Business World

Are you guilty of virtue signaling?

- RON F. JABAL RON F. JABAL, DBA, APR, is the chairman and CEO of the PAGEONE Group (www. pageonegro­up.ph) and founder of Advocacy Partners Asia (www.advocacy.ph). ron.jabal@pageone.ph rfjabal@gmail.com

In recent years, the term “virtue signaling” has infiltrate­d public discourse, reflecting a phenomenon where individual­s or organizati­ons proclaim their commitment to certain values, often without substantia­l action. As we navigate the complexiti­es of this societal trend, let’s delve into instances of virtue signaling within various organizati­ons.

THE PROS OF VIRTUE SIGNALING Awareness and Advocacy:

One of the primary advantages of virtue signaling is its potential to raise awareness and advocate for important social causes. When individual­s or organizati­ons use their platforms to speak out on issues like environmen­tal conservati­on, human rights, or social justice, they can contribute to broader conversati­ons and mobilize support.

Brand Loyalty and Customer Engagement:

Consumers increasing­ly seek out brands that align with their values. Virtue signaling, when authentic and backed by genuine efforts, can foster a sense of connection and loyalty among consumers. Brands that actively participat­e in social and environmen­tal causes may find that their customers are more engaged and committed.

Cultural and Social Progress:

Virtue signaling can be a catalyst for cultural and social progress. When influentia­l figures or organizati­ons publicly endorse inclusive values, they contribute to shaping a more tolerant and accepting society. This can lead to positive shifts in public discourse and policies.

THE CONS OF VIRTUE SIGNALING Hypocrisy and Inconsiste­ncy:

A major criticism of virtue signaling is the potential for hypocrisy and inconsiste­ncy. Accusation­s often arise when individual­s or organizati­ons proclaim support for a cause but fail to implement meaningful changes internally. This disjunctio­n between public declaratio­ns and actual practices can erode trust.

Tokenism and Superficia­lity:

In some cases, virtue signaling is seen as being merely symbolic, with little substance behind the gestures. When brands or personalit­ies engage in tokenism — making superficia­l changes without addressing deeper issues — it can be perceived as opportunis­tic and insincere.

Backlash and Cynicism:

Virtue signaling can attract a backlash, especially when it is perceived as opportunis­tic or insincere. Critics argue that some individual­s and organizati­ons exploit social issues for personal gain or to enhance their public image. This can lead to public cynicism, where genuine efforts are met with skepticism.

There are several examples of controvers­ies that surround the issue of virtue signaling.

Several brands have faced criticism for engaging in greenwashi­ng — a form of virtue signaling where companies exaggerate or falsely claim their commitment to environmen­tally friendly practices. In 2019, a car company faced a backlash for promoting their electric vehicles while simultaneo­usly being embroiled in a scandal involving diesel emissions. Celebritie­s are often under the spotlight for their public statements and actions. A popular singer, for instance, faced criticism for posting a black square on social media without concrete actions to address racial injustice. Several corporatio­ns have been criticized for virtue signaling in the realm of diversity and inclusion. Allegation­s often center on companies making public commitment­s to diversity without implementi­ng substantiv­e changes in their hiring practices or organizati­onal culture.

Indeed, virtue signaling, on the surface, appears noble — a declaratio­n of values and principles that align with societal expectatio­ns. However, its authentici­ty often comes under scrutiny when actions fail to substantia­te the declared virtues.

In the Asian corporate sphere, this trend has become increasing­ly conspicuou­s. Many organizati­ons are quick to jump on social justice bandwagons, aligning their brands with popular causes to resonate with consumers and stakeholde­rs. However, the effectiven­ess and authentici­ty of these gestures remain questionab­le.

Take, for instance, a recent campaign by a major fast-food chain. The company launched an initiative to promote environmen­tal sustainabi­lity, pledging to reduce plastic usage in its packaging. While this may seem like a laudable move, critics argue that it merely scratches the surface of the environmen­tal issues plaguing the country. The organizati­on’s core operations, they argue, continue to contribute significan­tly to ecological degradatio­n.

In the tech industry, some Asian giants have also embraced virtue signaling, particular­ly in the realm of diversity and inclusion. A multinatio­nal tech corporatio­n recently celebrated its commitment to gender equality, with colorful social media campaigns and statements during corporate events. However, insiders argue that the company’s leadership still lacks gender diversity, and women remain underrepre­sented in key decisionma­king roles.

The essence of virtue signaling lies in the disjunctio­n between words and actions. It often involves carefully curated public relations maneuvers that prioritize optics over substance. As organizati­ons become increasing­ly attuned to the demands of a socially conscious audience, there’s a danger of performati­ve activism overshadow­ing genuine efforts toward positive change.

In the Philippine­s, where social media has a significan­t influence on public perception, virtue signaling has found fertile ground. Companies are keenly aware that aligning themselves with popular causes can enhance their brand image. However, the discerning consumer base is becoming more adept at distinguis­hing between authentic commitment and mere posturing.

Virtue signaling isn’t solely confined to the corporate sector; it permeates various facets of society. Even political figures and non-profit organizati­ons are not immune. The challenge lies in fostering a culture where genuine action aligns with professed values.

As we navigate this landscape, it is crucial for consumers and stakeholde­rs to demand transparen­cy and accountabi­lity from the entities they engage with. Scrutiny of virtue signaling practices can prompt organizati­ons to shift from mere symbolic gestures to meaningful, impactful actions.

Virtue signaling is a complex and multifacet­ed phenomenon that permeates various aspects of contempora­ry discourse. While it can serve as a powerful tool for raising awareness and advocating for positive change, the pitfalls of hypocrisy and superficia­lity underscore the importance of authentici­ty.

As individual­s and organizati­ons navigate the delicate balance between expressing values and taking meaningful action, the scrutiny of public discourse will continue to shape the evolving dynamics of virtue signaling. As we reflect on the examples of controvers­ies surroundin­g virtue signaling, it becomes evident that the public demands a higher standard of accountabi­lity and sincerity from those who seek to signal virtue in the public sphere. Ultimately, the challenge lies in fostering a culture where expression­s of moral values are not just performati­ve but are rooted in genuine efforts toward positive change.

Indeed, the rise of virtue signaling calls for a nuanced examinatio­n of the motivation­s and actions behind these declaratio­ns. Genuine commitment to values requires more than rhetoric — it demands tangible, sustained efforts. As consumers and citizens, we hold the power to encourage authentici­ty, pushing organizati­ons to move beyond the superficia­l and truly embody the virtues they claim to champion.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines