Blog written by Cory Sealey

Wowza!  Elections are in full swing.  Will it be Obillary or McRomnabee?  The excitement and hubbub of red states, blue states, and swing states tends to bring out the most patriotic in people, and as a native Washingtonian, the political process flows through my veins.  I like nothing more than sitting down with some beers and watching the returns come in.  This is not going to be an article about spin in the current election.  That would be too easy, this entry is about politics, but specifically how Congress has honed and mastered their spin process for more than 250 years to deny citizens of Washington, DC their rights.  What you say?  DC residents denied rights?  Correct. 

Like certain elected officials, many people fail to realize people actually live in DC.  I was born and raised there.  Not everyone flows in and out with the political tide every four to eight years.  Along with great museums and amazing cherry blossom trees along the tidal basin, we also have zero official representatives in Congress.  Citizens of the District of Columbia have only non-voting representation in the United States House of Representatives and no representation in the United States Senate.  We are not even seen as competent enough to vote on our own budgets.  Even fewer people are aware that residents of DC were only “granted” the right to elect the U.S. president in 1964.  Thanks Congress!!!  I guess that kind of makes up for all those years you controlled our city’s coffers according to your whims.  This lack of control is spun by members of Congress as a way of making sure DC doesn’t get too powerful and end up tap dancing over all the other states.  This spin also means we have people assuming my hometown is a gaggle of power-hungry wonks who will use every opportunity to trounce on our neighbors.  This spin is disenfranchising, wrong, and plain stupid.

To the man on the street, taking away his voice in the Senate or the House would be grounds for a smack-down, but yet, year after year, elected officials, people elected into office on promises of “shooting straight” continue to spin DC voting rights as a horrible idea which might make the world implode upon itself and make our founding fathers (and mothers) spin in their graves.   Piggybacking on the idea DC residents would have no idea how to handle national representation, as I mentioned before, Congress controls the money DC residents see for public projects.  From our woefully underfunded public schools to our hyper high HIV/AIDS rate, DC has serious problems because it is repeatedly denied its own voice and identity because of some national level spinning.  We were seen as a population of neophytes, unable to govern ourselves.  Unfortunately this stigma still remains.  When DC Home Rule legislation or funding bills are brought up, someone grandstands about “taking the power out of the hands of the elite in DC and giving it back to the people”, I wish this person would come see the schools that the children of these “elites” go to, some have partial roofs, most have no books, many have lead paint. 

Although there has been recent talk to do away with these arcane laws, nothing really came of it.  We continue to be the land of “Taxation without Representation”.  Spin in any form, is something we deal with everyday, from Britney “She’s crazy, no she’s just tired” to the current election, “Clinton makes racist comment, never mind it was taken out of context”.  This spin gets most of our attention, but unfortunately, spin has been around the block, and wants to make sure it stays.  When this spin is perpetrated by our elected officials to deny an entire population basic rights…that is when spin disenfranchises. 

Blog written by Angela Loiacono

When blog PR Watch posted a harsh attack against a particular public relations professional Jan. 27, it definitely caught my attention.  Judith Siers-Poisson’s post titled “When Flacks Attack, We Bite Back,”  is yet another rant about how PR professionals are nothing but annoying senders of unsolicited e-mail. 

Well, Judith, I’m glad you decided to join the ranks of journalists/bloggers who feel that near libelous language is the best way to handle the situation.  Since taking the high road obviously escaped all parties in this situation, let’s just jump to the chase. Siers-Poisson received an unsolicited e-mail containing an embargoed press release from a PR professional who I will not name. In retribution for the e-mail, Siers-Poisson posted the embargoed release, in its entirety, in her blog post out of spite.

Now, let’s understand something right off the bat. The fact that Siers-Poisson received this news release in the first place is just bad PR practice and most likely the result of not conducting any research.  I will not defend the actions of this PR practitioner, and in fact, I get a little heated when people in the industry feed the PR flack stereotype.

Regardless of what the e-mail contained, however, none of this warrants the unethical actions of Siers-Poisson. While she may think she taught the PR industry a good lesson with this one, she really just lost a lot of respect.  Two wrongs don’t make a right; and PR watchdog or not, acting ethically is still important.

