OK, folks, here’s one for you to wrestle with (actually, it’s me wrestling with it, but I’m looking for help).
United Press International (UPI) is looking to hire freelance writers in an area where I have some knowledge. As you may or may not know, I am a freelance writer on the side, and am looking for opportunities just like this one.
The problem: UPI is owned by the Moonies.
The dilemma: Do I apply for a job with a business that is run by a group that I find morally repugnant?
I have a good friend who (up until recently) worked for the Washington Times, A Moon-owned paper. After making my share of mass-wedding jokes, he told me that there really was no pressure to convert and no overt religious messages anywhere around the office. Granted he was in advertising, but I would think that it would be similar.
I’m also assuming that you may find someone else who works for UPI and isn’t a Moonie. Then the both of you can tear the organization down from the inside.
While I have no experience with morals (had them removed with my foreskin as an infant) I would think that it is a matter of common sense.
Any situation which causes you to ask others for a moral opinion on falls in to one of two categories:
You know it is wrong by your standards and you would probably censure someone else for doing it but you yourself really want to do it and so you are looking for others to justify an action for you. Thus overriding your morals and providing you with a scapegoat for the possible guilt that will come later on.
You NEED to do it but want to be talked out of it so you can feel justified in taking the “moral high ground” in a situation which may be contrary to your own best interest. Funny how self-serving and richeous<SP> seldom go hand in hand.
Frankly I would take the job and drop the lofty idealism. No matter who you work for you are working for someone who is scum by anyone’s definition. Pay taxes and you buy bombs, buy mickey mouse shirt and you are pissing all kinds of people off and don’t even get me started on working for Intel.
Take the job, if it comes with a pay increase then take a percentage of that and give it to organizations dedicated to eradicating brainwashing or NPR. Whatever floats your boat.
Take the job. The Unification church(tong-il kyohoe) is a weird organization, but you’re not going to be working for them directly, you won’t be proselytizing for them, and you need the money. It’s impossible to lead a 100% squeaky clean life with no moral ambiguities.
A few questions, if I may. All questions are completely honest and unsarcastic; any sarcasm read into these questions exists solely in the mind of the reader.
A) Would you actually be directly interacting with Moonies? Or would your editors, copy boys, what-have-you (sorry, freelance writing is not an area I’m familiar with) be nice, regular people like yourself?
B) What specifics of the Moonies do you find repugnant? Do you consider them a cult and brain-washers? Or do you feel that, as an athiest, you would be repulsed at working for a fervently religious organization?
C) (Sort of a follow-up to A) Even were you to be working will people you like and respect, would the fact that your work was directly profiting the Moonies be distasteful to you? Do you now boycott stores and agencies that support causes distasteful to you (for example, did you boycott Domino’s Pizza in the early '90’s because the owner of the corporation made massive donations to Operation Rescue*)?
(*Note for those whom are now ready to start boycotting Domino’s for that- too late. The owner decided to stop giving money to any political causes in the mid-90’s. If you still wish to boycott them, please do so over those god-damned “Bad Andy” commercials.)
Thanks to everybody who’s responded so far, except zen101, who seems to think that he has the ability to psychoanalyze me.
Right now (yes, I know, it’s only a few minutes past when I posted this, but I was discussing it for a little while elsewhere also), I am leaning towards at least applying. As wring noted, it’s freelance, so I can quit if I feel there is a problem (or refuse to let them use an article if they decide to exert editorial pressure).
The main thing that’s still bothering me is that I would be essentially making money for this organization, even if indirectly…
In today’s economy, unless you want to become your own boss, you are bound to work for a company that has its hands in SOMETHING you’re not likely to agree with.
As long as they don’t force you to be pro-Moonie, i say go for it, David.
*I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, one week, two days, 18 hours, 18 minutes and 44 seconds.
7710 cigarettes not smoked, saving $963.81.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 5 days, 18 hours, 30 minutes.
On the one hand, if you only work for folks with no ties to any group or ideology you find repugnant, you won’t find much work.
OTOH, you’ll be miserable if you take a job you really don’t want to.
I’d say do it. While UPI may be owned by the Unification Church, it is not an active arm of the moonies, doesn’t proselytize, doesn’t propagandize, and as far as I can tell does not expect anything from it’s employees beyond normal business practices. It’s no worse in my mind than a non-Mormon working for the LDS-owned NBC affiliate in Salt Lake.
You are helping put money in Moon’s pockets, but they own enough stock worldwide you’re doing that already by merely living and purchasing.
Connor, the Moonies are members of the Unification Church, followers of the Reverend Sun-Myung Moon. They have a rather . . . unorthodox theology. Many call them raving nutballs, and are considered a dangerous cult by many mainstream sects.
I think that groups like the Moonies are no more repugnant than a lot of people I know who are small business owners.
