GMA Weather Report: Sunny for Gay Marriage & Ratings

October 10, 2012 by Leave a Comment
s SAM CHAMPION large300 150x150 GMA Weather Report: Sunny for Gay Marriage & Ratings

The PR Verdict: “A” (PR Perfect) for Good Morning America. (Pictured: Rubem Robierb and Sam Champion)

Last Friday, Good Morning America weatherman Sam Champion was singled out by his cheering co-hosts as having good news to share: He was engaged. During hearty congratulations from a crew that seems closer than most morning show personnel, it was easy to miss one slightly surprising aspect: Champion was not only engaged, but also coming out.

The announcement of Champion’s engagement fit right in with GMA’s congenial, family-like vibe, and the fact that he will  his marry longtime boyfriend Rubem Robierb did not merit the batting of a single on-air lash. Outside GMA’s studio in Times Square, Champion was met by viewers from all over America who congratulated him like extended members of the GMA family.

The hosts on Good Morning America have been positioning themselves as a family for a while now, especially since co-host Robin Roberts decided to publicly share her battle with MDS, a rare bone marrow disorder. Video segments have been devoted to her bone marrow transplant while co-host George Stephanopoulos has struggled to maintain composure as he reads her blogs to GMA viewers. And the ratings keep on climbing.

The PR Verdict: “A” (PR Perfect) for Good Morning America winning ratings with team chemistry, not sensationalism.

The PR Takeaway: Keep it in the family. Gone are the days when GMA could only dream of approaching the ratings of the mighty Today Show. Now, GMA has overtaken Today. In the wake of an uncomfortable public dismissal of Ann Curry and reports that Today host Matt Lauer is losing popularity with viewers, GMA’s folksy, seemingly sincere family approach is winning hearts – and ratings. Team chemistry is the main drawcard here, and sharing the good and the painful is what makes this more than just a slick marketing gimmick. Viewers seem to be liking it, and they keep on coming back for more.

What’s your opinion of GMA’s “family style” approach? Give us your PR Verdict!

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Celebrity, Featured News Stories, Marketing and PR, Media, Society/ trends Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sex and the Single Gurley Brown

August 16, 2012 by 1 Comment
Sex and the Single Gurley Brown

The PR Verdict: “A” (PR Perfect) for Helen Gurley Brown.

What is the PR secret to staying “on- message” and in the public eye for over forty years? The death this week of Helen Gurley Brown (HGB), former Editor- in-Chief of Cosmopolitan and author of once scandalous books, provides some clues. Since the 1970s, she never stopped preaching the same message. And women in particular, kept on listening.

Feminists were never quite sure where to place HGB. Some staged a sit-in at her offices in protest during her editorship of Cosmo, while others lambasted her “teenage immaturity.”  She certainly knew how to scandalize, claiming “I’ve never worked anywhere without being sexually involved with somebody in the office.” Did this include her boss? “Why discriminate against him?” was her tart reply. Cheeky!

Having shocked America with her thesis that unmarried women not only had sex but also enjoyed it, the NY Times recently wrote that she spent “the next three decades telling those women precisely how to enjoy it even more.” Bottom line, her aim, she said, was to tell women “How to get everything out of life — the money, recognition, success, men, prestige, authority, dignity — whatever she is looking at through the glass her nose is pressed against.” So it wasn’t just about sex after all.

The PR Verdict: “A” (PR Perfect) for HGB. Her message was simple: Kick off the conversation with headline-grabbing sex, but broaden into “having it all.” No wonder she was still listened to.

The PR Takeaway: Lasting success comes from wrapping a simple message into a wider discourse. Weighing in at 100 pounds all her life, HGB was a socio-political heavyweight, talking about sex in the wider empowered context of “having it all” and being your best. The mistress of the sound bite, HGB was famous for her motto, “Good girls go to heaven. Bad girls go everywhere.” Back in 1970, she was already speaking to the Sex & the City zeitgeist, perhaps even helping to create it. Forty years later, her message still resonates; no small achievement for someone who was supposedly just talking about sex and the single girl.

To read more about HGB, click here.

Did Helen Gurley Brown help to objectify or liberate women? Give us your PR Verdict!

