Martin Moore reported mid-week on a PR Week-sponsored debate that asked whether PRs have a duty to tell the truth. Out of the 260 people present, a small majority voted against: in effect, that they would lie on behalf of their client.
I was a bit surprised, not because I expect PRs to tell the truth all the time, but that the motion was voted down, albeit by a small margin. My first response to reading about it was: how many of the 124 who thought they had a duty to tell the truth about their clients were being truthful with themselves?
I had expected a larger proportion to vote for a better image for PR, with fingers firmly crossed behind their backs as they considered the ramifications of always telling the unvarnished truth about their clients' activities, why an interview got canned or why a competing mag got an early sniff of an announcement. However, as Moore pointed out, the use of the word 'duty' in the motion is important - the first duty of any PR is to their client and I don't think anyone would seriously expect anything else to be the case.
(Via Martin Stabe)