Instructing the Ethic of Expediency:

Technical Communication, Rhetoric, and Ethics

Technical communication can serve a variety of purposes. In its most common uses, it can train or instruct, persuade, inform, or describe. However, these examples all carry an ethical burden. While one is ethically responsible to communicate precise and correct information, it is a deeper issue than merely being accurate. One can present information accurately and still be unethical by excluding certain details or by subverting important information to a footnote, endnote, or to a separate document. Additionally, a document’s main topic might be generally considered unethical, but be presented in such a way as to make it seem benign or even logical. In his article, “The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust,” Steven B Katz, presents this concept powerfully.

Katz argues that Hitler’s effective use of technical communication and deliberative rhetoric is at least partly responsible for the success of the Third Reich. He bases this claim on the assertion that “an ‘ethic of expediency’ underlies technical writing and deliberative rhetoric.” (198). By examining such particularly atrocious misuses of rhetoric in documentation, Katz illustrates the importance of ethical decision-making in technical communication and considers the significant results that occur from making certain decisions.

In this essay, I suggest that Katz’ ethic of expediency is a valid and important concept to present in either collegiate technical communication courses or in a workplace setting. While Katz’ theory could be established as its own course, it is not necessary to build it in this manner; I present a number of ways in which the theory could be incorporated into existing courses commonly offered in technical communication programs. Additionally, I offer reasons why the inclusion of this theory into existing programs is not only possible; it would be highly beneficial to the ethical future of technical communication, rhetorical pedagogy, and training.

Rhetoric

Rhetoric is taught in many technical communication and other writing and composition courses, as well as in corporate training classes. One goal in instructing rhetoric is to present a way for writers and orators to most effectively achieve an end result through communication. Therefore, it is important that technical communicators understand forms of persuasive communication, since technical documents often have the goal of convincing a reader to make a certain decision or of establishing a particular method or product as the best or most effective one. Persuasive writing is nothing new in academic and workplace classes. However, considering Katz’ article, it becomes potentially perilous to instruct persuasive writing as a skill, given the potential for its misuse. I do not mean to suggest that the topic should be removed from curricula or shied away from, but it should not go unchecked either.

The Ethic of Expediency

Steven Katz’ theory of the ethic of expediency is based on the expedient nature of technical communication or, more specifically, of technical writing. The goal of this writing genre is generally to serve as the means to an end; this is to say that the goal is generally to achieve a certain end through the writing and have the reader perform a specific action or make a particular decision. Therefore, “expediency,” in this case, refers to this use of technical communication and rhetoric to shape the written argument to achieve a certain goal. Katz states that it is this ethic of expediency that “gives impulse to most of our actions in technical capitalism.” (198).

Essentially, Katz asserts that the style of technical writing is rooted in objectivity, technical rationality, and efficiency. In this way, it separates itself from humanistic considerations. Without any consideration of the human factor, the ethic of expediency is a direct goal of technical communication. As Katz states, “Here, as in most technical writing and, I will argue, in most deliberative rhetoric, the focus is on expediency, on technical criteria as a means to an end.” (197).

Without concern for misrepresenting the document’s information (and misleading or even injuring the end-user), the author’s aim is to form the text in such a way as to reach the desired goal. Therefore, the ethic of expediency becomes an end, no longer just the means to an end.

Based on the ethic of expediency theory, Katz attributes the success of the Nazi Regime to Hitler’s excellent rhetorical skills and to a logical scientific and technological justification of his plan. As Katz notes, “[T]he ethic of expediency in Western culture […] was rhetorically embraced by the Nazi regime and combined with science and technology to form the ‘moral basis’ of the holocaust.” (198). It seems quite radical to state that there would have been no holocaust without technical communication; however, the theory is more logical when one considers the tools Hitler used to carryout his plan, including textual and video propaganda. Using these tools, and backed by the logic and authority of science and technology, Hitler established a fear and hatred in the millions of participants in the Nazi agenda. Katz details this example as the representation of the extreme that an agenda can reach, through the ethic of expediency, if left unchecked.

