Cohen: Flacks Follow-Up
After Blasting The PR Industry's Attack On Scott McClellan, Andrew Cohen Responds To Critics
-
Play CBS Video Video On McClellan's Book And Lying CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen provides commentary on Scott McClellan's controversial new book, "What Happened," which alleges intentional deception on the part of the Bush Administration.
-
(CBS)
Of course, my essay generalized about the PR profession. That’s what 450-word essays do. I am sure there honest and accurate public relations people out there just as there are (somewhere, I suppose) honest journalists and lawyers. But the self-righteousness of the PR responses to my polemic masks a denial of the most basic truth about this silly kerfluffle: public relations people may believe they are honest and accurate and chock full of integrity in the work they do - but lay people do not necessarily share that belief. And isn’t appearance on a par with reality in the crazy world of PR spin?
The point of my essay was a simple one - that it was hypocritical to the point of hilarious for those in the PR field to point a finger at Scott McClellan, the former White House press secretary, and declare that he had violated the ethics rules that “govern” the industry. I am sure that everyone who makes a living as public relations professionals would like to distance themselves from McClellan’s shameful conduct. But the gulf simply isn’t far enough, not by a long shot, to sustain the argument. Point a finger at McClellan, sure. But point the finger at yourselves, too.
I did not generate the link between McClellan’s book and the rules of PR ethics. In a million years I would not have figured out that link. Instead, it was generated by a public relations type who late last week raised the question. Had the American Bar Association connected the dots first I probably would have written an essay on lawyers instead of flaks. And already there are scores of journalists who are wringing their hands at their own failures to ferret out McClellan’s lies. Give the reporters credit on that score-at least they are doing their own series of self-evaluations (mea culpas, really) to figure out what went wrong.
The best comment on the topic came from one of my friends, a lawyer. He wrote: “In an academic sense, your hyperbole is inaccurate and therefore, perhaps, unfair. There are certainly ethical PR folks out there. But, like lawyers and the Fourth Estate, there have been so many bad actors who for so long have abused the public’s trust, that the hyperbole pretty accurately represents the feelings of most in the public, and is sadly not that far from the truth. The PR industry needs to take some responsibility for this state of affairs (as do lawyers and the media) and work to restore the public’s faith.”
My friend is exactly right - on all counts. Anyone out there on the vanguard of the concerted effort to discredit me and my essay want to take issue with his main point? For years now, I have railed against dishonest and hypocritical and cynical lawyers and judges and politicians. Really, you can look it up. Anyone want to argue with a straight face that the PR industry is somehow immune from the same criticism? Do people in the PR world believe that it’s all beer and Skittles when they get up to a podium and that the public any longer automatically buys their spin? Some of the responses at the Sunday Morning site help me prove this is not so.
Sure, I live in a glass house and I threw a stone. I am sorry if it offended some of you. But consider it a wake-up call. For a profession that lives or dies on public perceptions you folks in public relations have as much work to do as the legal profession and the journalism profession (and the political profession) in changing the negative attitudes of your now-cynical audiences. And blaming me for calling attention to the problem - in a hyperbolic way, I freely admit - isn’t going to make things better.
Don’t be, like Claude Reins in "Casablanca," shocked - shocked! - to see yourselves painted with the same brush that over time has tarnished lawyers and politicians and advertising gurus. Instead, as a few of you suggested in your comments, use it as an opportunity to discuss among yourselves how a profession built on spin can survive with its credibility intact in a world where people are more sophisticated than ever in ferreting out such spin from the truth.
I’m sorry I compared your PR association to the Burglars’ Association of America. That wasn’t nice. But of course there is no Burglars’ Association of America. At least my animal analogies worked, though, right?
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Michelle Obama tells how her role as the First Lady has changed her perspective.





- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 80 CommentsYou sure you never worked in PR?
LAWYERS!
Posted by FlackvsHack at 11:04 AM : Jun 04, 2008
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FlackvsHack, the problem here is that telling only part of the truth, for effect, while leaving out the rest, is still a lie, as you have proven yet again with this response.
Lawyers may well be the one/ones %u201C%u201Dmodifying the releases, but professional PR writers helped in producing them without publicly contesting them thereby making them, in effect, equally guilty.
