« May 2005 | Main | July 2005 »
June 27, 2005
London Rising
I have spent much of the past week in London. I want you to understand the profound transformation that is afoot in this city, which now seeks to position itself as capital of the world, if not the creative capital.
My earliest memories of London, dating back to the mid Sixties, are a melange of Carnaby Street (a pair of bell bottom woolen pants so itchy that they were worn once before relegation to deepest depths of my closet for moths to eat), heavy traditional food at Simpsons on the Strand (mutton, peas floating in gravy), the usual round of American worship at sites now or in the past inhabited by the Royals (Windsor Castle, Hampton Court, the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace). A shirt sent out for cleaning came back starched, a perfect metaphor for the coldly correct service at hotels.
Now the change, not sudden but constant, over the past decade in particular, is an embrace of global culture in London that blends with and often supersedes the traditional British one. The key word is tolerance, an acceptance of differences in language, dress and sexual preference. At a time when America is pushing an agenda of conservative values, particularism and protection of its borders, Britain is opening its arms to those from the Middle East, Russia, and Africa, especially if they have the money to afford to live well and the ability to compete in the marketplace.
There has been a redefinition of what constitutes fairness. Mayor Ken Livingstone has instituted a congestion charge, so that cars are taxed on a progressively higher basis as they move closer to the center of the city. On first glance, this may seem a program in favor of the wealthy. But when combined with a strict effort to create bus and bicycle lanes, the net effect is to improve the environment for all who live in London. The Mayor has also allowed the construction of skyscrapers in a specified area near the City of London, including the now famous Swiss Re "gurkin" tower. In so doing, he has created a second hub for the financial community beyond Canary Wharf, adding badly needed space for the city's number one industry.
Life in London is undoubtedly expensive, even for this jaundiced New Yorker. But with the high prices now comes undoubted quality. The expression of "pounds for dollars" is quite true, but the diversity of eating choices and entertainment options is staggering. It is also clear from walks around the city that this has become a magnet for youth, who are driving excellence in the creative businesses. Our own JCPR consumer unit has total diversity in the workforce and its product is a reflection of broad experiences, including lots of late night clubbing.
There was a quote from a noted professor of history in the first segment of Ric Burns' excellent history of New York City about the importance of its Dutch origins. I will paraphrase it here. "The Dutch did not give a damn about imposing their own culture on New Amsterdam (now New York), nor about religion. The Dutch cared about making money." The loosening of the old British culture's hold on London has been driven by capitalistic urges, but made more powerful by a new tolerance for diversity and complexity. This is in fact the best hope for global culture.
Let me know what you think. Next week I will write you about Amsterdam and Paris. It is fun to be a global CEO of a PR company!
Posted by Edelman at 8:24 AM |
Comments
Richard,
Sorry we didn't talk more at the Carter party Friday night. I was reading this London essay. Had I known about it last week, I would have included my mother's history in London as well as my Dad's in Japan.
I have this great picture taken of me dressed in a Brooks shirt, a great Blazer from Paul Stuart's (the original Ralph Lauren) and a pair of phenomenal light green brushed cotton bell-bottoms recently purchased on Carnaby Street. reading - with sun glasses no less - the The Observer on the terrace at Gleneagle's.
It was a trip with great friends that lasted a week through Scotland and then the Lake Country before heading back to London and home on Eton Place. This was just before "Upstairs/Downstairs" .
I was on a brief vacation from Chase where I was learning all about Euro$ trading. So, in London, I went to see my banking cohorts for a few pints on Fleet Street. The talk was all about arbitrage and who was the best point scalper.
The London of the 70's was very upbeat despite the lousy world economy. My friends and I revelled nightly. The girls were glamorous and the food was just getting good. Chic restaurants were opening fortnightly and there was one - Walton's - that nearly hosted my demise. Friends who thought they knew where I was that night were calling St George's Hospital looking for what was left of me. The IRA had tossed a bomb right into the big picture window. It killed a couple that reputely boasted about surviving a bombing 2 months earlier at the Mount Street Bar.
Fate had it that the fussy chef could not change the reservation my mother originally made for 4 to 5 and so my mother - rather than wait for the maitre d' to come in later that afternoon - decided we should go to old reliable Mirabelle to celebrate my arrival in town.