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Branding, Featured News Stories, Highest Graded, Media, Society/ trends, Thought Leadership Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When Plastic Politicians Face the Nation

August 6, 2012 by 4 Comments

berlusconi surgery 150x150 When Plastic Politicians Face the NationKirchner cosmetic7 150x150 When Plastic Politicians Face the NationPUTIN SURGERY2 150x150 When Plastic Politicians Face the NationQaddaddfi surgery1 150x150 When Plastic Politicians Face the NationKIn Jong UN cosmetic 150x150 When Plastic Politicians Face the Nation

As the US elections edge closer, what is the PR obligation for a candidate to look his best? What price beauty? And who on the world’s stage might have already succumbed to the vanities of the knife?

Vanity Fair  thinks this an issue worth discussing. An article on the magazine’s website identifies who of the world’s leaders are most likely to have had “work done,” with a top Manhattan surgeon on hand to give his view. The undisputed winner, hands down, is former Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, while Cristina Kirchner of  Argentina, with her signature bee-stung lips, seems an almost certain runner-up. The jury is out on Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who just seems to take a good photo–or do Botox injections give him that rested appearance? Kim Jong Un of North Korea seems the biggest puzzle. If he has had plastic surgery . . . It really doesn’t seem to have helped. Money back for Lil’ Kim?

And what should a politician’s PR minder say when word of facial work on a head of state leaks out? What is the right PR way to handle a candidate’s cosmetic improvement?

“Medical reasons” seems the most convincing explanation, which Berlusconi initially used. He had ample air cover: Italian officials said he underwent procedures to repair damage sustained in 2009 when he was hit in the face by a protestor. But then, Berlusconi gave his own game away when he said, “Improvements are a way of showing respect to those who share your life, your family.” So the hair transplant wasn’t a result of the protester’s attack after all? He gets high marks for being forthright about going under the knife.

The PR Verdict: “B” (Good Show) for Silvio Berlusconi and his ongoing cosmetic makeover. His work is never done, but at least he gave himself ample PR cover to go back for more.

The PR Takeaway: Honesty is not always the best policy. For the Kremlin’s strongman or Libya’s former dictator, collagen puffed bee-stung lips might provoke the hardest ridicule to suppress. Electorates are inherently suspicious of peacocks, and whether for a democratic candidate or a dictator, admitting to plastic surgery seems an unlikely electoral winner. From a PR point of view, this is one case where the “Never apologize, never explain” rule might be the way to go.

To see who else might have gone under the knife, check out Vanity Fair’s gallery here.

Should politicians admit to having plastic surgery? Should they even get it, since the results are usually obvious? Give us your PR Verdict!

 

Filed Under: Featured News Stories, International News, Marketing and PR, Media, Politics, Politics/Government, Society/ trends Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

CERN-fusion: Big Bang Announcement Fizzles

July 6, 2012 by 2 Comments
godparticle CERN fusion: Big Bang Announcement Fizzles

The PR Verdict: “C” (Distinctly OK) for CERN and the God particle.

How do you explain a scientific breakthrough in a soundbite, let alone the creation of the universe? That must be the daily problem faced by the PR flak at CERN, the Geneva-based European Nuclear Research Facility. Scientists investigating the creation of the universe hit the front pages this week with a new discovery; top prize to anyone who could put it into a Tweet.

Physicists at CERN said Wednesday they have discovered a new subatomic particle which bears remarkable similarity to the Higgs boson. Apparently this gives a potential clue as to why elementary particles have mass… Still with us?

A CERN spokesman told the media, “The results are preliminary, but the five-sigma signal at around 125 GeV we’re seeing is dramatic. This is indeed a new particle.” Another scientist chimed in, “We observe in our data clear signs of a new particle, at the level of five sigma, in the mass region around 126 GeV.”  In spite of these “clarifications” the media found a way to describe the discovery–the “God particle” became the shorthand.  But does anyone understand what it means?

The PR Verdict: “C” (Distinctly OK) for CERN and the PR surrounding its discovery. While it rates top marks for global coverage and for getting key messages and data included, it’s only a “C” because we still have no idea what actually happened or what any of it means.