But here expediency and the resulting ethos of objectivity, logic, and narrow focus that characterize most technical writing, are taken to extremes and applied to the mass destruction of human beings. Here, is an ethical end as well. (197)

Literature Review

In his 1992 article, “The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust,” Steven Katz discusses the ethical burden that accompanies technical communication. He references the rhetoric within the communication of Hitler and the Third Reich as a prime example of how a technical document’s quality, clarity, and effectiveness can be excellent, but the content of the document can be horrifically unethical.

Relating his ethic of expediency theory to, and partly basing it in, Aristotle’s discussion of deliberative rhetoric, Katz details his theory as the ethical aspect of persuasively and rhetorically shaping a document’s content to reach a specific goal. In a further discussion, he explores the implications of the theory’s manifestation in Nazi Germany for rhetoric in our capitalistic culture. Katz’ article urges technical communicators and instructors to consider how their products and practices contribute to the ethic of expediency and the effects this factor can cause. Additionally, he suggests that this theory should be acknowledged and instructed to technical communicators so that their documents do not go unchecked.

There have been a small number of opposing responses to Katz’ article, such as Thomas M. Rivers’ argument, against Katz’ assertion that Hitler’s success can be attributed to effective rhetorical skill and that this defense can be based in concepts of ethos from classical rhetoric (Rivers 1992). However, such responses are few, brief, and usually appear to be misunderstandings over Katz’ intent. In at least the case of the Rivers response, Steven Katz responded directly, clarifying any apparent misunderstanding.

One of the few direct approaches to Katz’ article is Patrick Moore’s assertion that the article discredits both the academic and industry professions of technical communication by misrepresenting the motives of technical communication practice and pedagogy (Moore 2004). Furthermore, he claims that the article contributes to the field’s ongoing rift between academia and industry. Moore accurately states that Katz emphasizes the negative connotations of “expediency,” in his definition of the term and the way in which he relates it to Aristotle’s “Rhetoric.”

However, Moore’s argument that Katz frequently tries to associate Aristotle with Hitler is inaccurate. Katz makes no attempt to compare or relate these two individuals beyond expressing that Hitler’s skillful use of rhetoric is an example of Aristotle’s concept of “deliberative rhetoric” and the dangers associated with it. The essence of Moore’s article is to prove that “… no ethic of expediency underlies technical communication.” However, the majority of technical communication, and by extension the academic instruction of it, is clearly built on a persuasive rhetoric that aims to model the content to reach a certain end. While technical communication is, of course, not inherently evil, there are various motivating factors in the production and instruction of it that should not go unchecked. In this way, the underlying concept of Katz’s argument is valid.

Other authors have referenced and cited Katz on the notion of the ethic of expediency in articles discussing ethics in technical communication or writing in general (Dragga and Voss, 2001; Schneider, 2005; Dombrowski, 2000). However, these articles do not fully engage Katz’ article or the topic of instructing it. Generally, such articles discuss the often inhumane nature of technical writing and what ethical responsibilities technical communicators have to their audience. The theory is also referenced in journal articles that discuss business and international communication. While it is important to mention the presence of such citations, I have not listed any here, as it is beyond the scope of this paper.

The topic of ethics in technical communication is frequently addressed (Sullivan, 1990; Hartung, 1998; Sanders, 1997). These articles occasionally cite Katz’ article and theory, but they tend to confront broader or other issues of ethics, such as the humanistic facet of technical communication (Miller 1979; Winsor 1990), the consideration of ethics in technical communication textbooks (Dragga 1997), or the technical communicators’ ethical (and legal) responsibility to their audience, which are often in conflict with their responsibilities to their employer, academy, funding organization, or even the field of technical communication (Slack et al. 1993).

These articles, as well as others that discuss ethical concerns relating to gender issues, multiculturalism, and intellectual property, form the foundation of the larger discourse on ethics in technical communication. Since Steven Katz first published his now well-known article (Katz 1992), it has been referenced in a number of these and other articles and has even been reprinted in a collection of important and defining articles within the technical communication field (Johnson-Eilola and Selber). However, although both the article and the theory of the ethic of expediency are frequently referenced, few authors have addressed Katz’ article or presented ways in which this theory could be instructed. Therefore, in this article I have approached the topic of instructing the ethic of expediency, including reasons and methods for doing so.

