- Email: [email protected]
Public relations in dentistry. IX. Ethics and publicity
PUBLIC RELATIONS IN DENTISTRY IX. Ethics and publicity
Peter C. Goulding,* B A, Chicago
W here is the line betw een legitimate p u b licity and unethical advertising? T h e “ Guiding Principles fo r Participation on Radio and Television Programs” and the A D A Judicial Council’s official advisory opinions on the serve as guideposts in answering this question,
Principles of Ethics
which may be the most difficult public relations problem that a local society faces.
is this: Where is the line between legiti mate publicity and unethical advertising? It is not a line that can be drawn once and forevermore remain constant. It is stated in the Principles o f Ethics that a dentist’s obligations to his profession “cannot be reduced to a changeless series of urgings and prohibitions for, while the basic obligation is constant, its ful fillment may vary with the changing needs of a society composed of the hu man beings that a profession is dedicated to serve.” Beyond this is the essential obligation of the dentist to participate in the edu cation of the public, insofar as that edu cation will advance the public health. The Principles o f Ethics is clear on this point, both as to the obligation and the necessity for dignified exercise of that ob ligation :
Dental society X will not allow its presi dent to have his picture appear in the newspaper. Dental society Y will allow news pictures to be taken at its monthly meeting but maintains an elaborate card index system to make certain that no member’s picture appears twice in any one year. Dental society Z asks newspaper reporters to submit their news stories for Sectio n 2 0 . H e a lth E d u cation o f th e P ub prior clearance, including the proposed lic.— A dentist m ay p ro p e rly p a rtic ip a te in a headline. pro g ram o f h e a lth ed u c atio n o f the pu blic in Societies X, Y and Z are not imagi o lv in g such m edia as the press, rad io , telev i nary; neither are they historical, nor are vsion an d lectu re, p ro v id e d th a t such program s they unique. are in keeping w ith th e d ig n ity o f th e p ro fe s The question of personal publicity, of sion an d the custom o f the d e n tal profession of using a dentist’s name and picture in the com m unity. news media, is perhaps the most difficult But these are general terms ; how is the that local societies face in the area of local society to apply them to the specific public relations. The nub of the question ethical situation in its own town?
1504 • J. A M ER . DENT. ASSN.: V ol. 71, Dec. 1965
An experienced science writer, a man highly respected by scientists and mem bers of the health professions, had this suggestion:1 C odes c a n n o t w o rk if em phasis is p lace d o n censorship, w h ic h is a re flec tio n o f a lo t o f anxieties. T o be effe c tive, codes m ust b e posi tiv e ly o rie n te d , n o t n e g ative ly . T h e A m e ric a n M e d ica l A sso ciatio n has a rriv e d fin a lly a t this position a fte r m o d ifyin g its code re la tin g to p u b licity som e five o r six tim es in the p ast 2 0 years. S im ila rly , th e A m e ric a n D e n ta l A ssocia tio n has ad o p te d w h a t m ay be reg ard e d as a “ perm issive” position on the m a tte r o f p u b licity. N ow it is to be expected u n d e r su ch p e r m issive codes th e re w ill com e some b ad w ith th e good. Q uacks m ay in some c le ve r fash io n w in o v e r th e u n w a ry re p o rte r. B u t b y an d larg e, sound in fo rm a tio n w id e ly dissem inated w ill h a v e the effe c t o f o ve rw h e lm in g th e o cca sional p u b lic ity seeker an d his in sin cere m o tives. A perm issive code w ill n o t in sure th a t all in fo rm a tio n is sound even w h en p resented by sin cerely-m o tivated m en. T h e course o f scien tific progress w as e ve r such— tw o steps fo rw a rd a n d p erh ap s a step b ack w ard , b u t th e n e t gain is a step. T h e p u b lic is e n title d to sh are in these vic to rie s a n d defeats. A b e tte r u n d e r stan d in g o f d e n ta l research is thus obtain ed .