A propos your thoughts, it's our generation that runs things for the most part. I believe it's their energy and sense of freedom and experimentation with things new that has inspired the next generation. The 60's was the magic that made us good enough to leave the legacy you speak of.
I only hope some caution is exercised and we don't fall into the quagmire that came out of the decadent, Roaring '20's. There are too many similiarities here.
Maurice
PS - you apparently know my wife Carol Bernton and our friends John and Janie Friedman. Small World, Mister Global CEO!
Posted by: Maurice Hakim at July 5, 2005 11:21 PM
And now London is going to host the Olympics in 2012. A big win for the Brits and an additional proof of the point you're making!
Posted by: Luca at July 6, 2005 8:27 PM
Luca,
And a very sad day on Thursday in view of the triumph on Wednesday. Proof that we must enjoy every day to the fullest.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at July 8, 2005 10:13 AM
Post a comment
June 18, 2005
A Vision Achieved
I will read this at my father's 85th birthday party on Friday night in Chicago. I thought you would enjoy it!
There are business people who are visionaries but relatively few who are able to say they built institutions that will last. Even fewer can claim to have invented an entirely new way of doing business. It is in this context that I will talk about my father, before his family and friends who are here tonight to toast Dan Edelman on a life of achievement and personal fulfillment.
This is a journey from a small apartment in Brooklyn to titan of the public relations business. In this city that has bred so many superstars, Dan has become the Michael Jordan of public relations. In so doing, has helped to create a global profession that is essential to commerce. He has forged a firm that is the largest independent in the world, doing important work such as the 9/11 commission report, the revolt by the Gang of Eight against management at Morgan Stanley and the launch of such innovative products as XBOX and Halo 2 for Microsoft.
Dan has always been passionate about public relations in its noblest incarnation, which is telling the truth to consumers through the media, enabling them to make more informed choices. He has been a voice of ethical behavior in our industry, chastising those who would use front organizations to hide the true intentions of the campaign or its funding sources.
Dan has advocated a key role for public relations in the marketing mix. In fact, he is the father of marketing PR. One of his earliest innovations was the media tour, taking spokespeople on the road to promote a product. You would have heard of several of his programs, for the Toni Twins, for Colonel Harlan Sanders of KFC and for California Wines using actor Vincent Price.
He is a truly global thinker whose firm is now in 43 cities in 23 countries. He bought a firm in China in 1992, then insisted that if we were to be in the market, we would stop the practice of paying journalists to publish articles. He worked on several important cross-border campaigns, including work with the Anglo French consortium to secure landing rights in New York and Washington for the supersonic Concorde aircraft.
He is an incredibly well organized man who "sweats the details" and prepares intensively for every meeting. His "Dan-o-grams", messages to staff, are the stuff of legend at Edelman. He is blunt in his criticism and follows up on each outstanding matter. Yet no one at the firm can complain because they know his work ethic and his high standards of personal performance. He is much more interested in achieving top levels of client satisfaction and outstanding results than in making money. His motto is, "Teach, Test and Correct"--all of us at Edelman are indeed his students.
Few are as well read as Dan, who pores over five newspapers a day, then another dozen magazines on the weekend. He has an insatiable need to know everything that is happening at his company and in the world at large. He even listens to CBS News Radio while he drives to and from work so as not to miss the latest breaking stories, perhaps its the journalist in him unable to quench his thirst for news.
He has made his work and his life a seamless web. His wife, my mother Ruth, has been a true partner in building our company. She is the more social and out-going one, ever the life of the party, able to connect within seconds with even the coldest corporate executive. Together they have fashioned an exciting lifestyle, of book parties for authors, fashion shows for new designers, fundraisers for politicians, and events for important charities like the Weitzman Institute. Giving back to his community has been a central mission for Dan Edelman, from service on boards such as the Lyric Opera to volunteer assistance to SOS Kinderdorf in Europe. His firm carries on his good works through volunteer assistance to Save the Children on tsunami relief and to the Global Business Dialogue on HIV/AIDS.
It is Dan's personal style that is the key to his success over the past 60 years. He hardly celebrates his victories but deeply mourns his defeats, analyzing each to be sure such reverses never happen again. He is modest in all aspects of his personal life, in his dress, often wearing six year old suits, and in his cars which he keeps for at least ten years. He is a fierce entrepreneur, the last of the Mohicans, who jealously guards the independence of our firm. His passing of the torch to me eight years ago as the president and CEO, has been a smooth transition, though as chairman he is still very much at his desk every day, deeply involved in client counseling and new business development.