Who Can Be Injured?

The ethic of expediency is present in much of the technical communication produced today. We use rhetoric as a means to present information that we intend to persuade readers to a certain opinion or decision. As Katz states, “[I]n most deliberative rhetoric, the focus is on expediency, on technical criteria as a means to an end.” (257).

Since this is a theory and practice that many technical communicators are unknowingly using, it is important that we, as academics and trainers, instruct them in the effective use of the ethic of expediency. Included in such instruction should be discussions on how the theory relates to other factors in writing, such as the end user, the organization requesting the document, and any economic factors, such as funding organizations.

For example, consider a microwave oven manufacturer that ran post-production tests on its latest model, revealing that opening the door earlier than five seconds after the completion of the cooking cycle would release a small amount of microwave radiation into the face of the user. While the best course of action would be a product recall, the company might only decide to place a warning in the documentation. At the very least, such a warning should appear on the manual’s front page or even as a separate tag or sticker affixed to the microwave oven door. However, looking purely at the economic factor, such a warning would likely deter most consumers from buying that product. Therefore, the company might suppress the information in a less obvious location, such as a sticker on the underside of the oven or in an obscure location in the documentation.

There are many examples of actual events, as well, in which documentation or communication issues played into a larger issue of ethics and human life. Media stories have emerged of auto manufacturers releasing automobiles with known flaws, to keep a release date or, even worse, determining that it is less expensive to pay any lawsuits based on related injuries than it is to recall the vehicles and fix the issue. Consider Ford Motors’ apparent disregard for human life when the auto manufacturer rushed production of the late-sixties and early-seventies Pinto models despite knowledge of a design flaw that resulted in nearly all crash-test vehicle fuel tanks to rupture in rear-end collisions. Ford continued with the same fuel tank design for eight years, despite multiple deaths, injuries, and lawsuits related to the flaw, before changing the design. “Ford waited eight years because its internal "cost-benefit analysis," which places a dollar value on human life, said it wasn't profitable to make the changes sooner.” (Mother Jones).

Similarly, there have been reports of aircraft crashes due malfunctions later determined to have been known and kept secret in order to keep a launch date. The most prominent example of such an occurrence is the 1986 Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, in which the space shuttle exploded in mid-air, killing the entire onboard crew. Investigations of the event revealed that the cause of the accident was due to an O-ring that was known to not perform correctly in temperatures below 50ºF. There were a number of communication factors that contributed to the tie between the faulty O-rings and the shuttle explosion. According to Dorthy Winsor, those individuals who knew of the problem did not convince those in power to stop the launch due to, “… a complex set of factors, the most important of which seems to be (1) managers and engineers viewing the same facts from different perspectives, and (2) the general difficulty of either sending or receiving bad news, particularly when it must be passed to supervisors and outsiders.” (101).

These examples show how looking at an issue from purely a business and economic standpoint, one can overlook human issues. A customer might be physically injured by this product, and by extension, the company and the technical writer might suffer financial and legal injury. The fictional company might avoid a lawsuit by showing that they did warn customers (though in a concealed location). However, this would not free them of the ethical burden of bringing such injury. By understanding these issues, technical communicators can perform ethically and avoid injuring the user, the company, or even themselves.

Why Teach This In The Classroom or in the Workplace?

Of course, my intent is not to suggest that we model the rise of the Third Reich as a technical writing method, nor was that Katz’ intent. When discussing the ethic of expediency, it is important to consider Katz’ discussion of the holocaust as an example of technical communication gone atrociously wrong. As Katz states, “The holocaust reminds us not only of the potential brutality and inhumanity of the ethic of expediency, but of a rationality taken to such extremes that it becomes madness.” (267).

The main purpose of using Katz’ article would be to focus on the ethic of expediency as it relates to other aspects of technical communication and ways to apply it to academic assignments and workplace projects ethically and effectively.