SOME SPECIFIC GUIDELINES
Beyond the Principles of Ethics, there are two sets of guidelines that give more specific direction to the society and the individual dentist. These are the official advisory opinions of the American Den tal Association, Judicial Council,2 and the report entitled, “Guiding Principles for Participation on Radio and Television Programs,” which was prepared by the Bureau of Public Information and the Judicial Council in 1957.® The advisory opinions, a reprint of which may be obtained from the Council, are divided according to the section of the Principles of Ethics to which they apply. Some of the opinions most perti nent to publicity are the following: • A d e n tist w h o arran ges fo r a p aid new s p a p e r ad vertisem en t o f his “D e n ta l C lin ic ” is engaged in u n eth ical conduct. • A den tist w h o induces, o r agrees to, the p u b lica tio n o f an a rtic le in a lo c a l n ew sp aper
p ra isin g h im fo r h a v in g a research finding p u blished in a profession al jo u rn a l is engaged in u n e th ic a l conduct. • A den tist w h o ac tin g in his o w n b e h a lf induces th e p u b licatio n o f a n ew sp ap er artic le describ ing his activities as a le a d e r o f the lo cal society’s C h ild re n ’s D e n ta l H ealth D a y ac tivity is engaged in u n eth ical condu ct. • A d en tist w h o places a n otice in a lo c al new sp ap er th a t he is le a v in g to w n to take a p o stg rad u ate course in d e n tistry is engaged in u n e th ic a l conduct. • A den tist w h o p erm its his nam e to be used in a d e n tal h e a lth ed u catio n p am p h let to be d istrib u ted to the p u b lic a t la rg e b y a co m m ercial firm is engaged in u n e th ic a l con duct. • A den tist w h o issues a new s release lin k in g h im se lf to new advances in d e n tistry is engaged in u n eth ical condu ct. N ews releases c on cern in g achievem ents o f d e n tistry should com e fro m d e n tal societies o r o th e r a p p ro p ri ate p rofession al sources. • T h e descrip tion o f a school d e n tist’s w ork in a news a rtic le is n o t n ecessarily th e eq u iva le n t o f ad vertisin g , b u t it is ad visab le th a t such artic le s be cleared b y the lo c a l society in ad van c e o f p u b lication . • A den tist w h o arran g es fo r th e p u b lica tion o f a n ew sp aper a rtic le o n his use o f hypnosis in his d en tal p ra ctic e is in vio la tio n o f Section o f the P r in c ip le s o f E t h ic s w h ich forb ids a d v ertisin g by dentists. • A d en tist m ay in sert a p a id an n ou n ce m ent o f his d e n tal p ra ctic e in a lo c a l new s p a p e r on a restricted basis o n ly w h e re such m eth od o f com m u n icatin g in fo rm a tio n is deem ed in the best interests o f th e p u b lic and the profession as d eterm in ed b y the a p p ro p ri ate com ponent d en tal society. • B efo re a dentist in itiates th e p u b licatio n o f a d e n ta l h e alth colum n in a new sp ap er, it is ad visab le fo r him to seek th e a p p ro v a l o f his lo c a l an d state d e n ta l societies. • A den tist has the rig h t to speak out ag ain st th e policies espoused by org anized d en tistry, in clu d in g the rig h t to m ake p u b lic p ro nouncem ents again st flu o rid atio n . I t is u n e th i cal, h o w e ve r, fo r a dentist to rep resen t his view s as those o f the d e n tal society o r as those o f the m a jo rity o f dentists o f th e co m m unity w h ere in fa c t his view s are opposed to the society’s o r to the m a jo rity o f dentists in the com m unity. • A den tist w h o p rep ares a h e a lth ed u ca tio n colu m n fo r a n ew sp aper syn d icate is not re q u ire d to o btain the a p p ro v a l o f e v e ry com p o n en t society in w hose ju risd ic tio n the col u m n is published. • I t is the opinion o f the C o u n c il th a t the “G u id in g R ules fo r P artic ip a tio n on R ad io an d T e le visio n ,” published in th e J u n e ,
