82. Integrity becomes more problematic if wrongdoing is hushed up, denied, or hidden
It is problematic when SPs hush up mistakes because (1) SPs themselves are not in control if others expose their lapses, (2) hushing matters up is an infringement of integrity in itself, and (3) others will wonder what other mistakes the SP may be keeping quiet about. Denying or negating accusations is even more problematic, because this involves lying or a lack of values, constituting an additional infringement of integrity. Hiding wrongdoing is the most problematic, because this leads to further wrongdoing. For this reason, SPs should be aware of what they are doing if they hush up, deny, or hide their transgressions.
“Not disclosing the DUI on my terms may have been the single costliest political mistake I ever made,” according to George W. Bush, reflecting on his presidency.461 Why is hushing up a mistake so damaging?
Firstly, by hushing up transgressions, you lose control if others reveal them. If that happens, it can often turn out worse (because those who publicize the transgression may have reason to maximize the impact and damage caused), the information is incomplete (because those making it known often know less than the culprit), and colored (because information is presented subjectively and selectively for a specific purpose). Moreover SPs are often taken by surprise by the announcement, with insufficient time to prepare a good response. If you take the time necessary for this, you give the impression that you are hiding, have forgotten about it, are wiping away the traces, or avoiding criticism. By failing to take control you soon become a plaything and this in itself makes it look like you lack integrity.
Secondly, hushing up wrongdoing is damaging because it may involve a double violation of integrity, since both the transgression and the hushing up are violations. The more relevant honesty is for the position, the more opportunities SPs have had to reveal their misdemeanors themselves, and the longer the period between the misdemeanor and its becoming known, the more seriously their silence will be taken.
Thirdly, keeping quiet about a transgression is damaging because others will ask what else has been hushed up. If you are evidently capable of keeping one transgression quiet, why would you not do the same with others? This damages trust in the maxim “No new is good news.” Such situations are good opportunities for people with grudges or pent-up frustrations to add fuel to the fire and push you over the edge. It is also an ideal breeding ground for rumors, lies, and half-truths, because when others doubt a person’s integrity, they are more open to rumors and gossip about them. These doubts can lead people to distance themselves, out of fear of being infected and sucked into the impending scandal. They may do this by not picking up the phone, keeping quiet about their own involvement in the transgression, judging it harshly, and even contributing new incriminating information.
A more risky tactic is to deny accusations. If there has really been a lapse, this is a more serious infringement of integrity, as it resides not only in (1) the transgression itself, and (2) hushing it up, but also in (3) denying it when the issue is raised.462 Denying a transgression is risky. On the one hand, by acting this way you can come off well if the accusations blow over or cannot be proven. On the other hand, you will be judged twice as harshly if the accusations are corroborated, let alone if more misdemeanors come to light. Greek minister Akis Tsochatzopoulos responded to accusations of corruption from a newspaper by calling them insulting and defamatory, and threatening to sue. However, a subsequent parliamentary investigatory committee advised that he be prosecuted. Tsochatzopoulos denied all charges and said that the accusations were a plot against him. The court declared him guilty on all charges, including accusations such as accepting bribes in purchasing submarines and missiles, and condemned him to 20 years’ imprisonment. His wife, ex-wife, daughter, and 13 other accomplices were also convicted.463 A congressman reported to the media that accusations of possible insider trading on his part were lies from beginning to end. When it later emerged that the accusations were true, he resigned because he had not only abused his position but also lied about it. The more stubbornly the misdemeanor is denied, the more seriously it will be taken if it is proven to be true. The situation is further exacerbated if