The PR Takeaway: When in doubt that anyone will understand your announcement, talk about benefits and not content. This is one example where the subject matter is truly too daunting for any PR flak with a clipboard and red pen. A couple of soundbites might have been useful to explain what this could mean in its practical application, if there is one. Failing that, what is the question that can now be answered but which could not be answered a week ago? That might be the tweet CERN was looking for.

Could CERN have come up with a better way to relate their discovery? Do you know what the discovery means? Give us your PR Verdict, below.

Filed Under: Featured News Stories, Media, Society/ trends, Thought Leadership Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Slaughter’s “Can’t Have It All” Doesn’t Include All

June 27, 2012 by 4 Comments
atlantic Slaughters Cant Have It All Doesnt Include All

The PR Verdict: “B” for The Atlantic and Anne-Marie Slaughter.

Has anyone NOT heard about this month’s cover story of The Atlantic? Anne-Marie Slaughter of Princeton University, former foreign policy adviser to Hilary Clinton, has written a lengthy cover story pessimistically entitled “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All.”  The article has had over 1,000, 000 hits within a week and kick-started a blizzard of discussions on the morning shows and online.

Several “A” list women have been booked to opine on the article. CBS had Sallie Krawcheck talking about her role as one of Wall Street’s heavy hitters at Bank of America. MSNBC had Gillian Tett, U.S. editor of the Financial Times. Slaughter herself has done the rounds, talking about her time at the State department and her luck in having a husband who worked in academia and therefore had more flexibility when it came to sharing childcare duties.

Slaughter’s message includes a rethinking of work practices and work/life balance. It’s not a new message, but it has caught fire. The wrinkle in her PR push? This has been almost exclusively an “A list ” discussion among women with truly impressive careers. Slaughter better be ready for the follow-up conversation concerning women who work to make the rent, and who haven’t the luxury of loftier ideals.

The PR Verdict: “B” (Good Show) for Slaughter and her article that provoked huge media discussion. Sometimes an article taps into the zeitgeist; this seems to be one of them.

PR Takeaway: Head off a backlash early in the PR process. While Slaughter has captured the limelight in part due to her impressive career credentials, she misses out on a full mark as the conversation and PR positioning seem almost exclusively directed toward “A list” women. Slaughter might want to start preparing for the (inevitable) backlash. During the chat show rounds, vary the message by including women who don’t run the IMF or work at the State Department. Sometimes work is less about personal fulfillment and more about economic necessity.

Given the current economic situation, is Slaughter’s message on target or off-base? And should she prepare for a backlash after the initial blizzard of publicity? Give us your PR Verdict, below.

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Celebrity, Featured News Stories, Marketing and PR, Media, Politics, Society/ trends, Thought Leadership Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lights, Camera, Lawsuit: The Real Drama Behind Documentaries

June 25, 2012 by 1 Comment
2012 queen of versailles 001 300x200 Lights, Camera, Lawsuit: The Real Drama Behind Documentaries

The PR Verdict: “D” (It’s a Dud) for David and Jackie Siegel.

Why does anyone agree to take part in reality TV-style documentaries? Invariably they end in tears and lawsuits. The forthcoming documentary The Queen of Versailles, about a thrillingly tacky billionaire couple that embarks on a quest to create America’s largest home, proves the point. Well before the film’s release date on July 20, lawsuits began flying.

Meet David and Jackie Siegel, the couple with royal pretensions. David is the billionaire founder of Westgate Resorts. At 77 years of age, he says with pride that Westgate is the largest privately owned time-share company in the world. His wife, 31 years his junior, marvels in the film at her crocodile boots by Gucci ($17,000), her ten kitchens, spa, and bowling alley–requisites, obviously, of any comfortable home. The dream? To create a palace to rival Versailles, in the principality of Orlando, Florida.

The dream turned nightmarish when the film’s final edits came through. Westgate, like many other business, hit the headlines for running into problems with the collapse of the property boom. The film suggests that David Siegal was in financial trouble and juxtaposes images of ongoing and then ceased construction.  Wasn’t this meant to be about business success and not business failure? We’ve been stung–call the lawyers!

