Scott McClellan's controversial new book, "What Happened," which alleges intentional deception by the Bush administration, became fodder for CBS legal analyst Richard Cohen to take PR practitioners to task for our ethics. His rant was aired on the CBS News Sunday Morning show on June 1, and was subsequently posted on the CBS Web site.

Noting that some in the PR field have questioned McClellan's ethics as a PR practitioner, Cohen used highly charged language that, in effect, said that the public relations profession is based on lying, so why would a PR pro dare challenge one of their own who may have lied? In Cohen's own words:

Apparently, an industry, the very essence of which is to try to convince people that a turkey is really an eagle, has a rule that condemns lying.

The Public Relations Society of America states: "We adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth in advancing the interests of those we represent..." This clause strikes me as if the Burglars Association of America had as its creed 'Thou Shalt Not Steal."

Show me a PR person who is "accurate" and "truthful," and I'll show you a PR person who is unemployed.

The reason companies or governments hire oodles of PR people is because PR people are trained to be slickly untruthful or half-truthful. Misinformation and disinformation are the coin of the realm, and it has nothing to do with being a Democrat or a Republican.

So McClellan is a liar. Big deal. Thomas Jefferson was a liar, and so was Franklin Roosevelt. John Kennedy lied and so did Richard Nixon.

During the time it took me to write this essay I'll bet dozens of PR people blatantly lied to their audiences, despite the presence of proclamations declaring that they should not.

You can't try to convince someone that a milk cow is really a racehorse without lying. You can't build a profession based a deceit and spin, then create "ethics" rules that call for honesty, and then criticize McClellan.

Cohen's remarks unleashed a predictable firestorm of comments on the CBS Web site from PR professionals in defense of the industry. One of the responders was Jeffrey Julin, Chairman & CEO of PRSA, who released a letter that said, in part:

Contrary to baseless assertions, truth and accuracy are the bread and butter of the public relations profession. In a business where success hinges on critical relationships built over many years with clients, journalists and a Web 2.0-empowered public, one's credibility is the singular badge of viability. . .

The next day, Cohen wrote his own response to the responses:

Having blasted the public relations industry in an on-camera essay for CBS News' "Sunday Morning" program, I am now the target of a public-relations effort to ridicule my effort, my points, my character and integrity. I expected nothing less. I mean, when you make fun of people whose job it is to burnish public images you've got to expect they are going to, well, burnish their own public images at the expense of your own. I am not taking it personally.

Of course, my essay generalized about the PR profession. That's what 450-word essays do. I am sure there are honest and accurate public relations people out there just as there are (somewhere, I suppose) honest journalists and lawyers. But the self-righteousness of the PR responses to my polemic masks a denial of the most basic truth about this silly kerfluffle: public relations people may believe they are honest and accurate and chock full of integrity in the work they do -- but lay people do not necessarily share that belief. And isn't appearance on a par with reality in the crazy world of PR spin?

There are plenty of bones that we can pick with, or throw at, Mr. Cohen (and I did in MY online response to his second piece), but the one point that I will grant him is contained in the final two sentences above. He's right - regardless of our perception of our practice and our PRSA Code of Ethics, we do have a credibility problem with the public. Cohen spits back to us what we have often said to our clients and employers: perception is reality.

There are PR people who are guilty of unethical practices, including lying, half-truths and "spinning." And these people - hopefully in a slim minority - are responsible for dirtying the image of the profession. When I was a journalist a bazillion years ago, we reporters had an almost religious zeal about our claim to be morally superior to PR "flaks," who, we believed, had "sold out" their ethics to work in "high dollar" (ha!) PR jobs. Never mind that I have witnessed reporters who would never "let the facts get in the way of a good story" or that a "good story" is measured by the "gotcha" factor, whether or not the "gotcha" was reported fairly, accurately and in balance. The fact is, journalists - specifically - and the public - in general - frequently see us as obstacles to the truth rather than profligators of it because some of us are not ethical.

As much as we would like to think that measures such as the PRSA Code of Ethics and professional accreditation will change our "flak" image, these tools - as worthwhile as they are - cannot. They will not fix our image problem, just as passing the bar exam hasn't precluded lawyers from being the brunt of jokes and receiving unflattering nicknames, such as "ambulance chasers" or "shysters." In Cohen's case, he used PRSA's Code of Ethics - which he showed on air from the Web site - as cannon fodder.

No, the work of changing our image comes from each of us educating ourselves about the sometimes-murky arena of making ethical decisions and then practicing those ethics on the job, every day, in matters large and small. We must tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," even when to do so means we place our jobs on the line. There is nothing wrong with advocating for our clients or bosses, but we must complete our own due diligence when shaping our messages to make sure that what the public hears from us is real, not "spin." That is, perhaps - depending on your political perspective - where Scott McClellan failed. When we parrot the company line without scrutiny, we damage not only our own careers, but also the careers of our peers and the future of our profession.

To help us with our ethical issues, our chapter has enlisted the help of Ethel, the Ethics Evangelist (a.k.a. Gail Kent, Ethics Chair)! In future issues of News & Views, Ethel will bring you ethics articles, including guidelines for decision-making, quizzes and case studies ripped from the headlines. If you have a particular issue you would like to see Ethel tackle, please contact her!