“The Ethics of Visual Rhetoric & Photo Manipulation”

by Amber McDonnell | Xchanges 10.2/11.1

Discussion & Application: Did BP Act Unethically?

With concern for the ethical theories previously outlined, paired with reasonable knowledge of the scenario and BP’s response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, one can make a well-considered judgment of BP’s public relations efforts. As technical communicators, our work is rhetorical, meaning we have a duty to practice responsibility within our means for persuasion. While this seems easily understood, pressure from a client, the corporation, the media, and the public can make easy ethical decisions rather hazy.

Under a deontological lens, BP would likely be accused of acting unethically in releasing manipulated photos. It would be difficult for anyone involved in the doctoring of the photos to argue that they believe that their actions should be or could be considered universal law. If it became universal law to alter reality by manipulating photos in the face of building public and corporate pressure, chaos would ensue. Additionally, in the wake of one of the largest environmental disasters of all time, it would be reasonable to argue that BP’s public duty was repairing — both physically and emotionally — the damage to families of victims of the explosion, people living and working on the Gulf Coast, and anyone who believed the corporate giant was acting solely in its own best economic interest. By doctoring images, especially in such a careless manner, the company was seemingly making light of such a public duty. BP also acted unethically in consideration of Kant’s second guiding principle: unless the corporation claimed to operate under an ethic of egoism, they should consider human beings to have moral standing and not deceive them.

Under a consequentialist lens, while it would be difficult to argue in favor of doctoring technical images, it could be reasonable to assume that BP was offering the photos to the public in order to ease pressure, so that they would be able to focus on more pressing matters — like killing the wellhead leak and cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico. If this were the case, under preference-satisfaction utilitarianism, the action of releasing photos that satisfied the desires of the media and public for visual evidence of BP’s cleanup efforts could possibly be considered ethical. However, this conclusion is still problematic in that there is no way to truly and accurately deem such an objective good or right.

Considering the case solely as it pertains to technical communicators, BP’s actions were unethical no matter how they are interpreted under more general ethical theories. According to the Society for Technical Communication’s (STC) ethical principles, technical communicators “seek to promote the public good in [their] activities. To the best of [their] ability, [they] provide truthful and accurate communications” (STC, 1998). Any manipulation of information that alters the accuracy or truthfulness should be considered dishonest. Furthermore, in doctoring the photos apparently for the sake of their own public image, the corporation acted without regard for the public good. Therefore, in being dishonest and seemingly operating under an ethic of egoism in their effort to ease public pressure, BP acted unethically by doctoring photos in their response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.