Social Responsibility and Ethical Decision Making

Baker (1999) explained that a communicator must consider their responsibility to the community over that of their raw self-interest. Self-interest in this context includes profits and career success.  The common good in social responsibility signifies that, as persuaders are members of the community, the overall benefit to the community should be examined when creating persuasive messages (Baker & Martinson, 2001). Moyers (1999) argues that persuaders are a privileged voice in society and as such share a responsibility to improve and not hinder the communal well-begin. Persuaders should consider social responsibility on both the macro and micro levels. They must consider how each message will affect an individual and group and balance that information in order to create a message that positively impacts society (Baker & Martinson, 2001).

To measure the social responsibility of a message ask yourself the following questions:

Balancing the Elements of the TARES Test

It is important to note that at times the elements within the TARES test may conflict with one another. This conflict results in an ethical dilemma. Kidder (2009) defined an ethical dilemma as a ‘right-versus-right’ decision. With any ethical decision-making situation, there is not always a clear correct answer. For instance, when being truthful can negatively impact the public, an ethical dilemma occurs, calling for the need to question the social responsibility of the piece.

In ethical decision making there is not always a clear answer. The TARES test is designed to start a conversation in order to make the messenger consider the ethical implications of the message. Each element should be compared and weighed against the overall good versus the overall evil of the message and the potential ramifications of the message.