The voting is over but the counting continues. So does the need for advocates to add ethics to their rhetorical toolbox.
With apologies to Thomas Hobbes, the 2020 election was nasty, brutish and long. Campaigns up and down the ballot exacerbated political divisions that have been with us since our nation’s founding. Those divisions will not be resolved when the outcomes of all of the elections are official. Our campaigns too often go from arguing about policy to condemning people because of their politics; rivals become opponents, and opponents become enemies. Too many politicians and consultants pick at America’s political scabs in the hopes of gaining electoral advantage.
Candidates and campaign consultants, advocates, journalists, and political communication scholars and students can take several steps to take to improve the quality of our politics, and thus the quality of our democracy.
Candidates and Campaign Consultants
You cannot burn down a house and expect to live in it. You cannot attack the idea of politics and hope to govern. Your voters listen to you. A lot of people believe you when you say the other side is evil, that the free press is an enemy of democracy, and that elections are frauds. If you cannot win without attacking the core tenets of our democracy, you probably ought not be participating in democratic elections.
Attack political opponents for what they say, or what they have done that is relevant to how good a job they would do if elected, not who they are or for things have no bearing on the office. Promote democratic institutions, even as you make the case for how they can be improved. Defend the independent professionals working on the public’s behalf, even as you argue for ways that work can be done better. Demonstrate you are proud of a system that allows you participate in it.
Join the Project on Ethics in Political Communication on December 10th as we talk to a leading Democratic strategist, a leading Republican strategist, and a political communication student about how consultants can help improve our politics. Sign up here to learn more.
Advocates
Over the past year, advocates of all stripes focused on electing their preferred candidate in the hopes the winner would listen to their arguments. Organizations across the political spectrum have already made it clear that they view election day as the day when the real work begins. Everyone, from those who oppose all access to all abortions to those who oppose all fossil fuels, views November as the time to get to work.
These advocates should advocate. They should be loud, bold, and hold power accountable. And they should do so in ways that advance a democratic dialogue. Advocates need to consider who is left out of their communications, whose voices are not being heard and whose faces are not being seen. They need to make their case in ways that strengthen the system and allows them to be part of the discussion.
Journalists
Journalists should add discussions of ethics to their coverage of causes and candidates. Reporters routinely talk to legal experts about whether or not tactics and actions broke the law, political scientists about the possible impacts of campaigns, and political handicappers about the odds of someone winning or a bill passing. They should also reach out to philosophers, rhetorical scholars, and ethicists to ask about the appropriateness of an ad or action. Journalists should not just ask what one can do, but also what one ought to do.
Scholars and Students
More and more schools are offering graduate degrees and certificates, majors, minors, and courses in political communication. Students in those programs should study the ethics of political communication alongside its theory and practice. Political communication degrees should include a course on ethics, and courses in political communication should include ethics on the syllabus.
The Media Ethics Initiative at the University of Texas - Austin has a growing library of short case studies for students, and the new textbook Political Communication Ethics: Theory and Practice can be a tremendous resource.
Scholars interested in digital media, campaign advertising, speechwriting, and the other areas that make up political communication scholarship should also consider ethics. For example, how do democratic norm-promoting campaigns perform compared to campaigns that attack democratic norms? Are rhetorical appeals that rely on core democratic values to make a point about the present both more ethical and effective than speeches that argue from circumstance (as Richard Weaver suggested)? How does the public respond to press coverage of campaign ethics?
The voting is over, the counting continues, and our raucous democratic debate carries on. Those of us who are lucky enough to make a living advocating for people and causes in which we believe, and who are charged with teaching the next generation of advocates, have an obligation to help heal the wounds. We can, and should, continue to be passionate and partisan advocates. And as we advocate, sometimes with sharp rhetoric, we should always focus on the nation we are helping build beyond the next election or legislative session. Our work is nothing less than the work of democracy.