More Ethics, + the Challenger Disaster

Communication Failures Contributing to the Challenger Accident: An Example for Technical Communicators—Dorothy A. Winsor
Two important factors:
1. Managers and engineers viewing the same facts from different perspectives
• not only see facts, but interpret themshared information=shared interpretation (easy when communication happens between people with the same role, difficult when coming from different points of view)
2. The general difficulty of either sending or receiving bad news, particularly when it must be passed to superiors or outsiders
• People are less likely to believe bad news than good
• Working in partnerships (NASA, MTI, Marshall Space Center), communicators saw others as outsiders—don’t air your (or your organization’s) dirty laundry
Physical Cause of the Accident
o Failure of a rubber seal in the solid rocket booster
o O-ring anomalies present in 1984, two years before the Challenger disaster
Early Responses to Bad News: Disbelief and Failure to Send Upward
o MTIMarshall: no communication that there were serious problems with O-rings
o MarshallMTI: willing to admit there was a problem, as long as it was MTIs fault
o Marshall hid problems with optimism
Continued Bad New Rejection Despite Contradictory Evidence
o Cast a positive light on the O-ring issue, blaming it on the cold flights
o MTI was ignorant of an imposed launch constraint, Marshall kept the bad news to itself, not communicating to NASA
Internal vs. External Communication of Concern From MTI Engineers
o MTI engineer Roger Boisjoly to a R.K. Lund (superior)—I thought this memo communicated effectively, but it was kept too private to make a difference
o Russell’s letter written to outsiders—conveys a much different message. No cohesiveness, they sent a mixed message
The Split Between Managers and Engineers
o Those in charge have different objectives and goals than those who have no managerial power. If managers don’t listen to their employees, they could be in serious trouble!
Conclusion
o First, no one at MTI or Marshall wanted to admit serious O-ring problems
o Then, once MTI engineers accepted the seriousness of the problem, they didn’t effectively communicate to their superiors
o Engineers and managers at MTI did not want to give bad news to outsiders (it would make them look bad?)

How to Lie with Statistics—Darrell Huff
-The sample with the built-in bias
-The truncated, or gee-whiz, graph
-The souped-up graph
-The well-chosen average
-The insignificant difference or the elusive error
-The one-dimensional picture
-The ever-impressive decimal
-The semiattached figure
-The unwarranted assumption, or post hoc rides again
Comparative advertising: Two KFC chicken breasts are “healthier” than a BK Whopper?

Determining the Ethics of Style—Dan Jones
What is ethics? –“Ethics is the study of right and wrong conduct,” “The discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation,” “a set of moral principles or values,” “a theory or system of moral values” or—just a guiding philosophy
Ethics and Technical Prose
o Ask yourself questions: Are you doing your best to communicate honestly and accurately? Are you omitting anything on purpose? Can your unclear or imprecise instructions cause harm to others?
o What makes someone unethical? What if they can’t help it? (Time constraints, might lose a job)
Ethics and the Professions
o Computer Ethics Institute published ten commandments
o Also, Society for Technical Communicators has ethical guidelines
- Legality, Honesty, Confidentiality, Quality, Fairness, Professionalism

Legal and Ethical Issues in Editing—Carolyn D. Rude
Legal Issues in Editing
o Intellectual Property
- Copyright
- Permissions and “Fair Use”
- Copyright and Online Publication
- Trademarks, Patents, and Trade Secrets
- Product Safety and Liability
- Libel, Fraud, and Misrepresentation