I’ve been thinking about this post for a few days now – it seems that all my arguments against press releasing around a death should apply to posting on the blog about the same thing. However, I think this is an issue that needs to be discussed and I will refrain from giving too many details.
Someone related to the organisation I work for was tragically killed a few days ago. It left us extremely shaken. We started working with others in the same locality as the victim, offering advice and support. Even though the news hit the national newspapers we did not issue a press release.
We didn’t even have to discuss it. We all decided that it was too unethical and fame-grabbing to issue a press release at such a tragic time. If we had, our name would have been in the national press but nobody even contemplated this.
I think we did the right thing and I am happy that we kept an ethical stance. What would you have done?
I would*. Saying nothing more that a few words about the departed. It's not about being ethical or unethical when it comes to a press release but acting with correctitude.
* especially if the incident has been known to the public.
You would eh? We opted for having a response ready if / when the media called. But actively issuing a press release, I don't know… Doesn't it strike you as a bit fame grabbing?
It might, from a "corporate" point of view. I can't really have a well-founded argument about that, thats why i said that its all about acting with correctitude. If you just say a few words and nothing more than that then at least you are ok with your conscience. Its all about what feels wright for you.
well, we got in to this situation a month ago. We did not issue a press release, but we made a post in the organisation blog and we had a link to it from the first page of our website…. http://weblog.greenpeace.org/makingwaves/archives...
koyan this sounds fantastic. Instead of telling the world you upload something on your own website – sort of in honour of? – It strikes me as a lot more respectful.
this indeed sounds much more appropriate!
I guess it plays a role of what kind of organisation it is, and what was the role of the person in it. I mean, if the person was a public figure of a public organisation then it would actually have a meaning issuing a press release.
If the person is public enough to affect stock price it might actually be essential to not conceal the fact. Investors might seek legal action for lack of disclosure.
not a bad point at all. I'm not talking about concealment in this case, I am talking about piggy backing on the news to get some limelight.
We had to deal with a similar situation about a year ago. The person though was the company's CEO. In that sense, we felt that we were obliged to issue a press release. First reason was because his death occured in another country, so people had to know. The second reason was because we felt that his lifework and achievements had to be underlined in terms of his "fame after death" (υστεροφημία). We also made posts in company's websites and magazines.
this indeed sounds much more appropriate!