Currently, we teach both the theory and skill of rhetoric in both the collegiate and workplace classrooms. We teach theory more directly through courses on the topic of rhetoric. The art and skill of rhetoric is presented less directly in that we do not generally call it such; we do not generally tell students that we will be teaching them the art of rhetoric. However, in skills-based classes, as well as training in the workplace, we tend to focus on just the skill, or “how-to,” of persuasive writing. We present various persuasive writing styles; visual design concepts, including layout and design; and writing with multimedia. These topics are taught in order to:

• Improve a document’s readability;
• Increase the reader’s comprehension and retention of the document; and
• Enhance a writer’s ability to communicate information in the most effective way.

However, if we’re training students and employees in the skill of applying rhetoric, we are providing them with a knowledge that requires an ethical base to apply it. Therefore, we must also provide them with an understanding of the effects of their writing on factors beyond those directly related to the project. In this way, the addition of the ethic of expediency to the general technical communication curriculum, to specific technical communication courses, and even to corporate training sessions on effective technical and business writing would result in more effective, efficient, and ethical communication and teaching practices.

Instructing technical communication students in the ethic of expediency would serve the following purposes:

• Present an understanding of the expedient nature of technical and professional writing;
• Provide a list of the dangers of this expediency, including outcomes of various examples;
• Assist the students in working through ethical methods of presenting various types of information.

Classroom Application

While this is far from exhaustive, I have established three ways in which this concept of the ethic of expediency could be applied to the classroom: as part of an ethics course, as part of a general technical communication course, or as its own course.

Ethics Course

There are many ethical issues in technical communication, such as questions of loyalty (to employer vs. user), of who defines ethics for a given project, and of responsibility for unethical documents. Such questions would provide fair (though incomplete) basis for constructing a course on power, law, and ethics. This course would include, but not be based on the ethic of expediency. Incorporating a section on the ethic of expediency would be fitting and even essential. Presenting this course in the workplace would be problematic, since it raises questions difficult for an employer to address from an unbiased perspective. Therefore, for the purposes of the workplace classroom, such a course could be presented by a third party organization. Considering the larger potential damage, it would behoove employers to ensure their employees are trained in these ethical issues.

Ethic of Expediency Course

One could certainly justify creating a course solely on this topic, since it is prevalent in the entire field of technical communication. However, any such course would incorporate so many examples of technical communication currently being taught, that the course would likely be quite similar to the following classroom method.

Technical Communication Course

This method refers to courses that are aimed at presenting applied skills, as opposed to the first two methods, which are focused more on theory. There are various technical communication and writing skills courses at academic institutions and in the workplace. But any course that instructs students in methods of technical writing, especially in persuasive writing, would benefit from adding Katz’ theory to it. When students are learning rhetorical methods of shaping their writing with a specific goal in mind, they can also be learning the ethical consideration of the decisions they make in such writing.

Constructing the Course

Courses presenting the ethic of expediency through any of these methods would be set-up quite similarly. In the theory-based courses, after reading a number of texts and theories on ethics in technical communication, including Katz’ article, students would be presented with the details of a dubious project, assigned to determine what ethical concerns arise, and would then create the document. Additionally, groups of students could be formed, so that each side of an issue could be addressed. An instructor could also add a third side to the debate, that of moderator/arbitrator.

A skills-based course could have a similar assignment; however, the assignment might have more weight on writing techniques, including rhetorical style, organization of ideas, and audience analysis. Depending on the level of the class, the students might read Katz’ article or the instructor might just present them with a custom presentation of the ethic of expediency. The class would then discuss the assignment, including the decisions made, based on Katz’ theory.

Clearly, there are factors that would determine how the course would be structured. However, any course that taught the ethic of expediency would include the following items:

• A presentation of the ethic of expediency, whether by reading Katz’ article or by the instructor’s presentation of the theory;
• A class discussion of the theory, including how it affects one’s writing decisions, the benefits of such deliberative rhetoric, and the dangers of the ethic if left unchecked;
• An assignment that allows students to see the applications of the theory, including multiple sides; and
• A post-assignment discussion on how the theory played into the students’ writing decisions on the assignment.

