Most people in the country are now becoming familiar with the story of Drew Peterson, the Bolingbrook, Ill. police sergeant that seems to have trouble picking faithful spouses. According to Peterson all he really wants from his fourth wife, currently missing, is to “expose herself to be alive and well”. He has also gone on to say that he is angry at Stacy Peterson for causing a media frenzy and raised suspicion about his innocence.

Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio also left under mysterious circumstances; unfortunately it was to a place impossible to come back from. She was found dead in her bathtub, which the coroner ruled at the time an accidental death. The case has recently been re-opened.

Can’t the poor guy catch a break? And all he’s asking for now is a little piece and quiet.

Just a quick question—why did it take the strange disappearance of his fourth wife to start stirring up a little noise around Drew Peterson?!? Since the news hit a national scale, reports have surfaced that both his 2^nd and 3^rd wives felt threatened at different times during the marriage. When considering filing reports with police, it seems that Savio, Peterson’s third wife, didn’t think the police would do anything to help her after ending up in emergency rooms from physical abuse. Although this raises larger questions about corruption that I’m not going to attempt to tackle right now, how could some kind of legal action not be taken against him after repeated emergency room visits? How is there not some sort of safe haven for women feeling this way (in some places, there are) and is it her fault for not taking advantage of them?

Now, I believe that every man or woman in this country has right to a fair trial. But let’s face it, in the court of public opinion, Drew Peterson is looking guilty with a life sentence and no hope of parole. As long as he lives, most people will know the story as soon as they recognize the face. It’s sad that young Stacy Peterson had to go missing before Drew’s martial history came under question. How many other Drew Petersons are out there? What’s it going to take to prevent from doing something just like this? — Josh Culver

Is Hillary Clinton giving students a negative outlook on politics? That is what 19-year-old Muriel from Grinnell College thinks. Muriel said she was asked by a Clinton staff member to ask Clinton a specific question after her energy saving speech. Clinton’s camp admitted that it planted the question and said it would never happen again. However, this might just be another blow to the campaign. Muriel originally wanted to ask Clinton how her energy saving plan compares to other candidates’ plans, but the staffer said, “I don’t think that’s a good idea, because I don’t know how familiar she (Hillary) is with their plans.”

I understand that planting questions with audience members is not unheard of in political campaigns. I do think Hillary should have avoided this because it is embarrassing and suggests that a candidate is uncomfortable facing tough questions, therefore easy questions and prepared answers need to be planted. Hillary was trying to answer questions she thought were relevant to her speech. It ended up with spin on how she and her campaign are manipulative and scheming and that they have to bend the rules to maintain her lead in the polls. For me, honesty and trust are such huge issues when looking at political candidates. Bill Schneider, CNN’s senior political analyst said Clinton’s husband had this same issue and was referred by critics as “Slick Willy.” Will her critics start referring to the New York senator as “Slick Hillary?” — Kristina Burn

Growing up I can remember being jealous that my friends had their lunches packed with cookies, fruit roll-ups, cans of pop, potato chips. and Twinkies while I sat next to them eating my sandwich on WHEAT bread with an apple, a real fruit juice box, and a green vegetable of some sort.  A couple of times a week I’d get cookies, but they were usually the small SnackWells kind that tasted similar to the crayons I would eat in kindergarten. 

Looking back now, I’m thankful my parents didn’t feed me food processed with blubber and sugar.  Do you have any idea how high the obesity rate is for children under 16 years old?  In 2002 alone, one in five children were considered overweight.  The cause of this?  Diet is the defining factor in obesity, but coming in second place is the amount of activity children get.  Almost half of children ages 8-16 watch three hours of television a day!  How many children are eating during this three hour period?  Probably most of them.  I can’t even sit still that long!

There is HOPE!

Recently, the school lunch ladies came clean with the truth about nutritious foods costing schools the same amount as the usual fatty foods.  The most exciting part of this University of Minnesota study is that the children ate the more healthful lunches which included fruits and vegetables rather than potato chips and cookies. 