He is a true family man, who has always taken the greatest pleasure from spending time with his children and now grandchildren. Inevitably, though, the spheres of influence connect, for as any visitor to an Edelman family dinner will observe, we eventually come around to a discussion of the business. Once a legend, always a legend. Here's to another great 85 years to my father and business partner, Dan Edelman.
|
|
Posted by Edelman at 3:35 PM |
Comments
For a public relations firm with a Jewish founder to take on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a client was an extraordinary step on Dan Edelman’s part. But the glue that has held the two organizations together these past years has been shared values.
Dan Edelman has always been a man of principle. His heart and his sense of right have caused Dan and his company to take on many causes that may not have been popular at the time. Values like honoring the memory of ancestors, love of God, strong family ties, integrity and honor are important to both organizations.
To the Mormon leaders in Salt Lake City, Dan Edelman is not just a highly respected public relations advisor, he is a trusted friend.
Dan, we salute you on this milestone, and hope for the benefit of many more years of your truly exceptional, professional caring.
We send our love to you, Ruth and each member of your family.
Posted by: Bruce Olsen at June 18, 2005 3:37 PM
Aside from the fact that I would compare Dan to Larry Byrd rather than Michael Jordan, that was a really great piece. I hope that Dan has a great birthday, thanks for sharing the speech.
The measure of what he has done is such that the Tony Twins campaign was so groundbreaking at the time. Hard now to appreciate, when we are spun to death.
I hope that we have a similar birthday blog ten years from now
Posted by: Ged Carroll at June 19, 2005 7:05 PM
I am in the interview process for a position with Edelman at its Beijing, China office and I cant express enough how comforting and exciting it is to think that I might have the privilege to work for a firm that was founded, built, and now entrenched in the values of a man of such principle. Even before I read Richard's most recent Blog, the reputation of his father's unquestionable integrity and ethics has always struck me as almost common knowledge among those in the professional world - this incredible accomplishment puts him in the company of very few. For aspiring young professionals (like myself) trying to make their way in this world, your story sets an example of how to do things the 'right way' ? an ideal that my generation sometimes needs reminding of. Thank you for your contributions, happy birthday Mr. Edelman.
Posted by: Adam Schokora at June 20, 2005 5:27 AM
Ged,
It was a wonderful event.
My dad does stand for the best of our business He has been a stalwart defender of PR as means of conveying truth, not spin.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at June 21, 2005 11:12 AM
Adam,
My dad will be touched to read this comment. He is a man of principle.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at June 21, 2005 11:13 AM
Happy belated birthday, Dan. Every now and then I visit the DJE site to keep abreast of the firm's remarkable growth and accomplishments since my years as a young AE in the New York office in the early '70s. It's good to know you're still behind the desk and will be for many more...God willing.
I fondly remember the Dan visits to the New York office and the quick, cheery hello at each staff member's door. Your guidance, direction, encouragement, and patience (And, oh, how I needed it!)during my tenure at DJE have taught me lifelong lessons in leadership. Thanks.
I come to the Windy City a couple of times a year--usually on a very hectic schedule--but would love to visit the offices. By the way, one of my cousins, Esther Lippman, works in your Atlanta office and loves it, I hear. Small world.
Again, all my best to you.
Brenda Katz Murphy
Posted by: Brenda Murphy at June 22, 2005 7:59 PM
Brenda,
I am copying my father on your note. You should come to visit us in NYC too. We now have 350 people at 1500 broadway. You would be proud!
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at July 6, 2005 1:27 PM
Post a comment
June 13, 2005
Say It Ain't So, Joe
Shoeless Joe Jackson was a phenomenal baseball player for the Chicago White Sox. But he was caught up in the Black Sox Scandal, where he and a few teammates conspired to throw the 1919 World Series. A young fan, seeing Shoeless Joe emerge from the courthouse, gave us the immortal line, "Say it ain't so, Joe." I have much the same feeling when I read the speech to be delivered this morning in London by Toni Muzi Falconi, a highly respected European PR executive, who is receiving the Alan Cambell-Johnson Medal for outstanding service to international public relations from the Council of International PR.
