I think that working in an industry that you are passionate about is going to bring the best results to the clients. But, I can work well in other categories as long as the client is passionate and likes taking a unique approach to the work.

You bring up a good point–”In your example, there are arguments on both sides that make sense, so I would write what the client required.” This is where ethics gets really tricky because where you see both sides making sense, there’s probably someone out there who thinks one side or the other is ridiculous or just plain wrong. Granted, wearing a helmet or not isn’t as dire a subject as white supremacy, but where some might be indifferent to it, there are those who are passionate about it. That’s true for any subject.

As I said in a previous comment, I feel a sense of responsibility in my writing, so there are times when it does become difficult to remain completely impartial. For example, as an animal advocate, I would find it difficult to write about how to breed pets there are so many animals in shelters waiting to be adopted. I can see how I could easily steer the stance of that content toward adopting instead of breeding. I understand that what is unacceptable to me is acceptable to others. I just don’t want to advocate something with which I so strongly disagree whether my name is on it or not.

I worry about ethics because I see my politics creeping in to paid blog posts and I know it’s wrong. I try to avoid injecting opinion into professional work, but some of the industries I write for have political issues built in and it would be remiss to avoid upcoming legislation that concerns the entire industry. So far, I think I’ve been able to report without crossing the line. But I know I have skirted the edges. It’s difficult to remain impartial.

But more than that, it’s about making personal decisions that are in line with our values and beliefs. Yes, plenty of companies exist that have what many people would call “substandard” values. But there are still personal decisions we can make–not to shop in that store; not to buy that company’s products; not to use that company’s services; or not taking that company on as a client.

Sometimes ethics is just about controlling the things we can, and making the decisions we can live with, even if those decisions don’t represent the ideal.

I can see how, as a company grows, it moves away from the more personal influences on business decisions. But that’s also a common complaint among consumers–the big, faceless corporation that doesn’t really care or seem to have any ethics, and makes decisions based solely on profit potential.

When to fire a client–that’s a whole other blog post! :-) But yes, I do think there have to be boundaries, and the philosophy of the customer always being right doesn’t extend to abusive behavior.

I’m glad you had your helmet on that day, too! Thanks for joining in the discussion!

This question likely really hits home to solo and very small shops in which one client can mean the difference between paying bills and going bust. In those cases, the temptation may be to take on a client they otherwise might not.

I’ve read of a few companies who have fired clients because the client treated their team members badly. While a slightly different subject, it illustrates the same kind of point: Where do you draw the line with clients?

Lastly: While I believe in freedom of choice regarding helmets – I rarely ride without one AND I wear bright yellow reflective vest which can be seen from the moon if the light’s right. That vest may look crazy, but it’s saved my bacon more than once. Except when the guy hit me from behind while I was stopped at an intersection – but that’s another story. I was glad I had my helmet on that day, for sure.

The question of morality is not an easy one. On the one hand, you can make a stand and choose not to benefit from a client whose values could be deemed substandard.

On the other hand, they are a legal entity in that the are registered to pay taxes. The government doesn’t mind taking their dirty money, so why should. And inadvertently, as members of the public we benefit from their tax collections.

Taxes were created as a form of social protection. If a particular niche becomes overly profitable or is deemed as potentially destructive to social fabric, then one would expect our governments to tax accordingly.

It doesn’t matter what kind of business an SEO (hate the word) company is promoting – somebody somewhere will find a moral argument against that industry.

By the same token, I want to produce the best content possible for our clients, and if I had to write something that was in direct opposition to my own beliefs, it most likely wouldn’t be my best work, which goes against my work ethic, so no one wins in that situation.

Thanks for weighing in, Jill!