Moral Outrage and Rationalization: How to Respond to Disgraced Public Figures

By David Miller, Ph.D., CP Op-Ed Contributor Wednesday, May 29, 2013

"It was a punch in the gut for those of us who know him." These words could have been spoken about Lance Armstrong. Or about the CEO of Lockheed Martin who was dismissed by the Board for an inappropriate relationship with an employee. Or the person next to you on the train to work, or in the aisle across from you in church or maybe even the person we see in the mirror. As it happens, these words are the reaction of West Point professor, Col. Michael J. Meese upon hearing of General Petraeus' admission of an affair.

Some of us have that same punch-in-the-gut feeling about Lance Armstrong– cancer survivor, iconic Tour de France winner, and major philanthropist who served as a beacon of light and hope for millions, whose life and legend continues to unravel.

How are we to react when the mighty fall? And what does it mean for our view of their sponsorships and charities? We who admire these larger-than-life figures from afar have feelings of disbelief, disappointment, and even disgust.

Get Our Latest News for FREE

Subscribe to get daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from The Christian Post. Be the first to know.

Subscribe

If we only knew him as Lance Armstrong, cyclist, the discovery of his systematic cheating would've been in the news cycle for a couple days, and had little impact on those outside the cycling community. Yet we know Lance Armstrong as a cancer survivor, role model, and philanthropist. Indeed, many of us were drawn to Armstrong, and watched his Tour de France victories, precisely because of his incredible story of survival, and the Livestrong campaign, with the ubiquitous yellow wristbands.

It is hard to hate someone who has also accomplished so much good. And yet, he cheated on one of the grandest of sports stages for many years. Can we still be a fan? Can we still be a supporter? So which Lance (if any) do we embrace? Which Lance (if any) do we erase?

Recently, some academics who specialize in product branding, have studied how fans and consumers respond to celebrities and other public figures who are discovered to have a "dark side," secretly living a life of vice and dishonesty.

In order to stay a fan and supporter, researchers used to think that consumers would morally rationalize the celebrity's transgressions, downplaying it in light of the good they do. Yet recently, some academics have put forward a new idea to explain how consumers can "hate the sin but love the sinner."

The concept is called "moral decoupling," and is different than "moral rationalization." In moral decoupling, we detach morality from other things. The theory is that consumers can disassociate the moral indiscretions of a celebrity, which allows us to still applaud our heroes and celebrities for the good they do. We acknowledge our moral outrage and do not seek to rationalize or explain away or excuse their misbehavior. Instead, we isolate it as if it has no bearing on the person's role, which allows us to still support the public figure.

Philanthropy is seldom a purely rational decision divorced of emotional attachment. If anything, our gifts are usually motivated not just by the cause, but also by our relationship to a person or an organization associated with a cause. Many would not have supported Livestrong had its founder and spokesperson not been a cycling phenom. Perhaps it was the decoupling between different areas of Armstrong's own life that led to his own breach in the first place.

So where do we go from here? One of the inevitabilities of life is that heroes, celebrities, and even organizations often let us down. Madison Avenue's compellingly crafted images become hard to maintain in the face of our human shortcomings. And, of course, like many human behaviors this is not a new phenomenon, linked purely to modern media and mass marketing.

We may not be as fast a cyclist as Lance Armstrong, or as brilliant a general David Petraeus. And yet, as athletes and generals, scholars and students, CEOs and secretaries, parents and pastors, we share in their accomplishments and failings. Is it possible that we can reduce the moral rationalizing and moral decoupling in our own lives and behaviors?