Comments on: Cohen: Flacks Follow-Up

After Blasting The PR Industry's Attack On Scott McClellan, Andrew Cohen Responds To Critics

[irliberal]

Hmmm that was the silliest non-apology I''ve ever seen. A follow up article that was contained six words: "I am sorry, I was wrong.", would have been faster and far more appropriate. No, no, no. Not Andrew. He can''t just say he screwed up and leave it at that. No. He has to justify where he got his talking point, and of course, blame his audience as well. Furthermore, this:

"Anyone out there on the vanguard of the concerted effort to discredit me and my essay want to take issue with his main point?"

...had me busting a gut. Andrew thinks he''s the victim of a vast conspiracy to... do... what? LOL Poor Andrew.

[feelfree4u]

Attn- PR hacks:

If you are going to come to the CBS Newz site to argue your case, you had best bring your "A"-game, and pack a lunch.

[annbarks]

Obviously, you''re much more interested in arguing than communicating. That must be the difference between whatever legal background you have and how you''d have approached this if you had any public relations training.

You compound your lack of integrity by now being gleeful at your lack of knowledge and defensive about how quickly we saw through your naive opinions.

[feelfree4u]

Re: "PR people are trained to be slickly untruthful or half-truthful. I''m not certain if this was stated out of ignorance or malevolence,"

Posted by JSchulerAPR

Neither. It''s called "imperical evidence".

[jschulerapr]

Like others, I was disgusted with Mr. Cohen''s stereotype of PR pros. And while his follow-up did little to apologize for the gross mass characterization of practitioners in an industry, I did detect a hint of backpedaling. I%u2019m afraid that may be as far as he will go in his remarks. Regarding two points he made: 1) "PR people are trained to be slickly untruthful or half-truthful.%u201D I%u2019m not certain if this was stated out of ignorance or malevolence, but I can tell you that I was never trained in this vein in my undergraduate studies, during my 10 years on the job or in my studies to become an accredited professional. And if I were ever asked to lie or tell the half-truth, I%u2019d walk. Whether Mr. Cohen would agree with me or not, I don%u2019t know, but my integrity is worth more to me than the next paycheck. 2) %u201CIt was hypocritical%u2026for those in the PR field to point a finger at Scott McClellan%u2026and declare that he had violated the ethics rules that %u201Cgovern%u201D the industry.%u201D And it was his friend who said, %u201CThe PR industry needs to take some responsibility for this state of affairs%u2026and work to restore the public%u2019s faith.%u201D I ask you this: by PR pros questioning Mr. McClellan%u2019s ethics, don%u2019t you think the intent was to do just that: to take some responsibility for the industry? To point out one of its own not adhering to the ethics is not hypocritical, it%u2019s responsible and forthcoming. Jamaison Schuler, APR

[feelfree4u]

Re: "They are the Howdy Doody and someone else is Buffalo Bob..."

Nice one IOWEIGN!

I''ll bet Howdy never "lied".

[ioweign]

Collectively, they don''t seem to be able to debate their way out of a paper bag

- They seem to think that they can make sweeping, unfounded claims like, "...public relations professionals who are just that - true professionals? They are the majority", and expect that we will accept that claim without any supporting evidence. Or by "true professionals", were they referring to professional liars? That, I would accept without challenge.

Posted by FeelFree4U at 08:36 PM : Jun 02, 2008

They don''t need to think.

They are the Howdy Doody and someone else is Buffalo Bob...

[feelfree4u]

I have learned several things from these articles.

Among them:

- PR folks seem to be far more absorbed with their own egos and selfishness, than they are about the heinous and countless crimes of the regime, and about our country''s steady creep, now approaching a gallop, towards fascism

- Many of them appear unable to comment on a news site without flooding the site with the same comment, over, and over, and over

- Collectively, they don''t seem to be able to debate their way out of a paper bag

- They seem to think that they can make sweeping, unfounded claims like, "...public relations professionals who are just that - true professionals? They are the majority", and expect that we will accept that claim without any supporting evidence. Or by "true professionals", were they referring to professional liars? That, I would accept without challenge.

[derville-2009]

Dear Andrew,

I invite you to consider that public relations practitioners'' testaments to their veracity was one way that practitioners are attempting to improve the reputation of the public relations industry.

For a discussion among public relations experts about other ways we seek to improve the reputation of the industry, see Shel Holtz''s blog post titled "How to Shine a Light on the Real, Ethical Work of PR" and the comments area at blog.holtz.com.

[alaskapr]

I sincerely doubt that your comments would be accepted as hyperbole in a court of law. You are, afterall, defending your comments as truth, not hyperbole. Try a different "spin."

[hubbs63]

No, Mr. Cohen, we''re not shocked. We know we need to work on telling the story of our own profession and why we''re proud to be in it.
We just sort of, somehow, mysteriously, expected a little more from someone who is supposedly a professional journalist in the national spotlight.
You must be spending too long in your office; might I suggest you get out into the rest of the country and meet those journalists and public relations professionals who are just that - true professionals? They are the majority.
Kathy Hubbell, APR, MS, Fellow PRSA
Missoula, MT

[derville-2009]

Dear Andrew,

I invite you to consider that public relations practitioners'' testaments to their veracity was one way that practitioners are attempting to improve the reputation of the public relations industry.