12
1957
G o u ld in g : ETHICS A N D PUBLICITY ■ 1505
issue o f th e J A D A , m igh t also be ap p licab le w ith th e a u th o riz ed re p re se n tative o r com m it to th e p re se n ta tio n o f d e n ta l h e a lth ed ucation tee o f the d en tal society o f w h ic h th e dentist m a te ria l in such m edia as new sp apers and is a m em ber. 2. In so fa r as possible, scripts, notes and m agazines. • I t is the o p in io n o f the J u d ic ia l C o u n cil,o th e r m aterials should be su bm itted to the designated re p re se n tative o f the society in a d fu rth e rm o re , th a t th e c o n tex t o f d e n ta l h e a lth van ce fo r re v ie w a n d com m ent. ed u c a tio n colum ns should be the m ost im p o r 3. A lim itatio n should be established by ta n t co n sid eratio n ; this assumes, o f course, each society on the m axim um n u m b er o f tele th a t th e b y lin e o r o th e r id en tific atio n o f the a u th o r is dignified. vision o r ra d io app earances to be m ad e in an y one y e a r b y a m em ber o f the d en tal society. 4 . T h e nam e a n d o fficial d e n ta l society p o sition o r title o f th e m em ber m ay be p ro p erly used on television an d ra d io prog ram s, but th ere sh ould n o t be an y referen ce to his a d R u les fo r D e n ta l Societies.— T h e fo llo w in g dress o r his field o f p ra ctic e e xcep t fo r those is suggested as a guide fo r p a rtic ip a tio n in not engaged in p riv a te p ra ctic e . D escrip tive telecasts a n d broad casts by d e n ta l societies: term s such as “ e x p e rt,” “sp ecialist,” o r “ au 1. D e n ta l societies m a y sponsor, in d iv id u th o rity ” should be avoided. a lly o r w ith o th e r e th ic a l groups, open c irc u it 5. E v e ry e ffo rt sh o u ld be m ade to assure telecasts a n d b road casts w h ic h are o f a p u b lic th a t the d en tist’s p a rtic ip a tio n is a re a l co n service n a tu re p ro v id e d the scripts, film s, prop s trib u tio n to the h e a lth ed u c atio n o f th e pu blic. an d m a te rials a re ap p ro ve d in ad v a n c e by a u D e ta iled d escrip tions o f techn ics a n d p ro c e th o rized rep re se n tative s o f the d en tal society. dures, p a rtic u la rly those w h ic h are c o n tro v e r 2. D e n ta l societies m ay p a rtic ip a te in open sial, sh ould be avoided. c irc u it television an d ra d io p rog ram s w h ich T h e in te n t o f th e fo re g o in g is to encourage do h a v e c o m m ercial sponsors p ro v id e d : ra th e r th a n discourage the use o f television a. T h a t a ll scripts, films, prop s an d a d an d rad io by d e n ta l societies fo r th e h ealth vertisin g m a te rials an d statem en ts in co n ed ucation o f the p u blic. D e n ta l societies q u ite ju n c tio n th e re w ith be ap p ro ve d in ad v an c e p ro p e rly should tak e the le ad in d eveloping by au th o rized rep resen tatives o f the co and encourag in g television an d ra d io prog ram s o p e ra tin g d e n ta l so ciety; in keeping w ith pro fessio n al standards. b. T h a t the ad vertisin g , in g en eral, be
The essential portions of the “Guiding Principles for Participation on Radio and Television Programs” follow:
It should be noticed that these general principles, with little change, also can be applied to the other mass media.