LAWYERS!
Even though I''''ve counseled management to do the right thing time and time again, there have been instances when my bosses still went against my ethical voice. It is not always the PR person''''s fault for what is stated in press releases or in the media statements and interviews.
Eilene Wollslager, PhD(c), APR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Therein lies the justification for Mr. Cohen%u2019s very accurate and appropriate article.
Press releases by business and/or politicians are almost NEVER written by just one individual and are almost always %u201C%u201Dmodified%u201D%u201D by someone in charge to say or insinuate what is best for the intended beneficiary and twisting or omitting facts (lying) are the norm.
ANY participant in producing said releases are equally guilty unless and until they PUBLICLY challenge the official wording.
What these %u201C%u201Dspin doctors%u201D%u201D (PR people), including the responses to Mr cohen%u2019s article/s, take advantage of is the fact that the truth can be told in so many different ways that they do not really need lie.
"Your poorly written and poorly written commentary ..."
You''re not really helping your case here.
To discover the Bush administration lying to the American public!
Re: "Please provide "imperical" (it''s actually spelled "empirical," by the way) evidence of PR people being "trained" to lie."
Posted by RobinMayhall
Thank you for correcting my spelling error.
As far as my evidence goes, I would like to mark this thread as exhibit "A".
I rest my case.
Um ... are you just sitting online waiting to reply to each comment in this thread?
If so, you might spend some of that waiting time by doing some research.
You wrote:
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,"
Neither. It''''s called "imperical evidence".
As you have challenged others here to do: state your evidence. Please provide "imperical" (it''s actually spelled "empirical," by the way) evidence of PR people being "trained" to lie.
PR professionals have a mercenary interest to serve their client, not the truth, not the public. Whereas reporters are also unlicensed, they do not operate with a clear conflict of interest since they can be presumed to serve the interest of the public''s need to know and their version of a story can be challenged and set straight by their peers.
Here''s some truth to ponder: Now that you''ve pissed off every PR professional around the world, try getting some help with the next real hard "news" story you need to put together outside of your own world of -- dare I offend -- ignorant generalized self-serving opinionated "essays." I wouldn''t TRUST my company''s reputation and ACCURATE information (which I have NEVER NEEDED to LIE ABOUT, SPIN or BURNISH ) in your hands as a "journalist" -- EVER.
My guess (and my hope) is that no one else will either.
What professions fall under the classification of Public Relations?
A. Public Information Officer
B. Public Affairs Officer
C. Director of Communications
D. Crisis Communications Officer
E. All of the above
F. None of the above
Answer: F, none of the above.
PR professionals, members of the media, and the general public tend to classify each position as one in the same - interchangeable. Speaking of truth, such a view would be the farthest from the truth. Each is a unique discipline.
The President%u2019s Director of Communications should not be viewed as a PR specialist. He is, in fact, the communicator of the President''s message, right or wrong, true or false, skewed or otherwise.
How could anyone assume the director of communications for a politician would be bound by any standard to tell the truth?
It''s a matter of specialization, really. Lawyers, doctors, accountants and reporters specialize in subject matters. Just as well, communicators specialize in certain areas or types of communication. Most of those areas rely on honesty to accomplish their duties. Sadly, a political spokesperson is neither burdened nor hampered by that standard.
PR= patently ridiculous
I won''t disparage your character or credentials--that would be unethical. I won''t call all lawyers liars--that would be inaccurate. I wish you had adhered to those same standards in your original commentary. What Scott McClellan did was bad for the public relations field on many levels. If he knew the truth behind the lies he propagated, then he was unethical. If he didn''t know the truth, then he was out of the "managerial" loop at the White House. Either way, he does not represent either the ideals or the reality of the public relations profession as it is practiced my most professionals. Your commentary only exacerbates inaccurate stereotypes of the profession. I could not, in good conscience, have been a PR educator for 20 years if your characterization was even half right.
Michael Smith
La Salle University, Philadelphia
Public Relations Student Society of America faculty advisor
Vice-chair, National Communication Association PR Division
I respect both journalists and public relations professionals as communicators. We need to work together. It''s sad that someone like you doesn''t recognize that.
I support: The Impeach Bush Movement!
We need a change in Washington. NOW!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 80 Comments