Let me give you an excerpt of the speech: "Over the last century or so the US based model of public relations practice has not only been predominant but unique. Exported and adopted, like many other models, throughout the world with considerable success, it has however failed to instill the idea of a profession with a reputable identity. In its glass half full version this model is based on marketing, on third party endorsement, on media relations, on organization of events and mostly on persuasive one to few, one to many and asymmetric communication practices. The evaluation of its effectiveness is still predominantly based on advertising value equivalent indicators and more recently on intelligent and always more sophisticated media content analysis. In its glass half empty version, the same model is also based on one way, asymmetric, manipulative spin and propaganda practices. And in many cases the two versions of the same model are thoroughly integrated, making it difficult to distinguish one from the other. The limits of this predominantly ethnocentric model of public relations appear ever so vividly in the last decade of the 20th century and the first five years of this one...The academic consensus now seems to be there is a European public relations model more committed to the enlargement and enrichment of the public sphere, communicating in public with the public, for the public."
So let's list the charges against the defendant:
1) PR is a marketing discipline
2) PR is a one to many model that is one way communication, in short just like advertising
3) PR utilizes manipulative spin and propaganda practices
4) PR as currently practiced is a uniquely American phenomenon based on hype
I'd like to address these charges systematically, beginning with a spirited defense of marketing public relations. I believe in a world of consumer choice based on full information, not one of government control and a docile nanny society. PR is a valuable means of projecting a brand into the spotlight based on objective analysis by the media. PR builds brands and credibility before advertising can truly be effective. The use of third parties such as academics and doctors is even more critical in a world lacking trust in institutions, whether business or government. Our Trust Barometer indicates that articles in media are nine times more believable than advertising! We are in a world of empowered consumers who control and are self-seekers of information. We need to satisfy their desire to make decisions based on fact, not image.
PR is no longer a one way street in the same sense as advertising. There is a critical distinction. We are not selling, we are seeking to co-create brands and corporate reputation. Smart companies are showing their products to enthusiastic consumers well in advance of launch, allowing them to be citizen journalists, listening and modifying the beta models in response to the constructive criticism. These same smart companies are making their employees their most credible spokespeople by telling them in advance of corporate intentions. Employees of Starbucks were given advance notice of the company's move to purchase of only sustainably grown coffee.
There is a threat to all of us for instance, from spin and propaganda. The behavior of the US Government in failure to properly identify the source of video news releases on behalf of the US Department of Health and Human Services is frankly unacceptable. That is a far cry from a blanket denunciation of marketing PR as a propaganda operation. There is much more use of campaign style PR, which originated in the political wars in Washington, in public affairs than in marketing PR. We should all reject the black arts of leaks and subterfuge. Nor can we accept the characterization of PR executives as spinmeisters, whether on the European side (Max Clifford) or US side (James Carville).
The disdain for a society based on conspicuous consumption is a view held by many Americans, not just Europeans. Many of us are uncomfortable with the excesses of American life, whether the halftime show at the Super Bowl or the Michael Jackson trial. Yet we are tolerant of those who hold different views on what constitutes a "good life." I will confess to watching TV shows like "America's Top Model" and understand it to be part of the hype that is modern America. I know what is happening to me as a consumer but I believe I am smart enough to discount the information being conveyed.
The implication of the speech is that PR outside of the US has a more serious purpose, "to enrich the public sphere." The logical conclusion to this thesis is that PR focused on social responsibility to stakeholders is the only worthwhile branch of the profession. In fact, in a free society with intelligent consumers operating in a wired communications environment, there is as noble a purpose in providing information that enables private decisions.
Posted by Edelman at 7:56 AM |
Comments
Seeing (however, not agreeing) the argumentation brought forward by Toni Muzi Falconi and your counter-arguments, would like to pick out one statement I think is important: “(…) The US based model of public relations practice (…) failed to instill the idea of a profession with a reputable identity.”
From my past and current experiences, I have seen (and coping with) different stages of development PR is undergoing in the various regions of the world, the self-perception of the respective PR pros in the respective regions as well as the different needs and wants clients address to PR (or don't).
Looking at the very sophisticated and diversified fields of PR in the USA, the PR profession is very confident not at least because there is a clearer understanding of the very nature of PR (or close to be clear considering its variety).
I read Falconi's statement that in Europe, PR is about to develop self-confidence by growing a more specific understanding of PR. True, the PR profession is still undergoing an identification process ('what are we to whom?') whereby its self-perception is ranging from “counsellor to the board” to “servant of sales” - or in a practical applications from "relationship manager" to "news pusher".
