Corporate Competition and Crime: The News Corp Scandal

by Gina Simmons, Ph.D.

In the recent News Corp scandal, Emperor Rupert Murdoch's imperial warrior reporters allegedly hacked into and erased messages on the phone of a murdered girl, Milly Dowler, giving false hope to her family, and corrupting the police investigation. Allegations still stand that a Murdoch company attempted to hack into the voice mail messages of 9-11 victims.  News reports suggest that for over a decade, many of Murdoch's companies got their competitive edge by corporate espionage, or cheating. Murdoch settled with several companies that sued, claiming a Murdoch company stole secrets. The lawsuits were settled with the purchase of the victimized company. Rep. Peter King (R. New York) wrote to FBI director Robert Mueller suggesting "the conduct would merit felony charges for attempting to violate various federal statutes related to corruption of public officials and prohibitions against wiretapping” here in the U.S.

While we like to think of cheaters as a deviant few living among us, the research results are far more disturbing. Studies show, cheating increases with competitive pressure. Give financial incentives to schools for improved performance, you get teachers falsifying test results. In the competitive field of journalism, a winner-take-all contest propels some to use every tactic available, no matter how illegal, to beat the competition. In the 1940's about 20% of high school students admitted cheating. Now, between 75 and 98% of college students admitted to cheating in high school. Reasons given for cheating include:

• It doesn't hurt anybody.
• Everybody does it.
• Don't want other cheaters to have unfair advantage.
• Not likely to get caught.
• High pressure to get good grades.

When people feel that achievement is more important than anything, cutting legal and ethical corners often becomes the norm. If a reporter feels they don't possess the skills to get the story legitimately the odds that they will cheat increase. Don't underestimate the pressure of the situation to make good people do bad things.

When my son was in high school he faced a moment where he might have lost his integrity. One step toward getting into a classical music conservatory required making an unedited tape of a performance. He received pressure from several people to edit his tape to make it perfect. He looked sick, seeing the faces of the adults around him urging him to cheat with comments like, "everyone does it; at this level it has to be perfect; no one will know." Seeing the torment in his face I said, "let's reread the rules." The rules clearly stated no editing allowed. I said, "we're sending in the best take, unedited." My son's face relaxed in relief. He was accepted into and graduated from a top conservatory with his integrity intact. He wanted to succeed on his own merits. He had the skills to do it honestly. When people don't have the skills, they're more likely to cheat. I still remember the pressure we both felt that day.

When businesses create a culture of achievement over quality of work they encourage cheating behavior. A management style that values a code of ethics creates an atmosphere of respect for honesty. When people cheat, faulty engineering appears on cars, bad drugs get into the market, and dangerous products fill shelves. Psychologist Phillip Zimbardo coined the term "The Lucifer Effect" describing the tendency for corrupt systems to corrupt good people. He describes how he was corrupted by his own experiment to conform to harmful behavior as set up by the demands of his famous "Stanford Prison Experiment."

It takes more than a code of ethics posted on a wall to keep people honest. Encouraging cooperative achievement, valuing integrity over results, fostering the exposure of errors and mistakes can help reduce cheating in any organization, while improving quality performance. All human organizations, whether it be a church or a business, can fall victim to the Lucifer Effect. When we encourage our employees, children and coworkers to achieve honestly, others will follow. One antidote to The Lucifer Effect is the Heroism Project. This curriculum encourages young people to look for opportunities to do the right thing and behave heroically. It's a good start.

Photos courtesy of ssoosay and Enokson.

Tweet

It Really Was Weiner’s Weiner

by Katherine Scardino

In May I wrote about the seemingly overload of male "pigs” - defined as men who had too much power and not enough common sense. I asked you at the end of that post in Women in Crime to “stay tuned. I’m sure there’s more!” And, sure enough, along comes this weirdo Congressman from New York, Anthony Weiner. I admit that I did look at the tweeted photo of his covered weiner and was totally unimpressed. But, what makes Mr. Weiner interesting to me now is that he was sexting, which I also wrote about last February, asking how did we, as a nation, get to the point that having sex via satellite was, well, sexy?