in stitu tio n a l in n a tu re an d th a t n o endorse m en t b y the d e n ta l society is m ade o r im p lied fo r a n y co m m ercial p ro d u c t, and c. T h a t com m ercials d u rin g th e p ro g ram sh ould n o t in clu d e the nam e o f o r referen ce to th e d e n ta l society. A RU LE OF T H U M B 3. In a rra n g in g fo r television an d ra d io prog ram s, the d e n ta l society should insist upon the rig h t to determ in e the pro fession al aspects o f th e pro g ram s in w h ic h it w ill p a rtic ip a te an d sh ould c le a rly state in ad van ce its rig h t to term in a te its p a rtic ip a tio n in a n y p ro g ra m at a n y tim e it believes its p a rtic ip a tio n is no lo n g er in th e best interests o f th e p u blic. 4. T h ese sam e g en eral p rin cip les sh all a p p ly to clo sed -circu it television w ith the excep tion th a t in p ro g ram s devised solely fo r pre se n ta tio n to profession al audiences, p ro d u c t a d v ertisin g m a y be p e rm itte d in acco rd w ith the a d v ertisin g a n d exhib it stand ards o f the A m e ric a n D e n ta l A ssociation an d o f th e re spective co n stitu en t an d com ponent d en tal *Dîrector, Bureau of Public Information, American Dental Association, Chicago 60611. societies. 1. Snider, Arthur J., science writer, Chicago Daily R u les fo r In d iv id u a l D entists.— T h e follow.News. Presented before the First National Conference ing is suggested as a g uide fo r p a rtic ip a tio n on Dental Public Relations, Chicago, August 10-11# 1964. 2. American Dental Association, Judicial Council. in telecasts an d broad casts by in d iv id u a l den Principles of ethics with official advisory opinions as tists: revised November, 1964. JADA 70:136 Jan. 1965. 1. A ll in v ita tio n s to in d iv id u a l dentists to 3. American Dental Association, Bureau of Public Information and Judicial Council. Guiding principles p a rticip a te on rad io an d television pro g ram s for participation on radio and television programs. should be c le ared in ad v an ce o f accep tan ce JADA 54:848 June 1957.
If dental societies will ask themselves three questions when considering public ity and ethics, the problem may perhaps be simplified: Is the publicity in good taste? Does it advance the profession’s aims? Is it in the public’s best interest? When all of the examples, the rulings and the guidelines are boiled away, there appear to remain two essential elements: common sense and the golden rule.
Peter C. Goulding,* B A, Chicago
W here is the line betw een legitimate p u b licity and unethical advertising? T h e “ Guiding Principles fo r Participation on Radio and Television Programs” and the A D A Judicial Council’s official advisory opinions on the serve as guideposts in answering this question,
Principles of Ethics
which may be the most difficult public relations problem that a local society faces.
is this: Where is the line between legiti mate publicity and unethical advertising? It is not a line that can be drawn once and forevermore remain constant. It is stated in the Principles o f Ethics that a dentist’s obligations to his profession “cannot be reduced to a changeless series of urgings and prohibitions for, while the basic obligation is constant, its ful fillment may vary with the changing needs of a society composed of the hu man beings that a profession is dedicated to serve.” Beyond this is the essential obligation of the dentist to participate in the edu cation of the public, insofar as that edu cation will advance the public health. The Principles o f Ethics is clear on this point, both as to the obligation and the necessity for dignified exercise of that ob ligation :
Dental society X will not allow its presi dent to have his picture appear in the newspaper. Dental society Y will allow news pictures to be taken at its monthly meeting but maintains an elaborate card index system to make certain that no member’s picture appears twice in any one year. Dental society Z asks newspaper reporters to submit their news stories for Sectio n 2 0 . H e a lth E d u cation o f th e P ub prior clearance, including the proposed lic.— A dentist m ay p ro p e rly p a rtic ip a te in a headline. pro g ram o f h e a lth ed u c atio n o f the pu blic in Societies X, Y and Z are not imagi o lv in g such m edia as the press, rad io , telev i nary; neither are they historical, nor are vsion an d lectu re, p ro v id e d th a t such program s they unique. are in keeping w ith th e d ig n ity o f th e p ro fe s The question of personal publicity, of sion an d the custom o f the d e n tal profession of using a dentist’s name and picture in the com m unity. news media, is perhaps the most difficult But these are general terms ; how is the that local societies face in the area of local society to apply them to the specific public relations. The nub of the question ethical situation in its own town?