We’re on the road to recovery, folks. – Lindsay Brown

As a diehard fan of the Chicago Cubs and Major League Baseball (ML, it brings me almost to tears to have to write something bad about the MLB. As I have been reading lately in the news when it comes to the indicted Barry Bonds, I can’t help getting upset when I read things about how it will be Barry Bond’s friends that are the cause of him getting indicted. Several questions have came across my mind through the entire year as Barry became ever so close week after week of breaking the great Henry “Hammerin Hank” Aaron’s all time home run record. What’s taking the MLB so long to test Barry or as my dad used to call him, “The Jewelry Man”, for his excessive amount of gold chains he would wear while playing in a game? Once a month you would hear breaking news of other “smaller named” players testing positive, why not Barry? Who is he paying to not be tested? Why would such a highly recognized organization and America’s past time sport wait so long to challenge a man that has been lying to the entire world? It must be his friends that are the cause of this or says The Denver Post in a story that ran November 23, last Friday. I am reminded of the old saying, “if I told you to jump off a bridge would you do it?” I will not believe the media on this one, nor will I allow the media to direct me into believe wrong information, especially when it comes to my love for the game of baseball. The media has continued to persuade me along with every other baseball fan that Barry is innocent and it is the people around him that have brought him down. Why not believe the courts or do as I do and blame “This Bud’s for you Selig”, the commissioner of the MLB. The day that he is out of the commissioner spot will be a great day for baseball. Let’s not forget about how he allowed a tie game in a baseball All-Star game a couple years ago. Bud Selig called the game because he didn’t want any of the pitchers to get hurt for the remainder of the season. Now Selig has Barry Bonds on his commissioner era as well. It just kills me to know that a man that has lied in front of a federal grand jury saying he did not take performance enhancing drugs still has a chance to continue to play again this coming 2008 season according to The Denver Post. Barry is old, can’t run or play in the field, but is still holding out for money which some team is going to cough up to him so he will put fans in the seats. Do people really want to come see a cheater play? If he comes to the Chicago Cubs, which is highly unlikely, I will go to every game dressed up as a human steroid. But don’t forget, it was his friends that are going to be the cause for Barry getting indicted or says the media in their evil spinning tricks. Maybe it should be the fault of a man who allegedly took steroids or the man who contains a forehead the size of a basketball, not his friends. – Thomas Short

One of my favorite business magazines just hurt my feelings.

In the December issue of Inc., there is an article about deskside briefings and how overused they are.

I’ll admit it; when I started my business nearly three years ago, NO ONE was doing deskside briefings.  At least not with the reporters we were talking to on behalf of our clients.  So I suggested our clients get out in front of their targeted reporters, in person.  And it worked.  It still works.

But according to the article, deskside briefings are just a fancy way of saying an interview.

“By constantly using different buzzwords, PR pros are doing what they do best: taking something commonplace and spiffing it up with shiny new language.”

That’s where my feelings got hurt.  What we do best?  Spiffing it up with shiny new language?  It’s not an interview.  An interview is a conversation between a reporter and your client about a specific topic or story.  A deskside briefing, which is what they have been called as long as I’ve been in the PR business, is an opportunity to meet a reporter and begin to establish a relationship.  If a PR person is selling it to their client as a guaranteed story, that is spin.

And I agree with Rhoda Weiss, chair and CEO of PRSA.  In this day and age when no one meets in person anymore, a deskside briefing is extremely effective.  Not only does it begin to build a relationship, but if your client and the reporter hit it off in person, the reporter is more likely to embrace the relationship and call your client for trusted source interviews…over and over and over again.

But trust me Ed2010, we won’t be calling you to see if you’d like to meet any of our clients.  Everyone knows bloggers don’t want to actually meet people in person.

TRAVEL NIGHTMARE TO SPOIL THE TURKEY  Drudgereport.com

People know that when booking travel arrangements scheduled during the holidays with it comes with a risk, if not the probability of delay.  Yet news outlets invariably report delays as if they are so shocking. National networks all flock to the worst hit airport and interview the most distraught travelers they can find. Pictures of people waiting in lines accompany language of victimhood and subtle tones of sadness. American media completely ignore the many starving people in Africa, the scores of war torn regions in need of help and instead in the spirit of humanity, they devote pity pieces to those people who might be late for turkey because they decided to fly hours before it was being served. 

And of course there is always this nugget every holiday season:

 Flying and Blood Clots: A Deadly Risk

To give media credit, many also devote miles of column inches to mind boggling travel tips such as this genius idea: When it comes to paying for holiday travel, it pays to price shop.  And thank goodness for this advisory:  Have boarding pass and identification out when in line.

Now that I got that off my chest, I have resigned myself to the fact that this annual “news” event is part of the holiday season. So, in the spirit of spin, I would like to suggest members of media remove the fear and distress from reporting the mass holiday exodus and instead provide tips such as these:

-How to have great conversations with strangers when stuck in line

-How to get to  and return from the bathroom without waking up the person in the aisle seat

-How to get that arm rest all to yourself

-How to get extra peanuts, cookies and even the extra blanket

-What to do if your breathe stinks and the person next to you is a talker

-How to make a meal out of candy and wine

By Jason Damata

As the 14^th annual “City Crime Rankings: Crime in Metropolitan America” was published by CQ Press, discussions erupted over the credibility of the lists.  The study, which was released Sunday, was hit with criticism prior to its release, and it continues to field complaints into this week.

The American Society of Criminology issued a statement Friday calling the study “an irresponsible misuse” of crime data, as reported by the Associated Press.  The study gets its roots from the FBI’s September 24 crime statistics report. The big disagreement comes in how the list was formed and whether the information was used within context.