P.S. If you want the entertainment to continue, read the childish, he said, she said playground banter that follows the post.

Blog written by Courtney Lawrence

The world of baseball is crumbling as we know it due to the Mitchell Report — or is it?  In a report to the commissioner of baseball, Senator George Mitchell released his findings after a 20-month investigation that major league baseball players knowingly used steroids and performance enhancing substances.  Congress has invested their time in these allegations, so has members of the media, and the accused players are running scared, but the real question is:  Do the fans really care?

Sure, Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa got booed every time they were up to bat on the road, but to their home fans (minus Sosa in Chicago) and the individuals that caught their homerun’s, they are still solid players and can hit them out of the park like the best of them, drugs or no drugs.  Baseball had a record $6 billion in revenue last season, all in the midst of these allegations.  So while some people feel the sport has been tainted, many are still happily giving money to America’s favorite pastime.

Roger Clemens is suing and spinning his way out of his allegations.  His former personal trainer, Brian McNamee, claims he injected Clemens with performance enhancing drugs on several occasions.  And, instead of keeping quiet, Clemens is on a public relations tirade, and spinning the accusations with such force, that people have to believe they aren’t true, right?  Are people seeing this as a case of he said vs. he said?  Are these players really good at spinning these claims to make it seem as though they are the victims?  Or, do the fans really just not care, and want to watch a good ballgame, enhanced or not?

Blog written by Morgan Smith

It was discovered last weekend that an employee of the French bank Societe Generale, had made some bad bets on stocks, and then while trying to cover them up, worsened his position even farther.

To the tune of $7.2 billion. Yes, that’s billion, with a B.

$7.2 billion is a lot of money, even for one of France’s largest banks. What may be most interesting about this, is how the story is being laid out for the media. The news was posted in the New York Times Thursday, almost a week after it was discovered by the bank. A week is a long time to wait and announce that you have been defrauded of $7.2 billion. The bank used this free time to sell off many of its positions Monday, before allowing the world to know what was going on.

The other interesting part of the story is the bank and French authorities are saying the trader, Jerome Kerviel, was the sole perpetrator of this vast financial crime. With all the security, auditing, reporting, and accounting large financial institutions must do, it is hard to believe this was not the work of more than one person. Even financial experts are saying it is highly unlikely this is the case. For example, Howard Davies, former chairman of the Financial Services Authority of Britain and now director of the London School of Economics, was quoted in the New York Times as saying “I don’t think we’ve had the full story.” Some were more blunt about their opinions, C. Ricardo Esteves, executive director of Banco Hipotecario of Argentina told the Times, “It is not credible. One person responsible for this? I just don’t believe it.”

It seems the bank is using spinning by omission to distort the fact of the case. This is especially bad, due to the current volatility of the markets and the state of the U.S. Economy in general. It is odd an institution that must be so forthcoming about its financial data would be using spin to distort what happened. You would think that transparency here would be what is needed. Tell investors what happened, regain their trust, put them at ease, and show them how you plan to fix the problem. That makes sense to me. But, then again, maybe that’s why I’m in public relations and not a banker.

Last Thursday I was traveling on business and had The Early Show on while I caught up on email before my first meeting.

Harry Smith interviewed Brenda Frese, the University of Maryland women’s head basketball coach, who is expecting twins in March.

First, shame on the PR department at Maryland for suggesting Brenda talk about what it’s like to coach a team while pregnant.

But doubly shame on Harry for the questions he asked:

1. “What’s it like to have a coach that is so pregnant?” 
2. “How pregnant are you?” 
3. “You can’t travel, can you?  How do you deal with that?” 
4. “What are you doing to do when they go to the NCAA tournament and you’re at home holding two babies?”

I’m surprised he didn’t ask Brenda what it’s like to have a husband who lets her work outside of the home.

Blog written by Sydney Ayers, APR

Congratulations to the Association of Zoos and Aquariums!  Long maligned by animal activist groups for alleged mistreatment of animals, the AZA is undertaking a proactive public relations campaign to counter recently negative publicity according to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal.

