When PR becomes the story: why ethical standards are not an optional extra

News broke recently that a Labour-aligned thinktank, Labour Together, commissioned a PR firm to investigate journalists who were scrutinising its funding – a story which put the comms industry firmly in the spotlight and saw those who usually place news stories, become the story themselves.

It provoked a slew of negative headlines, as it was branded everything from a “scandal” to a “smear campaign”.

The Cabinet Office is now looking into the matter; the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA), the industry’s professional body, has launched its own investigation into the PR firm in question; and it caused those of us who work in comms to stop and think.

Of course, organisations have every right to know what is being written about them, how their activities are being portrayed and what reputational risks they face as a result. Monitoring media coverage, preparing responses and protecting credibility are routine and responsible parts of a comms professional’s toolkit.

But there is a line and the public expects us to know where it is.

The PRCA’s code of conduct states that members must deal “fairly and honestly with others”, ensure the “accuracy and truth” of their work and “not disseminate false or misleading information, knowingly or recklessly”. They are also required to conduct their activities “having proper regard to the public interest”.

These aren’t abstract principles. They exist because PR plays a powerful role in shaping narratives and influencing debate. When that influence is exercised responsibly, it supports a healthy democracy. When it appears opaque or shady, it weakens trust, not just in one organisation, but in the profession as a whole.

This is all the more the case when it comes to lobbying and public affairs. Engaging with elected representatives, presenting evidence and arguing for particular policies is not inherently unethical. Indeed, it’s as old as Parliament itself. Citizens, charities, campaigners, trade unions and businesses all have the right to make their case.

Most of that work happens in plain sight and is governed by rules, registers and professional standards. The idea that all political communication involves shady deals is entirely inaccurate.

However, perception matters. In an era of low institutional trust, organisations are judged not only on what they say, but on how they behave when challenged. When journalists scrutinise funding, governance or influence, that scrutiny is part of a healthy democratic ecosystem. How organisations respond to it can either reinforce confidence or deepen suspicion.

Of course, journalists and PR professionals have never been the easiest of bed fellows. Journalists should scrutinise and speak truth to power; communicators advocate and explain. The tension is part of the system. But it works best when both sides operate within understood boundaries of fairness and professionalism.

We don’t need additional distrust between journalists and those who represent organisations. At a time when misinformation spreads easily and confidence in institutions is fragile, constructive engagement matters more than ever. PR operators should aim to build understanding, not inflame suspicion.

That’s why the PRCA’s involvement in this case is important, despite it not being a statutory regulator. Professional bodies exist to uphold standards and, while codes of conduct only mean something if they are taken seriously, most agencies do, because credibility is their most valuable asset.

Ethics in PR isn’t about appearing virtuous. It is about recognising that influence carries responsibility. The public is rightly sceptical of anything that looks secretive. If we want trust in PR and communications to grow rather than dwindle, we must demonstrate consistently that we operate within clear ethical boundaries. We have to show, through our actions as well as our words, that responsible PR is not just a slogan – it’s fundamental to the job.