Strong ideological disagreement with a potential client... What would you do?

[Capitalocracy]

I have a bit of a moral question for you guys... what would you do in this situation?

I might get a subtitling job for a documentary that I have a very, very strong ideological disagreement with. No need to go into exactly what it is here, but the ideological disagreement is very strong.

Would you work for a client (or take a job, etc.) if you had this level of ideological difference? If I don't do it, someone else will, which could be a legitimate reason to take on the job or the kind of excuse that leads to complicency in evil acts, I don't know. At the same time, translating and subtitling this is a fairly neutral act... it aids them in spreading their message, but at the same time makes it possible to expose their message. I'm having a tough time with it. What do you think?

[SheilaT]

1. I would hope I would refuse the job.

The only excuse you can give yourself for taking it is that if you don't someone else will. Well, let the someone else do it and do not compromise your own principles.

What's that saying about the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing?

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. Take the money, do a good job

And let their stuff rise or fall on its own merits or lack thereof.

[madmax]

12. Very pragmatic. n/t

[Cronus Protagonist]

46. It's also important to be professional when running a business

Besides, turning away income in this economy is almost as stupid as voting Republican.

[kgnu_fan]

3. If I were you, I would not do it

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. If you take the job, how will you feel while you're doing it?

Will you feel disgusted with yourself, or guilty, or embarrassed? Your financial situation could be a factor -- you might just want to hold your nose and take the job if you need the money badly enough. But otherwise, I'd turn it down. To do your job with integrity you have to translate the words accurately (however tempting it might be to do otherwise). You have to be able to live with yourself.

[Capitalocracy]

11. Money is definitely a factor

I'm not in a situation not to at least take it into account and weigh it against principles.

I'm not worried about the integrity issue, though... I would translate it very accurately. They don't need my help to look bad.

[bemildred]

5. Translating can offer subtle possibilities ...

In any case, better you than some philistine or true believer.

[veganlush]

6. better you should get the money

than someone else, who may not be as generous to left-wing causes (either financially or other-wise ). In other words, someone else will take the work if you don't and that other person very likely won't be as astute as you are when in comes to ideology. better you should get the business than some unknown quantity.

[Sanity Claws]

7. If you can afford giving up the job, don't take it.

That's one of the advantages of working for yourself, you get to pick your clients.
When begging off the job, I'd say something neutral, like you can't fit it in your schedule. No need to the real reason.

[qnr]

8. If I already worked for the client, I'd do it - people are entitled to get their viewpoints

out. However, if it was a one-off thing and I didn't have a previous association with the client, I'd probably find it too distasteful. You're correct that it's going to be done by someone anyway, so I would suppose it would depend upon how much you need the money/how much it would impact you professionally to do or not to do it.

[Capitalocracy]

14. Yeah, I was thinking that too... like legal representation, it's their right

and the professional thing to do among lawyers, supposedly, is to represent people even if they don't like them...

It would be a one-off... I haven't been subtitling long and a one-hour documentary would be a good checkmark, but I don't think this one's going on the resume

[The Wielding Truth]

35. If you feel that the message is harmful to the country, don't do it.

[veganlush]

9. and also, what reply #2 said also

applies, IMHO.

[Bobbieo]

10. What does your conscience tell you to do?

[TheIdiot]

15. Exactly...

if it feels wrong, it probably is.

[madmax]

13. Just my 2 cents

Times being what they are and as someone else posted. 'If you don't do it, someone else will', and another - 'let it rise and fall on it's own merits.

Lawyers defend people they know are scumbags, it's just the way it is for some professions. I believe you think of yourself as a professional.

Ultimately, it's up to you.

[TheIdiot]

16. Two more cents...

OK... all lawyers are professionals, but not all professionals are lawyers.

[littlewolf]

43. +1

K&R

[Lars39]

17. Money aside, would it be something you'd put on a resume?

And if you do, what would that infer to future clients/employers?

[Capitalocracy]

19. Interesting question...

Honestly, now that I think about it, what it would probably say to my employers is "These people had money and wanted subtitles." I mean, that's generally how it is. If I had directed the thing, what it would say is "This guy is out of his mind."

I've done a lot of transcription work for things that I consider to be pretty much scams. I don't feel good doing it, but there's a lot of it in the business. I quit a customer service job for Bush's Medicare Prescription Drug Card program because that was a total scam, and man, that hurt economically.

[flvegan]

18. I always try to keep business and personal views apart.

Granted, were I being asked to give underwriting advice to close on a...I dunno, a fur farm, yeah I'd hate having to do it. But that's what my company pays me for (I'm a whore, I suppose). The flip side is that I'd have an awful lot of inside information...well, you know.

[Gormy Cuss]

20. Just make sure they don't list you/your company name in the credits

unless you want an impact on your future business.