The study, which is highly publicized each year, gives the public the perception that these rankings are hard facts, rather than controversial interpretations of data. In order to receive the full study, you must pay for it.

The opinions of the Detroit Police Department, FBI, and Michael Tonry, president of the American Society of Criminology, as reported by the Associated Press, speak for themselves.

“Detroit police officials released a statement Sunday night disputing the report, saying it fails to put crime information into proper context.”

The rankings “do groundless harm to many communities,” said Michael Tonry, president of the American Society of Criminology.

The FBI posted a statement on its Web site criticizing such use of its statistics. “These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular town, city, county, state, or region,” the FBI said. “Consequently, they lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents.”

Doug Goldenberg-Hart, acquisitions editor at CQ Press, even went on the record saying, “the rankings are imperfect, but that the numbers are straightforward.”

These rankings have no business being splashed in headlines, if they aren’t solid facts.  The study didn’t even include a look at some major metropolitan cities, such as Chicago.

Watch CQ Press Publisher John Jenkins describe how the data was used »

Ranked Most Dangerous

1. Detroit, Michigan
2. St. Louis, Missouri
3. Flint, Michigan
4. Oakland, California
5. Camden, New Jersey
6. Birmingham, Alabama
7. North Charleston, South Carolina
8. Memphis, Tennessee
9. Richmond, California
10. Cleveland, Ohio
Source: CQ Press

Ranked Safest

1. Mission Viejo, California
2. Clarkstown, New York
3. Brick Township, New Jersey
4. Amherst, New York
5. Sugar Land, Texas
6. Colonie, New York
7. Thousand Oaks, California
8. Newton, Massachusetts
9. Toms River Township, N.J.
10. Lake Forest, California
Source: CQ Press

“It’s the greatest scam in history”, writes John Coleman , founder of The Weather Channel.  “I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM”. (Click here to read the article).

Wow. If John Coleman is in anyway right about this, not only are we are looking at the greatest scam in history, but also the greatest act of spin in history.

Let’s take a step back and imagine, for a moment, that what John is saying is true. In his opinion, global warming is an illusion fabricated by scientists, journalists, politicians, movie producers, and extremists with “political and environmental motives” as a way of scaring the public into “adhering to a radical agenda”.  John does not delve any deeper into what this agenda is, or what it is set out to accomplish, so let’s assume for a moment that this so-called “agenda” is somehow related to an oil crisis. From this point of view, global powers made a highly secretive and unanimous decision to introduce something called “Global Warming” to dupe the unsuspecting public into believing the world will soon end without drastic change. The hoped-for effect is a reduction of energy consumption leading to better management of the dwindling oil supply that continues to diminish due to war and overconsumption. By teaming up with the world’s best known scientists, journalists, movie producers, politicians, and environmental extremists, the plan becomes fool proof. The public is saturated with messages from trustworthy people about a terrifying global crisis, and comes to the realization that Global Warming is human initiated. To counter the negative effect that humans have on earth, new energy methods are invented by way of ethanol, electricity, and solar power, and a lack of oil no longer becomes an issue. In conclusion of this so called “scam”,  the public ends up believing that they have saved the world, oil suppliers rest easy knowing that their supply will last much longer than anticipated, and governments around the world no longer worry about having to provide mass quantities of a quickly diminishing resource.  The most brilliant act of spin in human history. Period.

But let’s be realistic here folks. In all likelihood our global leaders did not team up to spin an oil crisis into something much bigger for the sake of radical change.  If that many people were working so closely and productively together, our planet would be a far more peaceful place. In my opinion, John is using Global Warming as a way of spinning his inner hatred of Al Gore into something people will actually read. Take this quote from his article as an example:

“I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.”

It’s almost as if Coleman is telling his readers that Al Gore himself is the sole creator (and thus fabricator) of Global Warming. His proof? Only a meteorologist like himself could know such things, and Al Gore is not a meteorologist. Is John making a valid point here, or is he just acting like a grown five year old jealous of Al Gore’s meteorological success? Considering the lack of proof John Coleman uses throughout his article to back himself up, I choose the latter. It merely sounds like whining to me. — Chris Thonis

I would have to take a guess that more than half of our population was not surprised when Matt Damon was announced “sexiest man alive” by People magazine.  Although a little degrading, I think nothing wrong with a little man eye candy. 

Although that was 10 minutes well spent, flipping through pictures of the hottest men on earth, I was absolutely appalled when I read the list of the “five most unsexiest women alive” by Maxim magazine.  I thought to myself, “They do that?  I must read on.”  Thinking that there was going to be photos of three breasted, facial haired, green wart covered faces to win these titles, you can imagine my shock when I found Madonna, Sandra Oh, and Sarah Jessica Parker to be in the top five??