1504 • J. A M ER . DENT. ASSN.: V ol. 71, Dec. 1965
An experienced science writer, a man highly respected by scientists and mem bers of the health professions, had this suggestion:1 C odes c a n n o t w o rk if em phasis is p lace d o n censorship, w h ic h is a re flec tio n o f a lo t o f anxieties. T o be effe c tive, codes m ust b e posi tiv e ly o rie n te d , n o t n e g ative ly . T h e A m e ric a n M e d ica l A sso ciatio n has a rriv e d fin a lly a t this position a fte r m o d ifyin g its code re la tin g to p u b licity som e five o r six tim es in the p ast 2 0 years. S im ila rly , th e A m e ric a n D e n ta l A ssocia tio n has ad o p te d w h a t m ay be reg ard e d as a “ perm issive” position on the m a tte r o f p u b licity. N ow it is to be expected u n d e r su ch p e r m issive codes th e re w ill com e some b ad w ith th e good. Q uacks m ay in some c le ve r fash io n w in o v e r th e u n w a ry re p o rte r. B u t b y an d larg e, sound in fo rm a tio n w id e ly dissem inated w ill h a v e the effe c t o f o ve rw h e lm in g th e o cca sional p u b lic ity seeker an d his in sin cere m o tives. A perm issive code w ill n o t in sure th a t all in fo rm a tio n is sound even w h en p resented by sin cerely-m o tivated m en. T h e course o f scien tific progress w as e ve r such— tw o steps fo rw a rd a n d p erh ap s a step b ack w ard , b u t th e n e t gain is a step. T h e p u b lic is e n title d to sh are in these vic to rie s a n d defeats. A b e tte r u n d e r stan d in g o f d e n ta l research is thus obtain ed .
SOME SPECIFIC GUIDELINES
Beyond the Principles of Ethics, there are two sets of guidelines that give more specific direction to the society and the individual dentist. These are the official advisory opinions of the American Den tal Association, Judicial Council,2 and the report entitled, “Guiding Principles for Participation on Radio and Television Programs,” which was prepared by the Bureau of Public Information and the Judicial Council in 1957.® The advisory opinions, a reprint of which may be obtained from the Council, are divided according to the section of the Principles of Ethics to which they apply. Some of the opinions most perti nent to publicity are the following: • A d e n tist w h o arran ges fo r a p aid new s p a p e r ad vertisem en t o f his “D e n ta l C lin ic ” is engaged in u n eth ical conduct. • A den tist w h o induces, o r agrees to, the p u b lica tio n o f an a rtic le in a lo c a l n ew sp aper
p ra isin g h im fo r h a v in g a research finding p u blished in a profession al jo u rn a l is engaged in u n e th ic a l conduct. • A den tist w h o ac tin g in his o w n b e h a lf induces th e p u b licatio n o f a n ew sp ap er artic le describ ing his activities as a le a d e r o f the lo cal society’s C h ild re n ’s D e n ta l H ealth D a y ac tivity is engaged in u n eth ical condu ct. • A d en tist w h o places a n otice in a lo c al new sp ap er th a t he is le a v in g to w n to take a p o stg rad u ate course in d e n tistry is engaged in u n e th ic a l conduct. • A den tist w h o p erm its his nam e to be used in a d e n tal h e a lth ed u catio n p am p h let to be d istrib u ted to the p u b lic a t la rg e b y a co m m ercial firm is engaged in u n e th ic a l con duct. • A den tist w h o issues a new s release lin k in g h im se lf to new advances in d e n tistry is engaged in u n eth ical condu ct. N ews releases c on cern in g achievem ents o f d e n tistry should com e fro m d e n tal societies o r o th e r a p p ro p ri ate p rofession al sources. • T h e descrip tion o f a school d e n tist’s w ork in a news a rtic le is n o t n ecessarily th e eq u iva le n t o f ad vertisin g , b u t it is ad visab le th a t such artic le s be cleared