Where's the Line?

I am having a really tough time rationalizing anything right now. I have gone, with the exception of about an hour and a half yesterday morning, for nearly 48 hours without sleep. My tolerance for much is low, and for some things I should say it's low-er. I am pretty laid back about most things in my life, even though sometimes I'm just a little neurotic.

But I believe that some things apply without compromise, some things defy rationalization, and some things should just not be tolerated. When you start working in a certain environment, you learn what is acceptable and what should be avoided at all costs. On the playground, violating this code of conduct can result in your exile from the sandbox and lonely afternoons on the swings. In the real world, though, ignoring your ethics can draw other people into the quagmire and literally ruin their lives.

Then, there's something to be said for hubris. Now, hubris is not to be confused with a healthy ego. Everybody should believe in their own intelligence, wisdom and capability; a healthy ego, rather than being a put-off, can actually help the person in question realize where their areas of improvement lie. Healthy ego does not mean "I am blind to my faults; worship me."

That's hubris. It crosses the line. Hubris means "excessive pride," and we all know that an excess of just about anything is a bad thing. The sheer arrogance present in some people makes them walking ethics violations - it's only a matter of time before the line is approached, passed, and completely forgotten. How on earth can a person of some authority justify coercing a peer or subordinate into whoring them to the mass market? To elaborate, anybody who has seen MySpace.com can attest to the users who whore out their friends in order to increase their profile views and friend counts.

In the real world, that is an ethics violation. In the right (read: wrong) environment, it is either cronyism or extortion. A person of authority in a certain environment, with experience and credentials to legitimize her position, is the one person who should be held most accountable in a situation where she could use her position for personal gain. If she is so blind to anything but her own supposed greatness, however, it's nothing for her to turn around and coerce a coworker to sell the world on her greatness.

It is a conflict of interest for an individual in a journalistic pursuit to interview and write a feature on a colleague that is meant to be objective but will undoubtedly have a bias and will tell the world how great the first colleague is. Journalists know, understand, and accept this rule of thumb, as well as the exception that mandates an editorial piece may be written without those restrictions. For someone who has advanced degrees and years of experience in journalism is the last person anybody would expect to submit to such an interview.

What happens when that person is the one asking?

And what happens when the person asked experiences a temporary lapse of judgment and agrees to do the interview? And then when it's only later that the extent of the potential for damage is so vast?

There are a lot of what-ifs, and I have digressed somewhat. My point, though, is that I do not believe for a moment that someone in a position of authority, as I have described, should ever put a coworker in ethical jeopardy by basically demanding preferential and biased treatment (*cough cough* an interview!). There is no justification, and no rationalization. And that person holds the reputation and professional fate of another in their overly greedy hands.

That is what's called a conflict of interest. The same conflict of interest would exist if I was to interview my own mentor, someone whom I admire and only have the highest respect for. There is no way that I could approach the situation objectively. If I was a judge handling a case where my own daughter was the defendant, I would not be able to comport myself with the bearing and dignity the situation requires. I would be unfairly biased, whichever way the bias would play itself out, and that would be wrong.

It just makes me sick that there are people in this world who have no compunction about using others to further their own agendas. And for what purpose? Just for another little trophy to add to the portfolio.

Where's the line? ...Eh, about three miles back.