This post started as a discussion with a Barkley colleague and some internal emails in our PR group. After a couple of emails back and forth, it became obvious the discussion should be expanded. So I'm posting about it, and my colleagues will input their original responses in the comments. My hope is other people in the blogoshpere who care about corporate social responsibility will add in.
The gist is this: Bob Zender and I were talking over lunch about China's suppression of Internet-information and its monitoring of the citizens using technologies sold by American corporations. Most notable of these is Nortel who supplies spy-ware to the Chinese government so it can track dissidents online under its "Golden Shield" project. The goal of this project, according to Amnesty International, Business for Social Responsibility and other human rights organizations, is "to develop a nationwide surveillance network, integrating a national database with financial, biometric, communications, and public video tracking systems. All activities of the population will be tracked." The question from Bob was, "What do you think about that?"
My initial reaction was, "So what. Let Nortel make a buck."
But then I reflected on it a bit further, and I read this and this from Bob. Now keep in mind, Bob Zender, who I greatly respect, is no tree-hugger. He's a Republican and a fiscal and social conservative who managed national and local campaigns of conservative politicians. I am fiscally conservative and socially moderate. I'm a registered Republican who is seriously considering becoming an independent.
So I sent Bob this email back, cc'ing several other people in PR, and inciting a reaction from another colleague, which I hope he has posted in the comments:
"You've opened my eyes a bit. Why wouldn't it be part of an American company's corporate social responsibility to NOT engage in such violation of human rights. I was looking at it completely from a narrow, western, capitalist viewpoint. And I'm not necessarily going soft…the utilitarian argument for global human rights is a good one…countries that respect human rights have a better chance of having strong economies, fairer trading practices, etc., etc.
You may have hit on something here that ties directly to our cause branding philosophy, which is why I'm cc'ing the sr. team on this. Our philosophy is that a company that wants to ultimately reach the level of "citizen brand," and thus reach true relevance nirvana, must first operate ethically and with significant transparency -- in short, have a stellar reputation. So if Nortel is building the spy-ware that allows the Chinese government to track its citizens, one could argue there is no way Nortel will ever be a true citizen brand -- in the US or anywhere -- because such behavior is morally questionable to most people, and if most people knew about this behavior, it would impact Nortel's reputation negatively.
Let's continue the debate."