When an escaped tiger killed a visitor at the San Francisco Zoo on Christmas day, it forced the hand of the AZA.  Even though most animal escapes don’t harm people, zoo officials had to talk about safety when they would much rather continue talking about all the positive things zoos do to educate the public and protect endangered species.

At the beginning of my career years ago, I was part of an agency team that worked with the Denver Zoo.  One morning, we were taken on a tour of the zoo before it opened to see some of the work being done to improve animal habitats by making them more naturalistic.  It was an amazing experience that allowed me to see the zoo in a totally different light.  Not that the Denver Zoo hasn’t had its share of problems.

Last May, it was determined that the cause of death for a capuchin monkey was bubonic plague.  Rather than sweep the story under the rug, Denver Zoo officials got out in front of the issue.  They held a news conference and issued a news release.  They involved the zoo’s veterinarian and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control to help get the message across that the monkey contracted the plague by eating an infected squirrel and that humans are not at risk.

The effort was worth it.  The general public understood.  The story died on its own.  It was, in short, PR done right.  No half-truths.  No cover-ups.  No spin.  America’s corporations should take note.

Blog written by Shawn M. Kahle, APR

I grew up in a political family in Indiana.  My mom was an elected official or worked in jobs that came or went based on the party that was in office.  That meant from the time I was three years old I went door-to-door with mom registering voters, handing out bumper stickers, watching political conventions on television, and believing that if you wasted your opportunity to vote – shame on you!

I vote — in primaries, in school board elections in the rain, and especially for the big races for state and national offices.  I am a registered voter in the state of Michigan – have been for about 30 years.  Generally, when I must declare a party, I go with the Democrats.

Last week, my party let me down in an unforgivable way.

There is so much spin surrounding what really went wrong with the move by Michigan to an earlier primary that it would take months to unearth the whole story.  Here’s what I know.

Leading Democrats in Michigan – Governor Granholm, Senator Levin, and others wanted to move up the Michigan primary so the state would be more relevant sooner in influencing the presidential election cycle.  In the process of doing so, the Michigan Democratic Party and the National Democratic Party had a major falling out – big time!  The controversy grew so great that leading candidates such as Barack Obama and John Edwards refused to file in the state of Michigan rather than face the reprisals of the national party.  Democrats who went to the polls on primary day could either vote for Hillary Clinton, or Dodd (no longer in the race), Kucinich, Gravel or “Uncommitted.” 

On Jan. 15, 2008, Senator Clinton “won” with 55 percent of the vote, leading “Uncommitted” by only 15 percent.  While a weak showing, her victory was irrelevant.  She did not garner any convention support as the National Democratic Party says the Michigan delegation will not be seated at the convention.  In effect, Michigan Democrats don’t count – at all – in deciding the candidate who will represent “their party” in the November general election. 

We live in a world where people still die every day fighting for the right to vote.  Party politics killed the right for Michigan Democrats.  

But, let’s give the wolverine state credit for accomplishing one goal — Michigan became more relevant in the presidential election cycle … FOR THE REPUBLICANS!

Yes, nationwide every major news service focused on the fight between Mitt Romney and John McCain.  In Chicago, local media traveled 90 minutes to New Buffalo and Union Pier to snap photos, and do stand-ups for stories that went on and on about the results of the Republican primary and the debacle of the Democrats.  Yes, the GOP won the airwaves and the jealousy of real voting Democrats who still want to have a say in who will be the next President of the United States. 

People wonder why Michigan is losing population so fast?  Add one more reason.  They strip away the true right to vote from their residents.  No blood was shed, only integrity.  Talk about “Uncommitted”.

Blog written by Morgan Smith

Sunday, January 5, 2008 was a telling day for the Republican candidates for president of the United States. The second to last day of the 2008 New Hampshire nomination campaign after Iowa voters supported the candidates of their choice in the storied caucuses of the Hawkeye state was an interesting one. The candidates squared off yet again in a televised debate, answering questions and pointing fingers at their opponents.