For a discussion among public relations experts about other ways we seek to improve the reputation of the industry, see Shel Holtz''s blog post titled "How to Shine a Light on the Real, Ethical Work of PR" and the comments area at blog.holtz.com.

[feelfree4u]

Re: "Isn''t journalism simply spin of another sort, presenting information through an extremely subjective lens while pretending a commitment to objectivity (i.e. the truth)?"

Posted by octoberjazz

Nope. That is called "propaganda", not journalism.

Welcome to See BS Newz!

[octoberjazz]

Isn''t journalism simply spin of another sort, presenting information through an extremely subjective lens while pretending a commitment to objectivity (i.e. the truth)?

The most telling comment in Cohen''s rebuttal is that the "best" comment came from a friend -- someone who, like him, probably breathes the rarefied air of smugness high upon a horse.

[cindyschutt]

I''ve worked for 25 years in the PR industry building a business built on my professionalism and reputation. Now I give all I have working for nonprofits to get the word out about leukemia, homeless teens, affordable housing for the mentally ill and scholarships for needy kids. I don%u2019t lie. I do a good job. I work hard. And I%u2019m a decent person. As I''m sure my colleagues would agree, it%u2019s sickening and infuriating to be called a blatant liar, a person with no integrity, a %u201Cflack.%u201D You should be ashamed of yourself, Mr. Cohen. And that%u2019s the truth. - Cindy Schutt, APR

[feelfree4u]

abha2,

Re: "Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations"

Thank you for reminding me of this man. He was truly one of the most skilled and incideous liars of all time.

Re: "...said it best: Public relations is the engineering of consent."

Such as in lying a country into accepting a lie-based, self-defeating, and criminal war of aggression, contrary to its own interests.

This man, Bernays, is a monument to the damage that can result from the lies of professional liars.

[td1285]

I heard your original commentary about how public relations practitioners are liars and read your follow up rebuttal about those who are indignant about your comments. I wanted to reply to you immediately but restrained myself, because I wanted to give my reply a little more thought than you did your commentary. Your comments are just following the tabloid trash line that is being foisted on the public by CBS, so I guess I shouldn''t have expected more from you. By overstating your case, you have caused segments of the public relations profession, and the viewing public, to lose faith in you and your ideas. That, by the way, is what journalists and PR professionals have to sell -- honesty, integrity and trust. You have diminished your storehouse of trust by your ill-conceived comments and cutesy remarks. The bottom line is that you totally missed the point. McClelland is not a public relations professional. He is a politician who was placed in a public relations post without any experience. If you will note, most of the "spinners", a term coined by politicians, are from the political world. Sure, there are a few PR people who don''t operate the way they should, but that happens in all lines of business. In all of my 50-plus years as a PR practitioner for large corporations and agencies, I was never asked to lie and would not have done so if asked.

[abha2-2009]

The dissed PR professionals and Mr. Cohen are arguing about bad apples when the real issue is the trees in the forest Most people working in public relations do their jobs with care and integrity. They are right to point out that the scumbag spin doctors Mr. Cohen describes are not likely to be very effective%u2014at least not for long.

However, we should not be comforted by good intentions and ethical decision making of individuals. We should focus instead on the actions of the powerful institutions on whose behalf they work.

And better still on the logic of the forest: a capitalist democracy. It%u2019s no accident that the practice of public relations was born in America. Edward Bernays, the %u201Cfather of modern public relations,%u201D said it best: Public relations is the engineering of consent.

[camagrama]

I wonder how Gil Schwartz, head of CBS public relations would respond to Cohen''s charges. Does the CBS PR operation lie? Is CBS a duplicitous organization because they devote so many resources to an in-house PR department? By Cohen''s logic, CBS can not be trusted. It''s a sad commentary that CBS doesn''t stand behind its own PR people. Gil: where are you? Stand up! Speak up!

[jandprprof]

Just a month ago I had a conversation with my students who were just finishing their first course in public relations. These students were a mixture of business, mass communication, and political science majors. What I learned was personally heart-warming and globally unsettling. One student, a business major, told me he respected me because I spent the entire 15 weeks beating into him that PR was about mediated shared meaning founded on truth. He said he had no idea he had to tell the truth in PR before he started the class. He thought his PR experience was going to be akin to a creative writing course for the business world. The rest of the class seemed in agreement. I was glad I could help set the record straight for these students, but the real problem lies elsewhere. All of those leaders of industry-in-training, all of those future pols, have a misguided view of PR, and those are the ones who will one day be signing the public relations officer''s paycheck. Public relations is equally duty-bound to the audience as it is to the organization. And, yes, I believe my idealism would get me fired if I was not in an ivory tower. The root of PR''s PR problems lies with intent and influence of the client or the management, not the trained and ethical practitioner.