Preparing a speech on the benefits of a new drug
Imagine that you are preparing a speech on the benefits of a new drug, and you find a direct quotation that clearly establishes your argument. Unfortunately, you soon realize that the source of your quotation is actually lobbyist who works for the pharmaceutical company that manufactures the drug. You really want to use this quotation as your attention-getter, but you realize that the source is clearly biased. Which of the following options do you think is the most ethical? Why?
- Disregard the quotation and find another way to start your speech.
- Use the quotation, but acknowledge that the source comes from a paid lobbyist of the pharmaceutical company who manufactures the drug.
- Use the quotation and just give the name of the source. If your audience is interested in your topic, they’ll do their own research and make informed decisions for themselves.
Sample Answer
The most ethical option is to disclose the source of the quotation and to explain why you are still using it. This will allow the audience to evaluate the quotation for themselves and to decide how much weight to give it.
Here is an example of how you could disclose the source of the quotation and explain why you are still using it:
“In my research on the new drug [drug name], I came across a direct quotation that clearly establishes my argument. The quotation is from [lobbyist’s name], a lobbyist for the pharmaceutical company that manufactures [drug name]. I know that [lobbyist’s name] is biased, but I believe that the quotation is still relevant and worth sharing. Here is the quotation: