Who's using (and needs) P.R. now?

Who needs P.R.?

Britney Spears, surely. But she needs “away time” to deal with her “issues,” not more “publicity.” (And besides, she probably needs a new publicist at this point, too.)

Don Imus? True. Though his plan to contest his firing will keep his name in lights - and that’s not a good thing, either. There are other, more productive ways to rehabilitate his image, such as focusing on his charity work.

But Tommy Hilfiger got the best boost in recent weeks by using P.R. to counter a myth.

He appeared on Oprah Winfrey's show for the first time, ever. Contrary to a long-time Urban Legend, he didn’t get thrown off the show many years ago because he said his clothes were "only for rich white people.”

In fact, the May 2, 2007 appearance was his first. So ignore the email spam saying otherwise when you get it (as I have on many occasions) saying he's some kind of bigot.

Also, I’ve recently heard that a P.R. firm was hired to rehabilitate Katie Couric by having her go on TV and radio to preempt her firing from CBS news. She apparently is balking at having to “campaign” to save her job, and refused several appearances. Not a good move, given her ratings.

All of these people need a degree of Public Relations help. Some need to work out some issues in their lives beforehand. P.R. people can't make things right unless the client is making them right, first. An apology is a good start when you mess up, but it's not credible unless you're actually apologizing from the heart and making changes in your life, too.

Gibson's meltdown - from a PR perspective

The damage to Mel Gibson's career cannot even be fully imagined just four days after his drunken, racist tirade during his arrest by Malibu police.

Fairly or unfairly, Gibson has always come across as rather unbalanced, and perhaps that's because of some of his film roles. But his personal life has, like it or not, become fodder for public consumption long before this lastest incident.

His blockbuster Passion of the Christ film sparked rumors that he was an anti-semite, and it's easy to get fired up over the "hidden" messages there. He argued convincingly at the time of its release that he was not a hater of Jews, and that the film simply told a story as it had been told for centuries. Most accepted this.

From a PR perspective, Gibson's apology (and then his OTHER apology) were the expected responses, as was the journey into rehab - ala Patrick Kennedy - and it seemed just about as contrived. And apologizing over and over again sounds like the Clintonian string of apologies for the Monica mess, which became at once more and more painfully detailed and dripping with contrition.

The problem is that many in Hollywood already hated him because of his success outside the system - remember he self-financed the blockbuster "Passion" - and because he wore his religion on his sleve. The fact that this religion wasn't Liberal Secularism was a cardinal sin in their eyes. Strike one against Mel.

However, he has now alienated many conservative Christians who will find his drinking, swearing and carousing unacceptable, and many Jewish people who were inclined to disbelieve that he really harbored hatred. (Whether he really does is open to debate. One commentator called liquor "truth serum" that opened what was in one's heart. That's debaable.)

The real problem is Mel Gibon's "base" is the conservative Christian. Alienate that base, and you're in more trouble than even George Bush, who must be secretly thrilled that someone now has lower approval ratings than he does.

Personally, of course, it's sad to see him self destruct this way, but no less sad than seeing the numerous other actors who have destroyed themselves with drugs, sex, alcohol or eating disorders. I can't imagine living in Hollywood among all of this disfunction.

If Gibson wants to claw his way back to win the hearts and minds of his fans, he needs to do far more than apologize several times.

I suspect a great role for his "comeback" would be a fictional or historical figure who hits rock bottom and finds his way back to the light, so to speak.

If I was his agent, I might say "Pick your favorite saint. In a year, after you're sober, you'll be doing that movie, and you will be in the starring role."

How to win elections

President Bush isn't always the most articulate person in the political world, but once in a while, he comes up with a good line.

Today's news conference in Chicago was one of those times.

He was asked about his low poll numbers, and then whether he was hurting candidates he was trying to help by simply showing up. Obviously a biased question, meant to embarrass him. He didn't really take the bait, and within his answer, said something close to this (I'm paraphrasing, pending release of a text):

“The way you win elections is to actually believe in something.”

Bravo! He's exactly right, and coming from a man who has won two elections for governor and two elections for president on that philosophy. It's amazing to me the number of  people who think they can run for office without having a set of core issues on which to run. 

Before announcing for office, it is a good idea to set down your core beliefs on paper, and then formulate them into a few key reasons WHY you are running.

Ronald Reagan probably didn't need to perform that exercise when he set out to run for president, because his entire career has been formed around a few simple principles:

- Less government regulation
- Cut taxes
- A strong national defense
- Stand up for traditional American values

Agree or disagree (and I happened to agree!) everyone knew what he stood for, and nearly everyone admired that about him. 

Someone without a firm belief system, or someone who fails to make it the 
cornerstone of their campaign, is simply asking to lose.