Table of Contents
Introduction
This material is a continuation of our previous article on ethics in PR, which outlined the fundamental principles of public relations and discussed the issue of truth in the work of PR professionals. Today we will talk about manipulation and its alignment with professional ethics in the industry. In examining this topic, we will once again refer to Edward Bernays – one of the founding figures of PR.
Manipulation in the context of public relations refers to a set of covert influence techniques aimed at shaping the audience’s opinions, emotions, or behaviors in the interest of a client. These techniques can be—and often are—considered unethical. The object of manipulation, in this case, is public opinion, and the PR specialist’s task is to create a reality that benefits the organization they represent.
Edward Bernays viewed manipulation as an integral part of public life. He wrote that the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses was an important element in democratic society. Thus, he saw manipulation as an effective method for achieving practical goals. But effective doesn’t necessarily mean acceptable. Or does it?
Signs and Techniques of Manipulation in PR
Common indicators of manipulation in PR include:
- The presence of a hidden agenda;
- Emotional influence on the audience (using fear, guilt, pride, or other strong emotions);
- Presentation of information that distorts reality;
- Creation of an illusion of choice.
Manipulative techniques in public relations can take various forms. For example, an oral care brand might feature a figure in a lab coat—“8 out of 10 dentists recommend us.” A large retailer might claim, “99% of our customers recommend us,” without disclosing how that number was calculated.
Other manipulative strategies used to promote a company, individual, or brand include shifting focus from one issue to another, creating a crowd effect with a favorable message, astroturfing (creating a fake appearance of public support), withholding facts, and more.
One of the most high-profile examples in recent years was the exposure of Theranos—a startup whose founders claimed to have developed groundbreaking diagnostic technology. In reality, Theranos had no such technology.
Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes promoted the company by emphasizing the advantages of the new method, which helped her attract at least $750 million in investments. At its peak, the company was valued at around $10 billion. The validity of its technology was only questioned 12 years after Theranos was founded, and its stock value eventually plummeted to nearly zero.
The Theranos case is notable for the scale of the manipulation. Still, PR professionals often employ tactics that, while containing manipulative elements, remain within professional ethical boundaries. Let’s examine some of them.
Storytelling
It would be a mistake to assume that PR should avoid emotional influence altogether. On the contrary—this is precisely how PR achieves its goals, by fostering lasting emotional connections between the audience and a brand or company. A strong brand story almost always strengthens relationships with clients and partners. A classic example is Apple’s origin story, which began in a garage in a California family home. However, facts should not be distorted or exaggerated to the point of fabrication—sooner or later, the deception will be uncovered, often with serious reputational consequences.
A common form of manipulative storytelling is falsely attributing foreign origins to a brand. This is particularly prevalent in developing markets, where local producers may try to gain consumer trust by implying prestigious foreign roots.
Focus on the Positive
This technique is frequently used in press releases. Companies don’t distort the facts but frame them in a way that is acceptable to their audience and stakeholders. For example, while acknowledging “new challenges” from competitors, a company may also announce record-breaking customer growth. In this way, PR professionals work not just with facts, but with how they are presented—vivid and inspiring language can create a favorable impression. For instance, McDonald’s did not deny concerns about plastic packaging but shifted the focus to its solution, announcing a transition to paper packaging. Starbucks and other companies later followed suit.
Use of Psychological Triggers
In the pursuit of ethical PR, one shouldn’t avoid tools that build audience trust in the brand. Even the overused phrase “millions of satisfied customers” can serve the company well—if it is backed up by data from credible sources.
Appealing to authority can also benefit a company. However, the credibility of the person or organization referenced must be unquestionable. For example, Tesla frequently uses the image of Elon Musk, whose reputation as an innovator remains strong despite his eccentric actions.
Consequences of Manipulation for Business and Society
Manipulation is a highly risky tool, especially in times of crisis. Yes, it may help to “let off steam” and buy the company some time to take further action. However, once the manipulation is exposed (and nowadays, it’s almost certain that it will be exposed), the resulting damage can be even greater.
A revealed manipulation can cause far more harm to a company than the actual issue it was meant to conceal. In such cases, a private crisis can escalate into a crisis of trust, which may last for decades. For instance, Nestlé still faces the consequences of its aggressive marketing practices in Africa and Asia during the 1970s. It’s important to understand that a crisis of trust is systemic in nature, and resolving it requires not only time but also significant financial investment.
Another danger of manipulation is its impact on the internal audience — the company’s own employees. Workers cannot help but notice the gap between the company’s messaging and the actual situation. This leads to internal conflict, the consequences of which are unpredictable, as each person reacts differently on a psychological level.
In the worst-case scenario, an employee may decide to expose the employer’s hidden activities. The higher the position of that person, the more trouble this can cause for the company. A notable example is Frances Haugen, a former Facebook manager who, in 2021, leaked internal documents revealing the manipulative nature of the company’s public policy. This led not only to a decline in the social network’s stock value but also forced Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg to explain himself before U.S. Congress.
| Manipulation | Short-Term Effect | Long-Term Consequences |
| Concealing the scale of a crisis | Reduces panic, temporarily preserves reputation | Loss of trust, increased fines, heightened scrutiny |
| Distorting facts | Eases public pressure | Exposure, reputational crisis, reduced market value |
| Spreading fake information | Creates an illusion of popularity | Exposure, boycotts, legal consequences |
Finally, the practice of manipulation in public relations has not gone unnoticed by governments. Many countries have introduced measures to ensure businesses “play fair.” In the U.S., PR integrity is regulated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Its work is based on the Truth in Advertising Act, which also covers press releases.
The European Union has also enacted legislation explicitly prohibiting manipulative practices targeting mass audiences. In Europe, companies caught engaging in “green PR” or greenwashing are often fined. Violators may be held accountable under the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the Digital Services Act, and other regulatory frameworks.
Conclusion
A public relations specialist, as Edward Bernays—“the father of PR”—once wrote, is “an agent who inserts ideas into the public consciousness using modern communication tools and the group structure of society.” But today, not all tools are permissible, even from a legal standpoint. Every PR professional must keep this in mind in their daily work.
Manipulations may be effective in the short term—a “sell and forget” strategy. But in today’s business environment, maintaining trust-based relationships with clients and stakeholders is of primary importance. Therefore, PR should be as transparent and honest as possible—even when it involves admitting problems.
Any deception will eventually come to light. And when it does, the company or brand will face not only the original issue, but also a trust crisis—a predictable outcome of discovered manipulation. In the digital age, when “the internet remembers everything,” it’s nearly impossible to fully hide damaging facts once they go public. The best way to address problems is not through distortion, but through a clear, consistent implementation of measures aimed at resolving the situation.
That said, there is a significant difference between outright manipulation and the use of certain manipulative techniques. No company will highlight its failures. The PR professional’s task is to build communication based on honesty, transparency, and a balance of interests.
With global access to information and its rapid dissemination, most governments are increasingly concerned with maintaining “information hygiene.” New regulations impose additional responsibilities on PR professionals. The growing oversight from authorities demands strict compliance with legal norms and professional standards.