The PR Verdict: “D” (It’s a Dud) for the Siegels and their delusional expectation that this documentary would be anything but problematic.

PR Takeaway: It’s all in the final cut. The longer the filming, the bigger the edits.  If Siegel wanted a documentary about his business success, he should have paid to have a promo film made about him and his firm. As the film crew followed the construction of the 90,000 square foot house, requiring months of filming, any control of the final outcome was relinquished. Not even a generous banquet with the producers in the Siegel’s Hall of Mirrors would shift the story line on this one. Their best hope is to take a leaf out of the Kardashian book and see how they can milk their new notoriety.

To read more, click here.

Should the Spiegels have expected anything other than drama, or are they getting a room with a view to reality? Give us your PR Verdict, below.

Filed Under: Celebrity, Marketing and PR, Media, Society/ trends Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The New York Times and When Not To Publish

June 22, 2012 by 3 Comments
The New York Times and When Not To Publish

The PR Verdict: C (Distinctly OK) for The New York Times. (Pictured: Times editor Jill Abramson.)

When does The New York Times decide it won’t publish something on the grounds that it might impinge on national security? It’s a question the paper of record has had to address recently. An angry Congress wants clarification, as do some readers. What to say?

The controversy stems from recent articles published in the NY TImes about President Obama’s “kill list,” as well as the U.S. government’s computer virus warfare against Iran.  Obama’s critics claim the information came directly from the White House in order to bolster the President’s tough image on national security. Obama’s PR says this is dead wrong and that the President is intent on cracking down on staff leaking classified information.

The Times‘s defense? It always consults with government officials prior to publication. The paper confirms that government officials had not asked the paper to spike the two stories in question, and it rejects any suggestion that national security was endangered. “No story about details of government secrets has come near to demonstrably hurting the national security in decades and decades,” is the official quote. Case closed for The New York Times (for the moment).

The PR Verdict: C (Distinctly OK) for The New York Times, whose response still keeps the decision to publish or not in the realm of a high level of discretion. Something more objective might help the debate.

PR Takeaway: Freedom of speech and public interest rest on a continuum of interest and competing concerns. The Times has chosen to portray the issues as relatively straightforward – dangerous to release, or not? Why not talk about the issue as a long continuum with transparency at one end and secrecy on the other. List and weigh factors that might have a bearing on publication. Think of it as a point system; it will undoubtedly be imperfect, but it would change the debate from a discretion-based decision to something more independent and apolitical.

To read more, click here.

Is The New York Times releasing information that could compromise national security, or exercising the freedom of press? Give us your PR Verdict, below.

Filed Under: Featured News Stories, Media, Society/ trends, Thought Leadership Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rodney King: Few Answers, One Important Question

June 21, 2012 by 2 Comments
Rodney King: Few Answers, One Important Question

The PR Verdict: B (Good Show) for Rodney King.

Rodney King was never an easy hero to love. The man who became a symbol of racial tensions that led to a week of deadly riots in Los Angeles twenty years ago was found dead in his pool last weekend after living a complicated life. The media has been trying hard to recap that life, but what seems to have had the most resonance in the national discussion were five simple words that became a philosophical plea.

Rodney King was no PR dream. After publishing a memoir in April, his life was an open book of drug and alcohol abuse. Arrested multiple times, he told the LA Times that he blamed politicians and lawyers “for taking a battered and confused addict and trying to make him into a symbol for civil rights.” He was in every way the reluctant activist.

While the reluctant activist in life, his death has provoked widespread debate about race relations. King’s famous quote at the time of the riots,” Can we call get along?” is the tag line that followed him. He is remembered for what he said, but perhaps he should be remembered for what he asked.

The PR Verdict: “B” (Good Show) for Rodney King and his legacy. Despite complicated personal circumstances, with one simple question he opened up a conversation that continues after his death.

PR Takeaway: Sometimes asking a question has more impact than answering one.  For a man whose chaotic ups and downs have been tracked by the media over the last twenty years, King’s press coverage was noticeably respectful and thoughtful. The statement he made at a packed news conference, pleading for calm at the time of the riots, became not only a headline but a philosophical question. A presumably unplanned PR moment, but one with staying power.

To read more, click here.

