| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Purposeful politicization is generally viewed as a cardinal sin by intelligence analysts because it degrades objectivity and credibility, and inadvertent influence is sometimes tolerated as a necessary evil in order to make intelligence useful. Some forms of politicization are clearly unethical, but politicization is not inherently evil. In fact it is an ethically neutral form of rhetorical discourse which when properly controlled can provide policymakers with additional decision advantage. When viewed through a rhetorical lens, evidence-based purposeful politicization is more objective than inadvertent influence because it does not try to hide where the evidence leads. By decoupling objectivity and neutrality, it becomes clear that taking a stand on the evidence or making a tough recommendation based on professional judgment are not practices that need to be avoided. As intelligence practitioners seek to remain relevant in the 21st century, embracing ethically-controlled, evidence-based, policy prescriptive analysis can give them the tools they need to succeed.
|