The Lobbyist

For good or bad, It's all in the delivery!

Simply put, lobbyists are influencers. Much like the Guardian "3 little pigs" commercial, lobbyists can spin information in favour of their objective. They can actively influence legislation for the benefit of their organisation, business and/or government.

The foundations of lobbying go back to 1600 but are nowadays commonplace with (albeit basic) boards keeping an open eye, whether it's watching however is another matter. The ethical implications of lobbying draw a very fine line, regulation is at the forefront of this issue. Lobbyists can and do use spin to influence action in their favour, this is unregulated so how can it be ethical?

Trust and transparency are 2 words that are constantly reiterated in this industry. There is a big debate on the call for more regulations regarding lobbying. In a survey, the CIPR found that over 80% of respondents felt lobbyists not on a register should not have access to government.

Now let's go back a little....
Edward Bernays, considered the father of PR & propaganda, manipulated society by drawing on the ideas of French writer Gustave LeBon and his theory - Crowd Psychology. It is widely considered that Bernays made the tobacco industry the juggernaut it is today.

"On behalf of Lucky Strike, Bernays sought the advice of the psychoanalyst A.A. Brill. Brill's message to Bernays and the American Tobacco company was "freedom": sell cigarettes to women as a symbol of liberation.
Following this advice, Bernays staged a legendary publicity event that is still taught as an example in PR schools. He hired beautiful fashion models to march in New York's prominent Easter parade, each waving a lit cigarette and wearing a banner proclaiming it a "torch of liberty." Bernays made sure that publicity photos of his smoking models appeared world-wide."

Without regulation, how can we know that those lobbying aren't being detrimental to society for their own benefit? How can we really be sure that this won't happen again.

A survey on skynews this week revealed that over 80% of the public don't trust politicians. Without regulation and transparency, how can we really know if they are friend or foe?

The Gender Issue

Stereotyping gender sounds like something from a Hitchcock movie. We barely take notice of this topic, believing it is not an issue anymore. I think this is another one of societies hidden vulnerabilities.

According to the CIPR 2011, their survey revealed that 55% of women work in PR, but even when women are the majority in a given profession, it doesn’t necessarily equate into a level playing field, men are the ones holding the power and earning the top salaries.

There is no dispute that women have come a long way. "The Iron Lady" broke box office records last month, showing (amongst other issues) the struggle of a woman coming to power against the condemnation of an institution. It is a story we like to refresh. To be honest it is a story that is never likely to go away, certainly not in my lifetime. From the advent of religion, gender has and will continue to be an issue.

Many of the practitioners in the PR industry are freelancers and this career option for a woman can be beneficial when starting a family. However, in saying this, men are increasingly becoming 'stay at home fathers' and sharing responsibility of raising their children. The option of freelance dominating the industry can provide more of an explanation why it is 'influenced' by women but being 'governed' by men. Are the women in industry only in it for the short term and prefer a healthy balance of life/work ergo leaving more opportunities at a senior level for men?

I like to think there is no discimination when it comes to working within the PR industry, but I am certain this is not the case. The real winner in the 'work race' is the individual who can maintain a healthy life/work balance and this is not specific to gender or industry.

NGO & Activism

The Rise of Conscience

Now, I am going to quote from a predecessor of the MA programme, Liana on her blog: it's all gone PR. She puts into words the discipline within NGO organisations.

The third sector is large and diverse; it consists of non-profit and non-governmental organisations that exist to serve a social cause, which can also have a political or an environmental aspect attached to it. Third sector or voluntary organisations are in a continuous battle to improve the world, society and the lives of people who are part of it. The organisations’ causes range from fighting world hunger/poverty, aiding the unwell and sustaining the environment. Although these organisations have different aims, they all engage in the same activities which can be the ‘hands on’ activities like providing physical assistance, campaigning and most importantly advocating and lobbying.

The key stakeholders of charities and NGO’s are the general public, corporations and local and national governments. Having said that, the relationship of corporate companies with NGO’s can often be tense, as NGO’s are always on the lookout for company misconducts and are prepared to take action if they feel like a corporation is engaging in activity that goes against what they stand for.

Motivation
A radical outsider approach for an NGO is unlikey to approach a CEO for a meeting, but more likely to mobilise public opinion in stunts etc and have the public put pressure on the corporation to change. eg. GREENPEACE vs MATTEL


But a cheaper and more viable solution is investment into illustrations to prove their point. It has a lasting effect and promotes a more serious and 'act now' attitude.

Examples of NGO Investment in to infographics



References
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~hiscox/Spar.pdf

Crisis Management

Crisis means danger and opportunity. It is about controlling the agenda.
Messages must be truthful, irrefutable and relevant to the audience.

A lecture at UW given by Lindsay Coulson // Comms Director , focused on 11 golden rules to crisis management (I have designed a document for your perusal listing these rules, please feel free to download. I've also attached a visual example of an infographic for Crisis management in the aviation industry, provided by emergency response planning

Two points that were reiterated again and again were..

::::: CARE & CONCERN IS CRUCIAL:::::
::::: TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY IS PARAMOUNT:::::

The lecture also focused on utilising new media to get your message across in an honest, quick and credible manner. it demonstrated how:

Social media can...
* trigger a nutshell
* escalate a crisis
* complicate crisis management
* creates new circles of trust and credibility
* requires up-skilling and different resouces
* can be an asset

But

* principles of good management still apply
* should not distract from overall strategy and objectives
* Still think audience first - message and medium second
* credibility is still important (but the rules are different)
* Social media connects, but news media still has power to disseminate to masses

War Spin

In discussing war spin after a lecture with a friend of mine, she came out with this wonderful statement "it is well known that terrorism is the ultimate extension of Public Relations". Since starting this MA, the common thread throughout every module, lecture and debate is TRUST & TRANSPARENCY. When a country makes the decision to go to war, is trust and transparency applicable?

We had to debate war spin 'modern wars are spun not won - what the warring parties say is more important than what they do' naturally we were on the opposing team denying this statement. Difficult, very difficult. It's obvious that spin plays the general in terms of war, Vietnam being a perfect example.

All we could say was that victory is dependent on power, economy, strength and numbers.. Opinions cannot and should not form a presence in war. We argued without actions war cannot be initiated using the Twin Towers and Pearl Harbour as our case studies. We touched on spin being unimportant in the formation of foreign policy and this is seen rightfully as the preservation of democracy, and the breakdown of democracy and human rights is why we go to war in the first place. The action is more important than the word. We concluded by explaining war coverage only accounts for 4% of the news and whilst critics do indeed concede to the media an important role in the process of war, that role is limited to humanitarian concerns and hence the media do not have the power to end a state of war, that belongs to military strategists, a game plan and a stronger power.

Of course we lost, we didn't stand a chance. But returning to trust and transparency in terms of war, new media is the Queen of the chess board to any warring party. Whilst warring parties can, do and will continue to generate war spin, the news channels that report are losing credibility and presence, and are no longer a trusted source of information.

Is it so crazy to think that in the not so distant future, this will become an ineffective war strategy?

some links to our debate research
- Realism in Afghanistan
- Victory by Spin?
- Media spin
- media on war
- The media & Vietnam war
- Why america can't keep fighting 1% wars
- How wars are won
- Democratic peace theory