Example

There are many ways in which to approach the ethic of expediency when applying it to the classroom, and these approaches will vary in part by the type of class in which it is being presented and by the nature of the assignment’s content, and by the instructors teaching methods. Nonetheless, let’s consider an example of this concept applied to a classroom assignment.

A student could be assigned to write some dubious document, such as a report arguing for the sterilization of the Pit Bull breed of dogs in order to end the attacks and other violent acts and crimes involving this breed. While in reality one could write such a report, hopefully it would not be well received by the general public. However, given the right social setting, timing, and outlet, as well as some extremely effective rhetoric, such an argument might receive a rather positive response.

This assignment could be presented to an individual student or it could be modified to fit the group assignment noted above. In the latter method, one student would represent some entity trying to initiate the action, while a second student would represent an animal rights organization against the proposal. A third student could even be included as moderator/arbitrator. Additional modifications could also be applied, such as using small groups of students for each side.

Clearly, this example harkens back to Katz’ focus on Hitler’s use of deliberate rhetoric to justify the destruction of an entire race of people. This example fits the purposes of this article and brings the holocaust example to a less intense and more contemporary issue, but it might not be ideal for all classroom settings. While I would certainly use Katz’ article for any class in which the ethic of expediency was taught, the focus of the article would not be the holocaust example. Rather, that example would be discussed in detail, but the ethic of expediency theory would be the common theme and consideration when discussing topics and assignments throughout the course.

Even for this article, my focus is not on the holocaust portion of Katz’ argument. I certainly do not mean to downplay any aspect of the holocaust, and it is important to show what can happen when deliberative rhetoric and the ethic of expediency are used for malevolent purposes. However, the focus of teaching this theory should be on how to apply it ethically and the way in which it will most benefit technical communicators.

Questions of Ethics

There are always multiple sides to an issue and different opinions as to the most effective rhetoric for a given document. These differences are based, in part, on whose interest is being considered. A funding organization has one agenda, while a manufacturing organization might have another, and both of these might differ from the best interest of the end user. This topic is truly not something that cannot be adequately addressed here. However, I suggest that there is a generally accepted level of ethics and that all those involved in the production of the material are responsible for ensuring the ethic of that material. This level of ethics includes presenting all information accurately and completely, and in such a way as to not knowingly bring potential or actual harm to a user through deception, misdirection, or subversion of pertinent facts.

Many technical communicators have argued for the “ethical transparency” of their work. The argument is that much technical writing is straightforward documentation and is, therefore, ethically neutral. However, as Jennifer Slack et al state,

Steven Katz’s examination of a virtually ‘perfect’ technical document proposing changes in a vehicle designed to asphyxiate prisoners during the Nazi holocaust ought to put an end to any assertion of ethical neutrality. It is not simply how well we communicate that matters. Who we work for and what we communicate matters. (Slack et al. 32).

Additional Applications

No topic can be fully considered for addition to a curriculum without also considering the teaching method through which it should be applied. However, for the purposes of this article, I do not wish to suggest any particular teaching method through which this should be instructed, as it is beyond the scope of this discussion.

What I have presented here is a general idea, and a few general examples, of how the ethic of expediency could be applied to instructing technical communication in the academic or the workplace setting. This concept can be, and should be, modified to fit the instructor’s own teaching methodologies, pedagogies, or andragogies.

It is, of course, not possible to control the actions of individuals. It is not possible to teach students an ethical concept and ensure that they will apply it to all actions and decisions. However, by providing them with ethical understanding, by empowering them to identify and ethically apply the rhetorical element of writing, we are at least attempting to improve the overall quality and ethic of technical communication.

In this way, the knowledge gained from this discussed use of rhetoric in the holocaust can provide us with a framework for better decision making when presenting information in relation to dangerous events that exemplify the ethic of expediency wrongly applied. There are an increasing number of public incidents and examples of the ethic of expediency’s negative applications, such as those previously discussed of the Ford Pinto, the Space Shuttle disaster, as well as more recent events, including the 2003 collapse of Enron that show the importance of addressing the topic of ethics in technical communication. Additionally, such events are giving rise to further study and resulting articles from technical communicators, such as those from Donna Kienzler and Carol David and from Dorothy Winsor, respectively.

