When Is It Not Alright?

Was just watching 20/20 and they had a piece on a mayor from Arlington, Oregon who had pictures posted on Myspace.com of her in a black bra and panties on top of a fire truck and another one that was suggestive. The town of 650 has some citizens that are trying to oust the mayor over these pictures. The mayor is a very attractive and physically fit woman in her late 40's.

Okay, here is the deal: The mayor is fighting back and saying that she didn't post the pictures- her friends and family did- and that she will not leave her position (which is a voted in position but non-salary).

What is right and wrong here?

The mayor is saying she has a right to post any pictures that she wants; the town is saying she is a reflection of the town and those pictures aren't the right reflection.

Let's first look at the right and wrong question and then we will get to the more important question.

If you are a CEO, Senior Management, Queen, King, in a visible government position, you DO have an obligation to uphold the values, principles and image of that position. It is no longer about you- your image extends beyond you to the town, country, or company. Yes, you did need to adhere to the standards that go with that office. Yes it may mean at times you have to curb what you would say in public, that you have to watch what you wear and that you have to watch what you do. And yes, that may at times, seem "unfair." But the truth is that when you sought that position this was part of the package.

But really, that is not the big question here. The big question is, why was it approached in such a way as to make the mayor feel judged and thus, to feel justified in digging in her heels and leaving the pictures up?

My understanding is she was first approached by some in the town telling her the pictures were a disgrace and that they wanted her removed. Right away they gave a judgement and she is fighting that judgment.

Imagine if instead they came to her and said, "we found some pictures on Myspace.com of you that don't fit your upstanding image as our mayor and we wanted to take some time to talk with you about them and how you propose to handle it. I am not sure if you are even aware these pictures are out there." My guess is she would have gone in and taken them right down.. After all, she says she isn't even the one that put them up. Most likely at this point she is defending herself as well as her family and friends that put the pictures up.

If she didn't want to do that, the discussion could easily move to "so if the image of mayor is to be one that is upstanding citizen that reflects positively on our entire town, how do these pictures fit that?" And if she insisted, they could then say, "So we are to understand that you feel strongly about keeping these pictures up and that if we don't feel that fits the image of a mayor you want us to go about removing you from office?"

Then if they proceed with the petition, the mayor is the one who essentially pushed that direction, not the citizens. My guess is that she would have removed them if she felt the grace of room to not feel judged for them being there in the first place.

Anne Warfield, http://www.impressionmanagement.com/