From an ethics perspective in strategic communication management, the consultant’s responsibility is to maintain professional independence, integrity, and transparency. Option A is the most appropriate response because it clearly establishes ethical boundaries while remaining respectful and neutral. It reinforces that professional services are not exchanged for personal political support and that civic decisions—such as voting—are made independently.
Accepting or promising a vote in exchange for payment would create a serious conflict of interest and could be perceived as unethical, coercive, or even corrupt. Strategic communication ethics emphasize that practitioners must avoid situations where personal actions appear to be influenced by financial relationships. Options B and C directly violate this principle by implying that compensation entitles the client to personal political support, which undermines professional credibility and public trust.
Option D, while avoiding endorsement, is evasive and may raise questions about honesty or civic responsibility. It does not clearly establish ethical independence and could be interpreted as an attempt to avoid the issue rather than address it professionally.
Option A appropriately reframes the conversation. It signals that the consultant respects democratic principles, separates professional obligations from personal civic choices, and evaluates candidates objectively. This response protects both the consultant and the client by preventing misunderstandings, ethical breaches, or reputational harm.
Strategic communication management stresses that ethical practice is not only about avoiding wrongdoing but also about managing perceptions. By clearly asserting independence, the consultant reinforces trust, maintains professional standards, and models ethical leadership. This approach preserves the integrity of the consultant-client relationship while upholding the broader ethical responsibilities of communication professionals in politically sensitive contexts.