I agree to some extent that PR in Europe lacks a reputable identity, but mainly because it missed to become concrete and tangible to anyone outside of the PR business; the profession (I may allowed to call it such) indeed failed to make people become familiar with its concrete values and assets. I have seen no other profession in Europe where the gap between perception and self-perception is so striking obvious than in PR.
However, missing not only a reputable identity, but a reputation is definitely not the fault of an "US based model of public relations practice", but of Europe's PR practitioners. European PR - or better speaking of PR in Europe - is arguably undergoing a change process. As practitioner I am less academic, but look at this process from a corporate level: We (we PR professionals) are forced to become less egocentric, but show more responsibility - not selling PR, but rather its values.
Once we are becoming clear about our role(s), we not only are able to clearly articulate our values but also contribute in evidence to the corporate value-creation process. A cognitive performance. At that stage we shape identity for our profession (...and stop arguing about being continuously misunderstood).
Posted by: Ralf C. Kaiser at June 13, 2005 4:56 PM
Richard:
In part, the argument offered by Toni Muzi Falconi smacks of European jealousy spiced with contempt for all things American. He lists virtually all forms of public relations and lumps them together in some "American model." There will always be circus barker publicity and intellectually-driven strategic communications. We co-exist within the marketing sphere. The same could be said for the sensationalist Mirror and the serious Economist in the world of journalism. I wouldn't call that a "European model" of journalism. Rather,it is the norm worldwide, dictated by the tastes of a diverse audience.
What Toni Muzi Falconi should examine is the innovation that is occuring in U.S. public relations and PR's new relationship with journalism, thanks to the Internet in general and the blogosphere in particular. Two recent stories come to mind.
Matt Smith's piece in San Francisco Weekly "The 2005 Pulitzer Prize For Distinguished Public Relations" (http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2005-04-13/news/smith.html )finally gives the harried and under-appreciated publicist her due. The distinguished Pulitzer went to a Sacramento Bee writer for editorials that, Smith says, were instigated by a publicist for an eco group called Environmental Defense. The publicist should be given credit for her work by the Bee writer and the Columbia University Pulitzer nominating committee, says Smith.
Imagine that, a journalist actually acknowledging the importance of publicists in the generation of important news. Writes Smith:
"In an ideal journalistic world, you see, publicists wouldn't exist. Journalists would be resourceful, hardworking, and freethinking, never needing the press releases, story tips, staged interviews, and other "on-message" news that publicists provide. But because they often lack these qualities, reporters eventually wind up accepting at least some of the fare that publicists pass out, albeit with resentment and suspicion, even contempt."
Those of us who have toiled in the publicity pits know precisely what Smith is talking about. We are expected to know the media, know journalists and how they operate, know our client's story inside and out. In the best case, we are a secret weapon for the media, their invisible research arm. We are satisfied to remain behind the scenes, with no attribution.
This is a story I became aware of through a PR blog, linked to the SF Weekly story, now shared through this blog. Round and round we go. In a way, bloggers are publicists and journalists are being forced to admit that they get some great ideas from PR. Our roles, once squarely cordoned off, are shifting.
The other story is out today in The New York Times and concerns Michael Kinsley's grand experiment at The Los Angeles Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/13/business/media/13lat.html?). Not to date myself but I worked in the LA Times newsroom when it was just switching over to computers. I wrote my pieces on an old beater typewriter in triplicate carbon copy and stuffed them in a cylinder to be sucked up a vacuum tube to be set for the printing presses (that sounds so ancient!).
The LA Times was and still is known as a "writer's paper," meaning you could go on for 10,000 words about almost anything nobody cared about. Unfortunately that also means that it is not a "reader's paper," tht embraces innovation. Kinsley aims to change all that by essentially turning the editorial pages into an online wiki that can be accessed and contributed to by readers. He is breaking down the wall between reader and writer and juxtaposing their roles thanks to Internet-based communications tools available to anyone for free. He wants the editorial board to listen to readers through the wiki to find out what readers want. He wants readers to shape the newspaper of the future. Wow!
We are in an era of radical shifts in communication processes. It is happening all around us and much of it is originating in the U.S. We are taking free speech to a whole new level.
Posted by: Mark Rose at June 13, 2005 8:56 PM
Richard,
I agree with your contra-arguments, but I also understand the words of Falconi.