Conclusion

To effectively apply this theory, organizations must practice a high level of honesty to the end user. Furthermore, while objectivity and profit will still remain the goal of writing technical documentation and reports, such a goal cannot be to the detriment of the human factor. Admittedly at some point, the effective application of the ethic of expediency will affect the bottom line of corporate projects, as well as funded academic projects. However, I must pose the question: isn’t it worth it? Given the alternative, the many examples of damaging technical communication produced that result in loss of lives, injuries, and monetary loss as well, I hope that it is widely accepted that it is worth it.

We, as educators and trainers, are providing students with the skills necessary to weave effective and expedient rhetoric. The instruction of such skills is present in current classrooms just as it is present in the training of and writing of current technical communicators in the workplace setting. However, without the necessary considerations of ethics and morality in these writings, we risk releasing additional unethical documents to the public. The ethic of expediency is not the only ethics-based theory that should be applied, but its application will greatly improve the ethos of current technical communicators and, by extension, the field of technical communication.

Works Cited

Dombrowski, Paul M. “Ethics and Technical Communication: The Past Quarter Century.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. Farmingdale, N.Y., Baywood Pub. Co., 30.1 (2000): 3-29.

Dragga, Sam. "A Question of Ethics: Lessons from Technical Communicators on the Job." Technical Communication Quarterly 6 (1997): 161-178.

Dragga, Sam, Dan Voss. “Cruel Pies: The Inhumanity of Technical Illustrations.” Technical Communication. Volume 48, Number 3, August (2001): 265-274.

Hartung, Kris K. “What Are Students Being Taught About The Ethics Of Technical Communication?: An Analysis Of The Ethical Discussions Presented In Four Textbooks.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. Farmingdale, N.Y., Baywood Pub. Co., Vol. 28(4) 363-383, 1998.

Katz, Steven B. "The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust." College English, Vol. 54, number 3, March 1992, pp 255-275.

Miller, Carolyn R., “A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing.” College English, Vol. 40, (1979): 610–17.

Moore, Patrick J. “Questioning The Motives Of Technical Communication And Rhetoric: Steven Katz’s ‘Ethic Of Expediency.’” Journal of Technical Writing And Communication, 34(1 & 2) (2004) 5-29.

Mother Jones Website. “Pinto Madness.” http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1977/09/dowie.html

Rivers, Thomas, M. “A Comment on the ‘Ethic of Expediency.’” College English, Vol. 54, number 7, November 1992, pp 856-858.

Sullivan, Dale. “Political-Ethical Implications of Defining Technical Communication as Practice.” Central Works in Technical Communication. Edited by Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber. Oxford University Press, 2004. 211-219.

Sanders, Scott P. "Technical Communication and Ethics." Foundations for Teaching Technical Communication: Theory, Practice, and Program Design. Edited by Katherine Staples and Cezar M. Ornatowski. Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1997. 99-117.

Schneider, Stephen. “Usable Pedagogies: Usability, Rhetoric, and Sociocultural Pedagogy in the Technical Writing Classroom.” Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(4), 447- 2005, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Slack, Jennifer Daryl, David James Miller, and Jeffery Doak. “The Technical Communicator as Author: Meaning, Power, Authority.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 7.1 (1993): 12-36. Sage Communications.

Winsor, Dorothy. "Communication Failures Contributing to the Challenger Accident: An Example for Technical Communicators." IEEE Transactionson Professional Communication 31.3 (1988): 101-107.

See Also

See also: “The Case of the Ford Pinto.” (http://www.cs.rice.edu/~vardi/comp601/case2.html) and “The Ford Pinto Case: A Study in Applied Ethics, Business, and Technology” by Douglas Birsch (1994). State University of New York Press.

Kienzler, Donna, and Carol David. “After Enron: Integrating Ethics into the Professional Communication Curriculum.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 17.4 (October 2003): 474-89.

———. “The Construction of Knowledge in Organizations: Asking the Right Questions about the Challenger.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 4.2 (1990): 7–20.

———. “Engineering Writing/Writing Engineering.” College Composition and Communication. 41.1 (1990): 58–70.