Sep. 29.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Sep. 28 — Related Newsline story, Aug. 31 — Related Newsline story, July 6 — Related Newsline story, Jan. 31, 2005 — Related Newsline story, Dec. 6, 2004.

The company will team up with volunteerism clearinghouse to match people and projects

LOS ANGELES
Disney is taking an innovative approach to encouraging volunteerism: The company is offering free one-day admissions to Disneyland or Disney World for people who donate a day of service to participating organizations.

NBC Los Angeles reports that the promotion will begin on January 1, 2010, with the goal of persuading a million people to donate a day of service.

“In 2010, we want to recognize and add one more reason for celebration: the contributions people make to their communities every day. We want to inspire 1 million volunteers — people who will invest time and energy to make their own communities and neighborhoods a better place,” said Jay Rasulo, chairman of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, according to the Los Angeles Business Journal.

The work must be performed in 2010 and the park visit must take place by December 15, 2010, according to the Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel.

Disney is partnering with HandsOn Network, a clearinghouse for volunteer projects, to connect volunteers with opportunities and certify that the work was done, reports New York Daily News.

Sources: NBC Los Angeles, Oct. 1 — New York Daily News, Sep. 30 — Sun-Sentinel, Sep. 30 — Los Angeles Business Journal, Sep. 29 — AP, Sep. 29.

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Sep. 28 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 17, 2004 — Related Newsline story, Jan. 20, 2004 — Related Newsline story, July 8, 2002 — Related Newsline story, Feb. 4, 2002.

While public interest in case is mild, those following the story opine strongly for prison term

From Rasmussen Reports:

“One-out-of two Americans aren’t paying much attention to the case of film director Roman Polanski recently arrested for the rape of a 13-year-old girl that he committed 32 years ago. But among those who are following the story somewhat or very closely, 78% say he should go to prison and just eight percent (8%) disagree….

“Overall, among all adults, 51% believe prison is the correct destination for Polanski, but seven percent (7%) disagree. Forty-two percent (42%) have no opinion.

“Polanski, best known for the film ‘Chinatown,’ was recently arrested in Switzerland on an outstanding warrant from Los Angeles and is now the subject of extradition proceedings to bring him back to the United States. He pleaded guilty to the 1977 rape but fled the United States out of fear that the judge in the case would send him to prison. Since then, he has continued to make films overseas and been a high-profile international celebrity. Polanski’s surprise arrest prompted an outpouring of support from the Hollywood and international artistic community, but that has been muted in recent days with the retelling of the facts in the case.

“The failure to arrest Polanski despite his high international visibility helps explain why 72% of Americans think celebrities get special treatment from the U.S. justice system. Only 15% think that system treats everybody about the same, while 13% are not sure….”

For more information, see: Related Newsline story, Oct. 5 — Full release from Rasmussen Reports, Oct. 5.

“The life of a man consists not in seeing visions and in dreaming dreams, but in active charity and in willing service.”

– Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (U.S. poet, 1802-1882)