I am a univeristy professor in Spain. As a European citizen, and as an academic in the arena of public relations, I am very worried about the misconceptions that from time to time appear in the media, and among professionals of PR in my country, and in other, as you see.
In Spain the label PR is not used as in USA or the rest of Europe. We prefer calling it "corporate communication" or "communication management", for instance.
The problem that I afford every course with my students is that they begin the course with these misconceptions your commentary shows. It is too difficult to teach public relations because of the preconception ideas students have. They think in the same way Falconi marks. And it is so surprise for me, considering that they are univeristy students in their last course.
I recently corroborated it in an article appeared in the web of a national broadcast Spanish tv, PR is always compare and reduced with "selling products", "manipulated de media", practicing spin control, etc. For example, the article began with a comparasion between PR and gas: "PR is like gas, when there is little it is OK, but when there is a lot in the air, it smells bad". What can I say about?...
Regarding with this, I will tell you one anecdote: I put this article in the exam, because I thought "well, let me try to verify what do my students think about this, and if they have learnt something during my subject". For my pride, the vast majority of the students -they are finishing their Bachelor- made a good essay arguing that PR is the practice of managing relationships between an organization or institution and its publics. In that sense, this means that a GOOD practice or the profession, because of its nature, is trying to enable the organization to gain the publics' support, offer information and permit to the publics to make their own judgement. The main general conclusion of my students was: 'let the publics decide in a democratic society in which they obtain information and opinions from several sources'.
The question that arise in other studens, in the other part, was: why the public and professionals limit their consideration about PR with practices that could be label as poor professional practices?
I think that when a profession has so many problems refering to its social image and consideration, this profession has a real problem that all of us, practitioners and academics, have to analize and solve, offering solutions for a better education and training of the future professionals.
Telling it in other way: Why do the historical heritage, as I consider, continue affecting so much to the social consideration of the profession? Is in this root where we can find the mis-perception that PR has?
Where is the real origin of this problem?
I hope that you can understand my English...
Posted by: Elena Gutierrez at June 16, 2005 11:18 AM
Richard -
I have to thank you. A comment I posted to you won me a very nice consulting gig with a group of parents in Portland, Oregon who coach kids to compete in Destination ImagiNation.
This is among the world's largest creativity and problem-solving programs for youth of all ages, with thousands of participants in 47 states, 15 countries and Canadian provinces participating annually. It is run by a nonprofit corporation, formerly called OM Association, that was founded in 1983.
The program, based in Glassboro, N.J., helps kids build important, lifelong skills, such as problem solving, teamwork and divergent thinking.
The competition is complicated, and it changes year to year. Basically, though, teams! choose one of five "challenges" early in the year, and practice whate ver they need to do before heading to competition.
I encouraged the parents to remember the three lives of PR -- before, during and after and suggested that the kids keep a diary and write their own articles.
Amazing how people connect with one another!
As always, when you're in Portland again, let's get together.
- Jack Rubinger, 503-469-9209
Posted by: Jack Rubinger at June 16, 2005 4:58 PM
Jack,
Glad to help your business any way I can! Meet Erin she is boss of Edelman Portland and a smart lady.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at June 21, 2005 11:05 AM
Elena,
I understand your English perfectly.
The origins of this misperception for me are as follows:
Political PR gets a lot of attention, in the US especially. The Clinton spin room which went into service in 1992 campaign, really hurt the profession.
The origins of PR in show business--this is where the concept of press agentry was founded, with PR types trying to promote their movie star clients
The use of PR in controversial campaigns, such as the effort to gain support for the US Department of Education by paying conservative journalist to put spokespeople on the air.
I think we have to confront those who misuse our business, by ostracizing them or criticizing them publicly. But we also must be vigilant against those who continue to blast PR as unsubstantive and hype.
We are the bridge to the future--which is democratic decisionmaking. We need to act appropriately to guarantee our role in this future.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Edelman at June 21, 2005 11:08 AM
Post a comment
June 6, 2005
Getting a Little Respect
I still love Aretha Franklin's hit song, Respect. Probably showing my age, I can tap my toes as I belt out, "R..E..S..P..E..C..T, find out what it means to me." At two events this week, I started singing this tune. The PR industry is now being viewed by leading journalists and opinion leaders as a crucial partner in gaining public support, particularly on complex issues.