What’s your PR Verdict on the media’s coverage of Rodney King, both in life and at the time of his passing? Leave a comment, below.

Filed Under: Featured News Stories, Media, Politics, Society/ trends, Thought Leadership Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Pet Whisperer of Park Avenue

May 29, 2012 by Leave a Comment
berman The Pet Whisperer of Park Avenue

The PR Verdict: “B” for Dr Berman and his PR Profile.

The latest edition of Town and Country magazine includes a profile of the apparently famous Park Avenue veterinarian, Lewis Berman, DVM.  Described as the preferred confidant of Manhattan’s “elite dogs and cats for more than fifty years” the magazine enthuses that “pets and their owners both seem to look forward to visits with Dr Berman”.

For more than fifty years, Dr Berman has looked after the pets of the boldest of bold-faced names.  Andy Warhol had a dachshund called Amos, Lauren Bacall a King Charles Spaniel while the Shah of Iran had a Great Dane.  Writer Lillian Hellman was more devoted to her French poodle than other people.  “She didn’t like people that much”, he offers.

The lengthy interview talks of his early days in the business as well as his family and charitable causes.  Described puzzlingly in the article as “having a pleasing attractive face with unremarkable unexaggerated features” the article reads like a prelude to something bigger.  Is a book, TV program or franchise in the offing?

The PR Verdict: “B” for Dr Berman and his PR Profile.  We may be cynical but was the ground being laid for stage two of a publicity drive? All the ingredients were there but in the end no clue was given.

PR Takeaway: Credibility is key to building a professional profile.  Dr Berman seems to have mastered the art, even if unintentionally.  Positioning himself as the dog and cat whisperer to Manhattan’s elite, he struck the right note of experience, wisdom and geniality.  Even if Dr Berman doesn’t intend to start his own franchise, create a shampoo line or launch a DVD/book on pet care, the article might flush out interested buyers of the business, if he is tempted that is.

The article is not available online. Print edition only. For a link to Town and Country click here.

 

ANY WHY NOT?

Interested in a London conference on rebuilding reputations in financial services?  This one day conference offers insights from nine heavyweight brands that have worked to rebuild their reputations.  Click here for the early bird offer:  Rebuilding Reputation in Financial Services

Filed Under: Celebrity, Featured News Stories, Society/ trends Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Ruffled Feathers of Opera News

May 23, 2012 by 3 Comments
operanews The Ruffled Feathers of Opera News

The PR Verdict: “D” for the Metropolitan Opera and Opera News.

What a puzzling (and entertaining) fuss at Opera News, the venerable classical music magazine, published by the Metropolitan Opera Guild, the fund raising affiliate of NY Metropolitan Opera.  Feathers have been ruffled by the magazine’s decision to no longer review the productions of its parent, New York Metropolitan Opera.

Peter Gelb, the controversial head of Met Opera gave an interview to the NYTimes confirming the decision was made in collaboration with the Met’s Guild.  The Editor of Opera News then gave perfunctory confirmation that the magazine is no longer reviewing Met Opera productions.  He also added that no other opera company has been banished from its review pages.

Whispers suggest that the policy is prompted by the Met, annoyed with recent negative reviews of its own productions.  Conspiracy theorists are claiming censorship.   Whatever the case, negative reviews of costly Met Opera productions, published in an affiliate magazine, hardly enhance fund raising.

The PR Verdict: “D” for the Metropolitan Opera and Opera News.  The diva in this case should have let the understudy do the talking.

PR Takeaway.  Who explains an issue to the media is as important as what is said.  To minimise the suggestion that there was undue influence from the Met, the ONLY person who should have spoken to the media was the editor of Opera News . The key message might have been that reviews would no longer be published to minimise conflicts of interest with current fundraising drives.  This was one case where Peter Gelb, General Manager for Met Opera, would have been better advised to be unavailable for comment and let the editor of Opera News do all the talking.

UPDATE : Since publication of the NYTimes article,  Metropolitan Opera has reversed its decision. The Met issued a statement late yesterday that it has changed its decision “because of the passionate response of the fans.”

Filed Under: Media, Not for Profit /Charitable Giving, Society/ trends Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts
Newer Posts»