[MineralMan]

21. Personally, I wouldn't do it.

I write web sites for small businesses. I've turned down several jobs, due to the nature of the business. I refuse to do porn sites, right wing political sites, bogus alternative health outfits, ambulance chasers, sites for other businesses that prey on people, and any other site that is doing something I cannot ethically support. It costs me money, but those are my rules.

The last one I turned down was a site for a guy whose business was buying people's life insurance policies for a lump sum in exchange for their making him the beneficiary. There are legitimate reasons one might do that, but when I met with the guy, I just didn't trust him to be an honest man. I figured that he was probably screwing many of his clients and that he'd probably screw me if he could. Some of the things he said to me just gave me a bad feeling about him. I just told him no, and told him why I was turning the job down. He got pretty angry at me.

Later, I did some research, and found out that he was a disbarred attorney, who lost his license for multiple legal malpractice cases. I trust my judgment in these things.

[Capitalocracy]

24. This falls under the category of "bogus alternative health outfits".

One could make an argument that all I'm doing is translating, where website building is an integral part of shaping an online presence and therefore part of promoting an agenda... but that might be a weak argument.

btw, pm me and tell me how much you charge for simple website creation

[Mimosa]

22. First, do no harm, my MD pal always says.

If the project has no real potential of harm or propaganda, you need to make a living, right?

[Capitalocracy]

23. Potential harm...

There is a potential harm of convincing people not to seek treatment for medical conditions.

I'm leaning towards no... business is not great though

[madmax]

25. Glad I don't have to make this decision.

There are so many valid opinions and morality points. It's not easy.

[Capitalocracy]

27. People make similar decisions every day.

How do you feel when you put gas in your car? When you think about it too much, putting on your socks in the morning is a difficult moral decision. (Who made these socks? Where did they come from? How much did they pay the person who made them? Are they clean enough to wear one more day or is it time to wash them?)

[petronius]

26. Ideological differences, or moral?

If it's a question of differing social, political, or economic views I would take the job - but if the material is advocating something that violates my moral beliefs than I would decline to be associated...

[Capitalocracy]

28. Very interesting question...

It's one of these alternative medicine things... they have a different perspective on a specific medical issue than the mainstream one. Now, am I against differing from the mainstream view? Not at all. Am I against expressing those opinions? Of course not. And so far (haven't gotten the job yet, etc.) I haven't detected a financial motive behind this one which would create the kind of conflict of interest that would be a moral issue for me. So maybe it's just ideological.
But the ideological difference is strong, and I would have a moral issue with promoting this because some people may seek alternative treatments in lieu of treatments they need. So maybe it's a moral difference.
But is translating it really promoting it, or should I think of it's a neutral service, like if I were a caterer at the production or if I put gas in their cars on the way to a screening?

[Bucky]

29. It depends. If they're just smearing someone, you don't wanna get with that.

If they're just honestly presenting relevant facts and then interpreting them in an ideologically slanted way, I don't see the problem. If it means working for a conservative like John Stossel, who's a douchebag, but more or less plays by the rules, you're just taking a job someone else would do. But it was a hit job operation like the Arkansas Project was in the 90s, then that's a different story.

So is it someone you just disagree with, or is it someone doing objective evil in the world? That's where I'd draw the line.

[Toucano]

30. Do it.

If you can stomach it, you should take the job.

Use some of the proceeds to do something good.

It isn't as though your participation or conscientious objection will likely affect the outcome, as you've noted.

At least you be taking some of their money off their hands.

[wtmusic]

31. Only you can answer it for yourself.

Not knowing the details I don't know what I would do.

As a wise attorney once told me, if the pluses and minuses are pretty even - flip a coin.

[TheKentuckian]

32. I chalk it as translation and pretty neutral. Those are not your thoughts any more then anything

else you do.

I don't feel like I need to agree with all the material I consume and that is deeper at least personally than just transferring over the data.

You got to live with you but I don't fault the people that translate Hitler or allow me to read Manson.
I think somewhere down that path the book banning and burning start seeming reasonable but that is me not you. Live by your own code and gut, I can only really tell you mine.

[Capitalocracy]

34. Interesting perspective... am I contributing to censorship if I refuse?

hmm...

[TheKentuckian]

49. could be, someone else will probably do it if you don't

So...don't beat yourself up either way. This is a fairly gray area when you think about it a little.

[Capitalocracy]

50. Which makes it different from a pharmacist who refuses

medication to someone who has nowhere else in the area to go

I went ahead with the test translation... I'll decide whether or not to do it if I get offered the job.

[TheKentuckian]

51. Right on. I'm sure you'll be true to you.

[Incitatus]

33. "If I don't do it, someone else will"

No, that is not a legitimate reason to take the job and I'm not sure if it can really be a neutral act if it isn't possible for them to spread their message without your help.

Of course, someone else will do the job if you don't. You can find someone to do anything if you pay them enough.