Let me tell you what Lionel Barber, US Managing Editor of the Financial Times, said at the PR Seminar on Friday (yes, he was addressing the most senior PR types in the world but Lionel says what he means...always). "PR is much more than spin. It is an essential medium to shape perceptions in the mass marketplace...In the 24/7 news cycle, the demand for such mediators (PR folks) is more important than ever...The free flow of information and simultaneous calls for higher levels of transparency mean reputation can be undone in a few days.." He went on to suggest that the "No" vote in France and the Netherlands on the EU Constitution was partly a failure of communications. "Politicians in those nations failed to invent a new vocabulary on why the EU matters...they defined the EU in terms of war and peace... and did not really ever confront the key issue of the challenge of globalization...In these situations, effective PR can help to persuade."
At the same event, Dr. Mehmet Oz, director of the Cardiovascular Institute at Columbia University Medical School, noted that the greatest challenge to the health care sector is to sell the concept of prevention, "the only effective policy...but prevention is boring. We have to take complex messages and make them fun...create engaging factoids, do myth busting.." He suggested that changing the diet of American teens, living on soda and pizza, depends on switching the paradigm from "living longer to performing better." If your teen child thought he/she could get better grades, be a better athlete or have better sex by eating more healthy foods, watch how quickly behavior change occurs!
At the CNN 25th anniversary celebration in Atlanta on Tuesday, I was privileged to be on a panel on Truth in Media, moderated by Christiane Amanpour, with such luminaries as David Mannion, editor, ITV and Jonathan Klein, president of CNN US. There was much discussion of the decline in trust in the media, with such notable events as the "dodgy dossier" story by the BBC, the "Rathergate" incident at CBS last fall and the Newsweek "koran flushing" story in May. Mannion took a strong position on the media feeling intimidated by governments who had been bullying reporters into submission. "We have to get back onto the front foot," he said. I suggested that in order to do this, the media has to explain its process and humanize itself, perhaps by allowing its producers or reporters to write blogs. Mannion took exception to this but Klein thought it was an interesting opportunity to change the current negative dynamic for the media. In fact, from a PR standpoint, what the media has done by NOT explaining its process is to leave the field to its critics, often the conservative bloggers, who define the story and leave the media simply to respond.
A final thought comes from futurist Andrew Zolli, again at the PR Seminar. He suggests that in a world of surfeit, with 40,000 brands in the average US grocery store, the consumer must be treated differently, allowed to become part of the "experience economy." He believes that capitalism must be humanized, that the sales process must be radically changed through the "participation revolution." "Information technology has given me the tools to have radical control over my experiences. I am the co-creator of experiences. I am creating shared cultural property in which any of us can participate." This is the connection of broadcast with a world of conversation. PR is key to offering the bridge to multiple stakeholders, allowing employees to explain why they love the company, suppliers to reiterate their commitment to sustainable supply chain, and so on.
With this greater acceptance comes responsibility. We are living in a time of erosion of traditional forms of power, whether government, media or business. According to Erik Peterson of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "the atomization of authority" will require leaders to embrace a "system of linkages, to establish strategic coalitions on issues." But leadership is endangered when it surrenders to expediency and there is a loss of principle. PR needs to stand for truth, continuous dialogue, transparency and outreach to multiple stakeholders. To use Lionel Barber's opening quote from George Bernard Shaw, "The greatest problem in communications is the illusion that it has been accomplished."
Posted by Edelman at 9:56 AM |
Comments
Wow, great post - as a former/always journalist (blogger now) who now works in the big agency world, this hit the right tone: good practice on both sides is vital against a media landscape that increasingly doesn't reward ethics and authority.
Posted by: Tom Watson at June 6, 2005 11:31 AM
Very interesting.
I don't know the full context, of course, but it is interesting that Lionel Barber sees PR as an important mediator of news. One of the criticisms after Enron et al was that business journalists -- especially those working for traditional franchises -- were far too cozy with their subjects and had failed to be sufficiently objective. Do you think the press should, as a matter of course, be sceptical of what comes to it "mediated" by PR?
Posted by: Tony McAuley at November 7, 2005 1:24 PM
Tony,
Sure the press should be skeptical. I believe our job is to present best case for media but not to be totally one sided and never to spin
Posted by: Richard Edelman at November 9, 2005 9:46 AM