b y the lo c a l society in ad van c e o f p u b lication . • A den tist w h o arran g es fo r th e p u b lica tion o f a n ew sp aper a rtic le o n his use o f hypnosis in his d en tal p ra ctic e is in vio la tio n o f Section o f the P r in c ip le s o f E t h ic s w h ich forb ids a d v ertisin g by dentists. • A d en tist m ay in sert a p a id an n ou n ce m ent o f his d e n tal p ra ctic e in a lo c a l new s p a p e r on a restricted basis o n ly w h e re such m eth od o f com m u n icatin g in fo rm a tio n is deem ed in the best interests o f th e p u b lic and the profession as d eterm in ed b y the a p p ro p ri ate com ponent d en tal society. • B efo re a dentist in itiates th e p u b licatio n o f a d e n ta l h e alth colum n in a new sp ap er, it is ad visab le fo r him to seek th e a p p ro v a l o f his lo c a l an d state d e n ta l societies. • A den tist has the rig h t to speak out ag ain st th e policies espoused by org anized d en tistry, in clu d in g the rig h t to m ake p u b lic p ro nouncem ents again st flu o rid atio n . I t is u n e th i cal, h o w e ve r, fo r a dentist to rep resen t his view s as those o f the d e n tal society o r as those o f the m a jo rity o f dentists o f th e co m m unity w h ere in fa c t his view s are opposed to the society’s o r to the m a jo rity o f dentists in the com m unity. • A den tist w h o p rep ares a h e a lth ed u ca tio n colu m n fo r a n ew sp aper syn d icate is not re q u ire d to o btain the a p p ro v a l o f e v e ry com p o n en t society in w hose ju risd ic tio n the col u m n is published. • I t is the opinion o f the C o u n c il th a t the “G u id in g R ules fo r P artic ip a tio n on R ad io an d T e le visio n ,” published in th e J u n e ,
12
1957
G o u ld in g : ETHICS A N D PUBLICITY ■ 1505
issue o f th e J A D A , m igh t also be ap p licab le w ith th e a u th o riz ed re p re se n tative o r com m it to th e p re se n ta tio n o f d e n ta l h e a lth ed ucation tee o f the d en tal society o f w h ic h th e dentist m a te ria l in such m edia as new sp apers and is a m em ber. 2. In so fa r as possible, scripts, notes and m agazines. • I t is the o p in io n o f the J u d ic ia l C o u n cil,o th e r m aterials should be su bm itted to the designated re p re se n tative o f the society in a d fu rth e rm o re , th a t th e c o n tex t o f d e n ta l h e a lth van ce fo r re v ie w a n d com m ent. ed u c a tio n colum ns should be the m ost im p o r 3. A lim itatio n should be established by ta n t co n sid eratio n ; this assumes, o f course, each society on the m axim um n u m b er o f tele th a t th e b y lin e o r o th e r id en tific atio n o f the a u th o r is dignified. vision o r ra d io app earances to be m ad e in an y one y e a r b y a m em ber o f the d en tal society. 4 . T h e nam e a n d o fficial d e n ta l society p o sition o r title o f th e m em ber m ay be p ro p erly used on television an d ra d io prog ram s, but th ere sh ould n o t be an y referen ce to his a d R u les fo r D e n ta l Societies.— T h e fo llo w in g dress o r his field o f p ra ctic e e xcep t fo r those is suggested as a guide fo r p a rtic ip a tio n in not engaged in p riv a te p ra ctic e . D escrip tive telecasts a n d broad casts by d e n ta l societies: term s such as “ e x p e rt,” “sp ecialist,” o r “ au 1. D e n ta l societies m a y sponsor, in d iv id u th o rity ” should be avoided. a lly o r w ith o th e r e th ic a l groups, open c irc u it 5. E v e ry e ffo rt sh o u ld be m ade to assure telecasts a n d b road casts w h ic h are o f a p u b lic th a t the d en tist’s p a rtic ip a tio n is a re a l co n service n a tu re p ro v id e d the scripts, film s, prop s trib u tio n to the h e a lth ed u c atio n o f th e pu