Chapter 12

 Communication ethics literacy and difference centers around “the good of learning as the constructive pragmatic response to an era defined by difference” (pg. 210). In an era defined by difference, disagreement, and lack of concurrence in communication ethics requires two pragmatic moves. First, disagreement in a conversation should not immediately move us into referring to an opponent as unethical. Second, embrace the need of learning about different ethical positions that differ from our own. When conversing with others who may come from a different background, it’s important when interacting to not agree with all ethical positions that are encountered during the conversation. It’s important to educate yourself on issues that are important to you and not change your values and morals because someone has a different viewpoint on the topic. In particular, the term crisis communication is an “increasingly relevant metaphor for today’s postmodern moment of virtue contention; the unexpected emerges and requires discernment and action as we encounter differing particular “goods” in the public domain” (pg. 210)

Throughout the chapter the author provides meaning of the term “crisis communication” by explaining how crisis communication begins with the contention of goods that disrupts the public sphere. Historically, increasing differences invite crisis in the disagreement over the good. It is our position that increasing commonality of ongoing crises in our culture generated by differing views of the good make a communication ethics dispute necessary. In our society today, we often only think about our self and what we consider “good” in a crisis rather than considering other viewpoints. This “me” thinking also equates to relationships and common interactions with others. Why do we only tend to think about our self in tragic situations? In what ways can we improve this as a society together?

For example, over the last few days’ new development has been announced regarding the deadly mass shooting in San Bernardino, California. Police statements and victim statements have been uncovered on what occurred inside of the deadly holiday party. Recounts of dead bodies sprawled outside of the conference room and the smell of gunpowder lingered upon entering the establishment. A video and audio has recently been released involving the first police officer and the minutes following the deadly massacre; his actions and dialogue of his identity as a police officer of what we should do and what we need to do. Ethical questions regarding our own mark and despair arise in the context of a particular life history or a unique form of life. They are wedded “to the questions of identity how we should understand ourselves, who we are and want to be” (pg. 220). The officer’s willingness to put his life on the line for strangers and protecting the citizens of San Bernardino is his identity. In that moment of crisis the unidentified officer urges the employees to “Try to relax, everyone. Try to relax. I'll take a bullet before you do, that's for damn sure.” In a crisis situation, how would you communicate with strangers? What are ways in which you would do so?