One particualarly repgunant individual owns the Dinner cruise boats I worked on for 3 years. As long as the actual business I was involved in was not repugnant to me I had nor moral dilemma. When he brought veteran soldiers over from a war he was donating lots of money toward and wanted me to donate my time for a cruise for them, I refused. So did all the bartenders. He had to pay us. No problem. He ranted and raved about it, but he figured out where his power ended and had to live with it. I didn’t mind bartending for these unsavory individuals as long as I was well paid. I wouldn’t shoot anyone for money but have no problem serving drinks to a-holes. I might shoot an a-hole but not because I was paid to do it. Because it was an open bar, I was paid a high hourly rate and didn’t have to worry about tips (that was how my contract with the boats was set up). No problem.
The problem comes if they censor your writing more than you can tolerate or ask you to put your name on statements you don’t agree with. Otherwise I think it is a good learning experience for unsavory groups to do normal business. So, as long as the business of UPI is business you approve of, I think you are morally OK. But, you will have to keep your eyes open knowing that they may have an interest in twisting your words or your mind. Maybe you can teach THEM something.
Like I said, we simulposted. Yes, that would be distasteful. I’m just not sure how distasteful – that’s one part I’m still mulling over.
For example, if working for these guys gives me experience that I later use to get better, more high-profile writing jobs, in which I can speak out against things like cults, is it worthwhile for me to take this job? Or will something else come along and I’ll end up in the same place anyway?
I did not boycott Domino’s (you can’t boycott something you don’t normally use), but, yes, I have boycotted places in the past and continue to do so. For example, there is a restaurant in town that is owned by a person who has had a number of drunk driving incidents. He has always skated by because of his connections. I will not eat at that restaurant and give him money. Similarly, there is another restaurant that discriminates against homosexuals. I will not give them my business either.
Noy analyzing YOU, but your situation. Think about it. You are an adult, obviously educated and intelligent enough to apply for a real journalistic position and have some hope of getting it.
Yet you find insult where there is only unvarnished observation.
This is a general truth which I state. If you find yourself in a situation called an ethical or moral dilemma then you have allready felt your ethics or morals come into conflict with self interest. It’s simple and easily observed.
The fact that you asked the question demonstrates that you do have a defined moral sense but are now finding that it is a bit clunky and hard to manage, thus you pose the question in the hopes that someone will offer you an option you had not noted in your own set of ethis prior to this conflict.
The only real option for long term personal wellness is to realize that assumptions you had made in the past are not set in stone just because you are used to basing descisions on them.
Ever play that game with a friend “What would you do for (arbitrary sum of money)?” A lot of people say “I’d never do that no matter how much money you had!”. Bull. There may be some people who feel that way, but needs make for change in moral tack. You NEED this job otherwise it would not be an issue.
Taking the job will not make you a less moral individual but it may make you more tolerant of others who find themselves forced to do things that they would not normally do because of circumstance.
zen101
D.F.A.
My personal solution is to drop the pretense of morals completely and live on instinct and fear of retribution.
It seems to me that your primary concern is not whether you would face pressure to convert or undue influence from the editorial staff, but whether you should contribute work to a group that you find morally repugnant.
Taking at face value your assertion that you find the Moonies to be such a group, I will argue that you should not apply for the job. The questions of work environment, editorial policy, etc. seem beside the point to me. You will be working for the benefit of a group you find morally repugnant. Why? Personal benefit? Money? Desire for change? Are any of these reasons sufficient for you to set aside your existing ethical position?
To me, it comes down to a question of how strongly you object to the group in question. You used the words “morally repugnant”, which imply a very strong position. What factors on teh other side of this choice would make you feel comfortable with setting aside that position in order to benefit the Moonies?
They will provide you with a venue for your thoughts, despite knowing that you may possess political,religious and philosophical biases that do not necessarily agree with theirs.
If they hire you, it shows that THEY are capable of being open minded and respectful of other people’s ideas.
It does? How do you know? When did you begin reading minds?
What about me? I’m not allowed to consider the possibility that I don’t want to support a group I find morally repugnant? Maybe while I’m at it I should try to join a cigarette company’s ad team so I can market to children!
Spiritus: Thanks for your comments. I don’t have anything to say in response to them, but rest assured they are running through my mind.
A year ago I resigned from a company specifically because I had ethical problems with the way the division I worked in was run. I specifically told HR at my exit interview “I am leaving because I find the conduct of management to be morally reprehensible.” The details aren’t important, and the situation is unlike your prospective one in that the individuals I had problems with were only 2 and 3 levels of management removed from me. But the point I wanted to make was that after the initial problems occurred, it took me quite a long time to find another position. And the place really wore me down in the meantime - I knew I was violating my own morals just by walking in the door everyday, but I had no other job and I had bills to pay. By the time I got out I was in a rather depressed funk. It happened so gradually that I didn’t realized how effed up I was until I left for a significantly less dysfunctional company. There were a number of things I liked about the dysfunctional place (mainly my peers that I worked with on a daily basis) that made it easy to rationalize staying there, but staying as long as I did was not good for me.
So I guess my point is, if you take the job, and if you find your conscience is bothering you, get out ASAP. The effect of staying can be rather insidous.
