For example, let's hear from Frank Luntz, professional crybaby extraordinaire:
Following Mother Jones' publication of remarks GOP message man Frank Luntz made to University of Pennsylvania students about conservative talk radio, Luntz has decided to withdraw funding for a university scholarship named after his father that sends students to Washington, DC, according to the Daily Pennsylvanian, an independent student newspaper at the school.
While Luntz is scheduled to speak on a panel at the University during graduation weekend, he said that he would never return to speak after this incident, and would discourage others from speaking here.
[...]
A student had asked Luntz a question about political polarization, and Luntz had responded by blaming conservative talk radio, saying, "They get great ratings, and they drive the message, and it's really problematic." Luntz had asked for his answer to be off the record, and although the student who asked the question agreed to those terms, Aakash Abbi, the student who made the recording and provided it to Mother Jones, did not.
There's an adage among researchers: "Don't do anything you don't want to read about in the papers." It applies to all consultants; researchers just say it more because we're the ones everyone expects to be revolting for money. It's just good business practice: the best way to avoid trouble for doing bad things is to just not do them. Better for you, better for your clients, better for the voters who have to put up with your clients.
And it's also good personal practice. Sure, everyone has secrets. Some people also keep secrets for other people. The latter group is a lot smaller than the former. So if you must take something off the record, or ask "can you keep a secret," or whatever, it's best to think out beforehand what you get out of it, and what the person listening to you will get out of silence as opposed to snitching.
For example: A reporter calls me for comment on something or other. Being a self-promoting sort I am happy to talk with him. I say something that doesn't make a whole lot of sense without some knowledge that involves an active campaign, which I don't comment on as a rule. So I say this up front and offer to explain it off the record. If the reporter agrees, s/he gets an amusing anecdote and a consultant happy to provide future comments. I get some publicity without throwing the current client off message. We both get something out of it, and we both lose something if we don't respect the convention: I lose publicity by taking everything off-record and I lose clients by saying things that are not just time-sensitive but damaging. The reporter loses a friendly process quote source by burning me. There's still a risk, of course. The reporter might be an asshole, or not think my story is really worth holding convention. I moderate my comments accordingly.
That's how grownups handle sensitive information and conversations in confidence: with caution and thinking about whether it's worth it before talking. Of course a lot of stupid grownups don't do that, usually because they're bragging. And honestly, that's what Luntz was doing. Look at me, I'm a smart consultant. I don't really believe all the crap I say on cable news. Bask in my duplicitous glory. Say that to a room full of college students and that's asking for trouble.
And that's the second lesson: don't play can you keep a secret in the middle of bragging. There's nothing wrong with self-promotion, but it necessarily relies on maximum publicity. When you mix self-promotion with secrecy, bad things happen.
So there you go, Nonvoter. People are neither trustworthy nor snakes. They're just people. They do things they think will be beneficial. Remember that and you'll be a better person than Frank Luntz.
