Where ethics and morality diverge in society – Richard Kyte

More importantly, it gives all of us an opportunity to talk about what is and is not appropriate, and that is an important exercise.

Fortunately, for the sake of discussion, there is no shortage of high profile people ready to engage in low behavior. It just goes to show that anyone can provide a lesson, even those who serve as a bad example.

Take, for instance, the scandal involving Diana Russini and Mike Vrabel. If you haven’t been following this story, let me briefly catch you up on the facts.

On April 7, Page Six published photos of Russini and Vrabel together at a hotel in Sedona, Arizona. They were seen embracing on the rooftop of a hotel and also hanging out together at the pool and in a hot tub. Both are currently married to others and have children.

Since the report came out, Russini resigned from her job as senior NFL reporter for the Athletic. Vrabel retains his job as head coach of the New England Patriots. During last weekend’s NFL draft, he stepped away to undergo counseling but has since returned to the team.

One of the questions I’ve been hearing is this: why did Russini lose her job and Vrabel did not? Isn’t that a double standard?

The simple answer is “no.”

Different professions have different ethical standards. Journalism has especially stringent standards regarding truthfulness and objectivity. If Russini had been caught falsifying sources or taking payments for favorable coverage, she would have been fired immediately. Having a secret, intimate relationship with the leader of one of the teams she covers is an obvious violation of journalistic ethics. Readers could no longer count on her objectivity when reporting on players and coaches.

There is no such ethical standard for NFL coaches. The NFL Personal Conduct Policy covers behaviors like criminal offenses, domestic violence, threatening behavior, possession of a gun in a workplace setting and “conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL.”

Notice that objectivity and truthfulness are nowhere to be found. If a coach can deceive reporters and coaches of other teams to get an advantage on the field, so much the better. Coaches are usually fired for losing, not for having affairs.

So, there is no double standard here. There is simply a standard that applies to journalists that does not apply to coaches.

What about undermining the integrity and reputation of the NFL? Didn’t Vrabel violate that part of the code of conduct?

That’s where it gets confusing. Most people would agree that it is wrong to have a secret, intimate relationship outside of one’s marriage. That’s a betrayal of trust and a violation of one’s vows. However, the violation of marriage vows is generally considered a moral matter, not a matter of professional ethics.

The confusion comes in because of our language. We tend to use the words “ethics” and “morality” interchangeably most of the time. When somebody does something that is widely considered to be inappropriate, we say it is “immoral” or “unethical.” And we don’t really distinguish between the two words.

That is because the words originally meant the same thing. “Ethics” derives from the Greek word “ethike” which meant “custom or habit.” “Morals” derives from the Latin word “mores,” which meant — you guessed it — “custom or habit.” So, it’s no wonder that we use the two words indiscriminately.

However, over time, the meanings have diverged somewhat. “Morality” tends to be used in the context of personal or private behavior and “ethics” is used more often to talk about professional or public behavior. When it comes to professional associations and their codes of conduct, we always use the word “ethics.” We don’t talk about medical morality and legal morality; instead, we talk about medical ethics and legal ethics.

It is evident from the language in the NFL code that criminal conduct by players, and especially domestic violence, has hurt their image. And so, they crafted an ethical code explicitly addressing the kinds of conduct that hurt their ability to attract viewers and advertisers. But it is highly doubtful any big sponsors will pull away because a coach had an affair, so Vrabel has little to worry about from league officials or team ownership.

This does not excuse Vrabel’s conduct. Both Vrabel and Russini violated a significant moral standard, and it may eventually cost them their marriages. Upholding one’s solemn vow of fidelity is arguably more important than professional ethics.

But it is not ours to enforce, nor is it the NFL’s, or the Athletic’s. That’s up to their spouses, and it is where public speculation should end.