I had the opportunity to hear James B. Stewart, the Pulitzer Prize winning author of Den of Thieves and Disney War yesterday. He has a new book coming out called Tangled Webs: How False Statements Are Undermining America: From Martha Stewart to Bernie Madoff that explores the breakdown in ethics in the judicial system, academia and business. He stressed that lying and perjury are becoming very common and accepted. Professor Stewart cited examples of people that were at the top of their professions that lied. To complicate matters, each person was typically surrounded by people that tried to cover for that person and lied as well. Loyalty seems to be more important than the truth. He stressed that the legal system is becoming paralyzed by lies. Stewart said “We need leaders to say perjury/lying will not be tolerated.”
How sad this commentary is on our society at large! I agree with the observations that lying is becoming more commonplace. I believe the acceptance maybe still reluctant, but it is inevitable, there is so much of it around that it seems like it is the norm, therefore acceptable.
I agree that leaders must stand up and say lying is not acceptable. But beyond this there are two more qualifiers:
1. They must condemn lying in the strongest words, not some wishy-washy version.
2. They must have clean hands. It is a terrible spectacle to see a leader who speaks boldly about truth and and against lying and cheating who is then found to be a cheat and a liar.
Just yesterday Congressman Chris Lee from New York was caught in a sleazy cheat surfing Craig’s List for a date, while presenting himself as divorced, 39 year old, father of one kid, and a lobbyist (he is married, 46, a father of one, and a Congressman.) He resigned by the end of the day. As a leader in his community in this country, he stood for some values, which he obviously flouted.
Avi,
Your points are well-taken. The problem is that so many of our leaders, regardless of the arena they work in, are guilty of lying and yet it seems most are getting away with the transgression/s. I have mentioned before that a real credibility issue exists. Just think of the incidents involving the White House alone, where we should expect the highest standards, and the outcomes. Until we find a way of making the guilty pay the price, what reason is there for a change in behavior?
S.
Sandy —
Your Q “What reason is there to change behavior?” is provocative. As a parent I’m often flummoxed by this. “How do I engage my children’s pro-social behaviors?” Parenting is, to say least, humbling — and I’m ever reminded that perfection is an parenting ideal I haven’t attained. But I keep trying.
In my best moments I am reminded children’s behaviors change based on experiences and environment. Research on adult learning indicates that adult change is somewhat similar, but is much harder to engage.
But there is hope: like children, adults can change based on environment. But sustained change is best achieved in sustained co-reflective relationships. Of course, cultures of leadership, like those of larger society, environmentally and experientially give much “reward” for negative behaviors and relationships. Your point, really.
My point, is practice–with others–is where change can occur. While pointing out and punishing negative behaviors provides impetus for some, the fact is, it doesn’t work for sustained periods.
Only, then in relationships, where pro-social behaviors are given as much sustained and visible attention as negative ones, can change be conceived.
So, a Q I would ask takes off on yours a bit: How can it be motivating to “do the right” thing?
Politicians and leaders are human. From my parenting lens, I try to remember they were once children. Without excusing bad behaviors, we can provocatively point out good ones, too. In fact, I wonder what would happen if we chose to replace two critiques of “the Other” doing bad/lying, etc. with one clearly conveyed observation of “the Other” doing something useful, productive, good?
I suspect this might have something of a contagious effect — if doing so was authentic, not simply lip service. Certainly the worst offenders should not be given such plaudits.
But if enough positives were reflected and amplified for sustained periods with real others, there is the chance that the environment that germinates negatives could change somewhat and that pro-social behaviors could germinate and spread with a social-contagion effect.
Andrea
Salon.com published an article on Sunday, 20 Feb 2011, and it dovetails well with position that public officials are more and more comfortable with lower and lower ethical bars. to make thinks worse, the people in this country also feel more at ease with such lower ethics!
Hi Avi,
The comments on Justice Thomas certainly highlights the questionable behavior of the justices on the Supreme Court and yet there seem to be no consequences for them. I personally think they lost a lot of credibility after their decision on the Florida election regarding Bush vs. Gore. Is that the correct article?
Thanks,
Sandy