The tone of the debate, like several other recent forums, quickly turned from the candidates providing insightful and succinct answers to important questions to a bickering and backstabbing mele. The most disappointing back and forth however, came from governors Romney and Huckabee. Both men have become desperate in the past 3 days since the Iowa caucuses concluded. Huckabee because New Hampshire voters have not been receptive to his Baptist minister rhetoric and he can’t afford to lose the momentum he gained coming out of Iowa. Romney because he can’t afford to lose his neighboring state, where he once held a commanding lead.

The real losers of this exchange are the voters in New Hampshire and subsequent primary states. The problem is at this point in the campaign there is almost no time to win over voters. Instead, the candidates are focusing on deterring people from voting at all, hoping that a 2 or 3 point drop in their opponents turnout will vault them to a victory. The winner in the heated exchange between these rivals is John McCain.

Both Huckabee and Romney are using spin to distort the facts about each other’s past, manipulating data and selectively using facts to attempt to discredit the other. In an ideal world, the candidates would be less concerned with creating negatives about their opponents and wholly committed to providing sound policy decisions to improve our country. It is my hope that New Hampshire voters can see through the spin and choose the best candidate for themselves based on the candidates strengths instead of the weaknesses presented by their rivals. The Republican candidates would be well served to stop parading their opponent’s skeletons about, giving the democrats less fodder for the General Election in the fall, and discouraging republican voters from uniting behind their candidate in November.

Blog written by Courtney Lawrence

While out of the country last week I refused to check my email or voicemail — however, I did feel a little out of touch by not really knowing much of what was going on back home.  I figured it was time to catch up on the daily headlines by Friday. 

This was the morning following the Iowa Caucus, and I was really interested to hear who had secured a victory for each party.  Pulling up the news on a blackberry, the first two stories caught my eye:  “Obama and Huckabee” and “Spears in Standoff with Police.”  At that same moment, I heard on a Mexican radio station, understanding very little Spanish, (more or less) “Brittney Spears es loco.”

I couldn’t decide which was worse, the top headlines in our country is who won the Iowa Caucus and a fallen pop-star is crazy, something that is front page daily, or that a radio station in Puerto Vallarta was gossiping about the previous nights “stand-off” as well. 

Have people in the United States become so involved with worthless news (don’t get me wrong, I read the blogs, I’m one of them) or are we trying to focus on other people, in order to not  think about how bad things really are?

Have most become so disengaged with what’s going on that they would rather hear about Brittney Spears then the economy, housing market, political candidates, and jobs?  Or, do we just talk about it because it isn’t our family or our problems?  The media is covering these topics daily, and with blogs, hourly, and they are doing so because people would rather read about Ms. Spears then President Bush.  ¿Es los Estados Unidos loco tambien? 

Blog written by Josh Culver

Since recently starting in the PR industry, I’ve been surprised at the amount of defense that is needed for the industry. Granted, every line of work has its critics, but I was bewildered with the amount of criticism toward an industry that is believed to have been started before the 20^th Century.

Yet, PR is hard to recognize when it’s done well without being ‘spin’. The best PR I can think of some would argue that it was simply leadership. I’m talking about the job done by ex-New York City Mayor Rudi Giuliani after the tragedy of 9/11. The appearance of Giuliani then has turned into one of the lasting memories of those events. He was viewed as a pillar of strength for not only the city of New York, but the nation as well. Although some people think of President Bush and his role during those hard times, for most Giuliani is in the forefront when remembering those events.

I’ve heard the arguments before that Giuliani was just a good leader and PR had nothing to do with it. But when the nation was trying to move past the mourning that September, and trying to return to normalcy, it was Giuliani’s appearance on Saturday Night Live just five days after the attacks that helped kick start the healing process. His opening spot on the weekend staple helped Americans realize that it was okay to laugh again.

In the months to follow, the Mayor was constantly in the public eye, not only in New York, but nationally. His usual appearances were coupled with constant camera shots of him at the World Series when the Yankees advanced to the fall classic. He was viewed as the anchor nationally, as the shining example of how every New Yorker and American should act. So much so that now he’s even attempting a presidential bid from all of the positive publicity during his tenure during that time.

As natural as all of the leadership seemed, there was a ton of work done to help publicly construct that image.