blic. an d m a te rials a re ap p ro ve d in ad v a n c e by a u D e ta iled d escrip tions o f techn ics a n d p ro c e th o rized rep re se n tative s o f the d en tal society. dures, p a rtic u la rly those w h ic h are c o n tro v e r 2. D e n ta l societies m ay p a rtic ip a te in open sial, sh ould be avoided. c irc u it television an d ra d io p rog ram s w h ich T h e in te n t o f th e fo re g o in g is to encourage do h a v e c o m m ercial sponsors p ro v id e d : ra th e r th a n discourage the use o f television a. T h a t a ll scripts, films, prop s an d a d an d rad io by d e n ta l societies fo r th e h ealth vertisin g m a te rials an d statem en ts in co n ed ucation o f the p u blic. D e n ta l societies q u ite ju n c tio n th e re w ith be ap p ro ve d in ad v an c e p ro p e rly should tak e the le ad in d eveloping by au th o rized rep resen tatives o f the co and encourag in g television an d ra d io prog ram s o p e ra tin g d e n ta l so ciety; in keeping w ith pro fessio n al standards. b. T h a t the ad vertisin g , in g en eral, be
The essential portions of the “Guiding Principles for Participation on Radio and Television Programs” follow:
It should be noticed that these general principles, with little change, also can be applied to the other mass media.
in stitu tio n a l in n a tu re an d th a t n o endorse m en t b y the d e n ta l society is m ade o r im p lied fo r a n y co m m ercial p ro d u c t, and c. T h a t com m ercials d u rin g th e p ro g ram sh ould n o t in clu d e the nam e o f o r referen ce to th e d e n ta l society. A RU LE OF T H U M B 3. In a rra n g in g fo r television an d ra d io prog ram s, the d e n ta l society should insist upon the rig h t to determ in e the pro fession al aspects o f th e pro g ram s in w h ic h it w ill p a rtic ip a te an d sh ould c le a rly state in ad van ce its rig h t to term in a te its p a rtic ip a tio n in a n y p ro g ra m at a n y tim e it believes its p a rtic ip a tio n is no lo n g er in th e best interests o f th e p u blic. 4. T h ese sam e g en eral p rin cip les sh all a p p ly to clo sed -circu it television w ith the excep tion th a t in p ro g ram s devised solely fo r pre se n ta tio n to profession al audiences, p ro d u c t a d v ertisin g m a y be p e rm itte d in acco rd w ith the a d v ertisin g a n d exhib it stand ards o f the A m e ric a n D e n ta l A ssociation an d o f th e re spective co n stitu en t an d com ponent d en tal *Dîrector, Bureau of Public Information, American Dental Association, Chicago 60611. societies. 1. Snider, Arthur J., science writer, Chicago Daily R u les fo r In d iv id u a l D entists.— T h e follow.News. Presented before the First National Conference ing is suggested as a g uide fo r p a rtic ip a tio n on Dental Public Relations, Chicago, August 10-11# 1964. 2. American Dental Association, Judicial Council. in telecasts an d broad casts by in d iv id u a l den Principles of ethics with official advisory opinions as tists: revised November, 1964. JADA 70:136 Jan. 1965. 1. A ll in v ita tio n s to in d iv id u a l dentists to 3. American Dental Association, Bureau of Public Information and Judicial Council. Guiding principles p a rticip a te on rad io an d television pro g ram s for participation on radio and television programs. should be c le ared in ad v an ce o f accep tan ce JADA 54:848 June 1957.
If dental societies will ask themselves three questions when considering public ity and ethics, the problem may perhaps be simplified: Is the publicity in good taste? Does it advance the profession’s aims? Is it in the public’s best interest? When all of the examples, the rulings and the guidelines are boiled away, there appear to remain two essential elements: common sense and the golden rule.