Early on, when the scandal first became news for almost all breathing Americans over the last several weeks, I felt that he should stick it out (no pun intended...) and keep his job. He was elected to Congress by the citizens of New York, and I did not see that anything he had done was really any of my business - taking into account that sexting has become somewhat routine for a large portion of the population of the United States. I believed that if the citizens of New York wanted him out of office, they should do so by their vote.

Then, things got a little more serious. As I understand there were several tweets to various women that were more than a little suggestive. I have not read them, but I would love to read the words and form my own judgment as to whether they are truly offensive to the general public, and really, whether the general public has any business reading them or, for that matter, looking at any private photograph that he has tweeted to “friends." Do these stupid, irresponsible, personal acts interfere with his job? Did we all think the tweets were so offensive because he is a married man? And, married less than a year to a very beautiful, successful woman. Does that fact change anything for us?

I noted that his wife was not “standing by her man” in any of his comments to the press, and especially during Mr. Weiner’s press conference when he officially resigned his position. I read in an article recently that women today are not like the women of ten years ago or longer. Women no longer feel the need to suffer embarrassment and ridicule just because they are the “loyal wife.” Strong, successful women today look at these men and can actually make individual judgments about the stupidity of their husbands and decide they do not wish to play the game. I give you Maria Schriver Schwarzenegger as a perfect example. Granted, her husband, the Governator, committed acts that were a bit more serious than Mr. Weiner and his weiner. But, nevertheless, she did not even make an attempt at excusing him or standing with him at any public announcement. I, personally, commend these women. Sometimes, spouses do such irresponsible, illogical and basically dumb things that it overcomes any thought of loyalty.

But, I want to talk a little more about sexting. Would someone out there please tell me why sexting is a happening thing now and especially why is it occurring among our young people? Can they not find a bed? Or the back seat of a car, as I recall... (no more about that!) But, at least my transgression with a high school football star was in person and not via satellite. Is it because the younger generation has grown up with social media: emails, text messaging, IM’s, Facebook, Twitter and now Skype, and that all emotions in any kind of relationship are relayed via these non-personal methods? Is there anyone out there who still believes that a personal conversation is better when  it is actually personal? That sex is really better when it is done in a prone position of some kind on some sort of flat surface - and in the privacy of someone’s home, car, kitchen, back yard, pool, hot tub, floor, etc...

If we are all involved in the computer relationships, how much do you learn about being social and about interacting in society with another student, teacher, parent, employer? Can these kids even talk? I know a young man, now age 25, who grew up in his room in front of a computer. And no, it is not one of my sons! For years, he could not speak in person except for an occasional grunt. We had to learn which sound was a positive sound and which was a negative sound. Over the last few years, he has matured and gotten a little better, but it is still definitely troublesome for him to speak aloud to another human.

But, back to Anthony Weiner. For people in public office, I would imagine that satellite communications of all kinds are a godsend to politicians. Think how many people they can reach via email and other methods of communication - all without leaving their desk. The idea of sending a photograph of a private part was not envisioned by the creators of these new methods of communication, but it became too easy.

So now, ex-Congressman Weiner, you have lost your job and perhaps your pregnant wife as well. But, why was he railed on so hard? Dare I even mention John Kennedy? He had sex with any person with the appropriate equipment, and some even in the White House, his home where Jackie and the children also lived. No one said anything about any of that activity until after his death. Or, Franklin Roosevelt, whose true love was not really Eleanor, but instead her one time social secretary Lucy Mercer, with whom he carried on a 30 plus year affair. The list goes on and on: Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gengrich, Eliot Spitzer.  And, I have not heard any news reports for weeks now about Arnold Schwarzenegger. And, who - or where - is Mark Sanford these days? So, why the big deal about Anthony Weiner? What do you think?

Tweet