Science vs. Corporate Communications

Ever witness a traffic accident?

Well, I have, kinda, it's an accident that a friend of mine had in posting on their blog something related to their workplace that was better left unsaid. A Bad Thing happened, and there were repercussions. I got that kinda queasy feeling of witnessing an accident, and it got me to thinking about a whole sordid mess of office politics and what seems to me the basic incompatibility of mindsets of Science and of Corporate Communication. (My emphasis added.)

It seems to me that one of the basic premises of Science is the free exchange of communication, of revealing the truth (as facts), and the thrashing out of explanations.

On the other hand, Corporate Communications has as its fundamental premise the communication of selected information (not necessarily fact), the "spinning" of the message (whether these are, at best, truths or half-truths), and the overriding importance of getting the message across as opposed to thrashing out of opinions to getting to the truth.

This gets worse as person trained in science (as I am) tries to embrace the world of corporate communications (as I did) and tries to reconcile the two. I tried, and failed.

While I don't argue that it is possible for the concepts of Science and Corporate Communications to co-exist, what I contend is that these mindsets are fundamentally opposed to each other, and that it is only by one mindset compromising a core value that the two can co-exist. And it is for each person to decide how far they are ready to compromise their core value in order for these two things to co-exist in the same brain - and incidentally how far one is willing to compromise their core value to "get ahead" in the organization. On this last point, I know of what I speak. 'Nuff said.

I have seen examples of individuals in several workplaces that refuse to compromise their integrity in the face of pressure to do so. They choose to do or say what they believe in - and they suffer the consequences of that because it doesn't fit in the mold of Corporate Communications or in the stated values of the organization.

Now, if what I have just said offends someone, then they'd better try and sue "Dilbert." I suspect that the very same people that would laugh at the comic strip and comment that it's true to life would be deeply offended if "open secrets" of their own organization were made plain in a blog or a comic strip and if it implicated them. I understand the concept of confidentiality, but I think that we've gone too far on the PC route if we can't state our own opinions without fear of corporate reprisal.

Just look at this story of the interference of American scientists by the American administration. And we in Canada shouldn't think that this hasn't happened already!

I, personally, wish I had the guts to speak out the way some of my colleagues and some scientists have from their own convictions. But I haven't, and don't, because I have a mortgage to pay and kids to take care of. I'm too in love with my income and my way of life to risk change and to have the courage to live my live the way I think I really believe in...

It's sad. It's so sad.

:-(