Do you think the completed work will result in pain and misery for others? If what you help create causes even one life to be destroyed, will it be worth what they payed you?

[ElboRuum]

36. How do you feel about a pharmacist who won't sell medications based on ideology?

Therein lies your answer.

[Capitalocracy]

40. Interesting. But isn't that "different"?

:shrug:

[ElboRuum]

44. Yes and no.

It really differs only by degree and context. The base conjecture still stands.

Does person A have the right to deny service/product B to person C because the service/product B that is being performed conflicts with person A's ideology.

The answer to this question is yes, however, whether one chooses to deny is up to the individual.

So the answer doesn't lie in any pat answer to the original conjecture, rather, the answer is an honest answer to the original conjecture. To whit, if you believe that someone is taking an ideological stand rightfully, then denying service to others along ideological lines would be similarly rightful. On the other hand, if you think that a person who provides a service/product has an obligation to "leave their politics at home", then it would be hypocritical to withhold one's own service from others for reasons of ideology.

The right move is the one that best addresses how you would feel about someone denying you service based on ideological reasons.

[AC_Mem]

37. If you can look at yourself in the mirror the next day

go for it. Personally, I couldn't do it.

And I would have faith that by standing on my principles, the Universe would quickly replace that opportunity with one that would help people.

How can we call the right hypocrites, and then be hypocritical in our own actions? We ask ourselves, how can they justify supporting a cause that is against the poor, the sick, the under-educated? My question to you would be, how can you add your energy to that message?

What price can you put on going against what you believe to be true?

Annette

[Loudmxr]

38. I have a question for you. Do you consider your work creative or technical?

Because if you are "creative". Then my advice is don't do it.

I managed a staff of creative/technical recording engineers at one of the largest audio for media facilities in Hollywood. A few of our engineers refused to work on anything that went against their moral code. I said "Done."(actual quote)

Because if you are creative you put some of your soul into your work. That work becomes part of you and you carry it in your heart forever.

One of those engineers was Brent Hahn who years before, when he lived in NYC, recorded the audio for a video of my friends The Ventures. The biggest selling instrumental rock and roll group of all time. I mixed the audio for the video in a little studio on Burbank Blvd just down the street from where I am now.

Recently, when I got a into a little battle with our City Council, I came home and put on the best damn version of "Pipeline" ever recorded. It gave me great comfort because there is a little bit of ME in it. Hawaii-5-0 with Max Weinberg ain't bad either.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqC3BjIyq_0

[Hannah Bell]

39. If you're in the business, a job like that might eliminate you from consideration for jobs that

might be more congenial. Just a thought, I don't know the field or the mentality.

[Loudmxr]

41. It all depends on what Capitol views his work as.

He mentions translations. Having experience in the Hispanic market I can tell you that translating English into Spanish is 30% longer. A 30 second spot is 45 seconds in Spanish. That requires creativity in copy writing.

In translating Japanese anime cartoons the writer has to translate so the words actually appear to come out of the mouths of the characters. Because English speaking viewers expect lip sync sound. That requires creativity.

Sub-titling.... not my field. I only knew one guy in the field. What a hoot. He rented an office in my partner's complex yesrs ago and came out of the private bathroom one morning after pulling an all nighter with my partner's toothbrush in his mouth and said "Oh sorry. Is this yours?" From what I understand he did great work.

[Liquorice]

42. My husband had a similar situation, and he decided to take the job. It

didn't turn out well, however, because he wound up regretting that he had done any work for this guy--the guy he did the work for is one of those right wing jerks who writes trashy books against democrats. Don't do it if you you think you're going to regret it. The money isn't worth regret. Also, you should consider that your name may be associated with it forever and the work will always be out there--you can't take it back.

[NBachers]

45. Hey- EVERYBODY'S workin' for the man

And can the sanctimonious "Don't take the job" advocates say their hands are squeaky clean?

Remember all the right-wing ads that appeared here and on Daily Kos during the election cycle? Isn't it better that they appear here where our side gets the money?

If it's a big issue for you, then donate some of the money to a progressive cause you believe in, or some tree planting foundation, or a childrens' fund, or something.

You're just an undercover mole in the gears of their machine.

[shimmergal]

47. As an undercover mole,

wouldn't it be possible to subtly make some decisions (word choice, etc.) that might undercut the part of the message you don't like? Or would you find that morally questionable if you take the job?

If you can do the work without hating every moment you spend on it, I'd say take it. You need the money, and it might as well go to you as to somebody who might actually be convinced of the film's POV by working on it?

[Papagoose]

48. An ideological disagreement, do it...a moral disagreement, don't do it

There is a thin line separating the two sometimes, but they are different.

I have STRONG ideological differences with the family who own the company I work for, but I can work for them because we agree on the same basic sets of morals. There are gray areas where the line blurs, but on the basics, I'm okay working for them. For now.