24601

I attended a meeting for a Foundation I’m doing some copywriting work for. After I got home, I sent an e-mail to each of the attendees, telling them I was glad to have met them and that I was enjoying working with them.

I did this for two reasons: one, that’s how I was raised, and two, I’m hoping they’ll use the “Reply” function to offer me more work.

My question is: Does the selfish motive negate the social contract? Should the notes be dismissed as opportunistic, or just taken at face value? I am sincere in both reasons, which is what set me to wondering.

I’m doing the initial work pro bono for a variety of reasons: the potential for further (paid) opportunities, good karma, the fact that they’re non-profit, a family friend is involved. But again, if I’m hoping to get something out of it (which cancels out the literal meaning of pro bono), am I still allowed to claim it in my personal “Good Deeds” column?

One strong argument I could make is that I’m trying to support my family. If I don’t do everything I can to find work, I’m neglecting that mandate. That train of thought led me to consider Jean Valjean. Yes, he broke the law, but he was trying to keep his family from starving. Who wouldn’t do the same? At least I can only be accused of being less than pure in intent (so far!).

We’ve all heard that the ends justify the means, but too often it’s used to rationalize some lapse in moral standards. On the other hand, everybody acknowledges the truth of the adage “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know,” which can encompass everything from favoritism to nepotism. Many employment strategists state that 90% of all available jobs are never advertised. If that’s the case, you have to work your contacts; in effect, turning them into your pimps.

I’m not too worried about this, really. It was a passing thought that was fun to ponder.