Baring all

A wonderful article by Kira Cochrane in The Guardian looks at how even the highest paid, successful and talented female stars in Hollywood like Nicole Kidman, Kiera Knightley and Scarlett Johansson take their clothes off for high-profile magazines like GQ, Vanity Fair and Esquire. Is that the price they must pay for publicity? Cochrane wonders if that is what it takes for the women to remain stars, even though they have careers that most actors would kill for. It sure doesn't guarantee positive PR, as is evident from the recent controversy about Knightley's slim figure. So why is baring flesh for magazines and advertisements the only sure-fire route to success?

Paying tribute

Jane Tomlinson was a true hero, an inspiration for millions of people around the world. She fiercely fought cancer for 17 years, battling back the disease for seven years when she was given just six months to live. She never gave up, holding out hope not just for herself, her family and friends but also for other sufferers of terminal illnesses and their loved ones. She ran several marathans, participated in some of the toughest triathalons and cycled across Europe and America to raise £1.75 million for charity. She did it all, often despite chemotherapy, so that, in her own words, in future people wouldn't have to hear a doctor tell them that they have only six months to live. She received an honorary degree and PhD, an MBE, CBE and many other awards. Sportsmen and women, royalty and even politicans admired and respected her. She acheived all this by being honest, courageous, strong, and determined. All she wanted was to be with her family and watch her children grow up. That is why she received worldwide publicity which helped her raise funds for charity. She wanted to make life better for cancer sufferers, and so others responded to her calls for help. She will be deeply missed. Her life was a ray of hope.

The Camilla controversy

It was a another Royal public relations disaster. Diana's sons invited Camilla to attend their mother's memorial service on August 31, her 10th death anniversary. The presence of most members of the royal family (excluding the exes) would have portrayed a united front on the one issue that divided the household and created a rift between the
Queen and her subjects.

But Diana's supporters were not content to let sleeping dogs lie. Many went public about their outrage at the person they (and Diana) blamed for her failed marriage. The Queen ostensibly stepped in and gave her permission for Camilla's absence from the service (incidentally at the same church where Camilla married her first husband).

Whether she actively discourage Camilla from going or merely acted to save her further embarassment is not entirely clear. Neither is how much of a part Prince Charles had to play in the controversy -- did he want her at his side or did he prefer her to remain in the shadows? Rumours suggest he encouraged her
to agree to attend, although she had her misgivings.

In the end, Diana's memorial service was marred by the Camilla controversy. She, on the other hand, is reportedly miffed with her husband and is off on a Mediterranean holiday in a few days with some family and friends -- but without Charles.

The Royal PR machine is studiously avoiding any further comment on the matter and are understandably keen to play down the issue. When will they ever learn that when Diana and Camilla are mentioned in the same story, there is bound to be discord?

Random Musings

Brad Pitt has been playing father to one of his two daughters in New York's Central Park recently, while partner Angelina Jolie visits Iraq. Zahara was seen accompanied by her stuffed penguin, her adoptive father and a bunch of bodyguards. But what escaped the attention of most star-struck fans was the handsome Hollywood star's new tattoo on his left forearm.

It was none other than Oetzi the Iceman, a naturally mummified body dating back to 3,300, BC, found buried in the Alps bordering Austria and Italy in 1993. Certainly makes for a refreshing change, although perhaps it won't generate as much publicity as Beck's tattoo in Hindi of his wife's name (spelt wrongly), but it's sure to create a fair share of curiosity. Pitt's pulicist says he has "no idea" about the rather strange choice of design.

Philip Pullman fans will be waiting with so small measure of anticipation (not all of it positive) for the first in His Dark Material trilogy from the New Line Cinema stable. But the Golden Compass has already been mired in controversy. Not entirely unexpected, considering the essentially atheistic and anti-god concept.

"The heroes include a pair of gay angels, a band of witches, and a lapsed nun who traded her vows for a life of sex and science; among the villains is a zealous priest who doubles as an assassin. A successful resolution of the plot requires God to be euthanized and an adolescent girl to give into sexual temptation," Jeff Bercovici aptly puts it.

According to The New York Times, "the books' religion-touched heavies were massaged into more generalized, authoritarian villains". But what would be the point? It would almost be like Harry Potter fighting an even-tempered Voldemort who never kills, merely stuns his victims.

"The books' theology (atheology?) is integral to their appeal; without it, they're just stories about talking bears and a plucky street urchin. And it's not as though controversy doesn't also sell tickets. Just look at The Da Vinci code which managed a similar worldwide take despite terrible reviews. Shouldn't a tie go to the author?" writes Bercovici. I couldn't agree more.

Dubious honour

It's a dubious title for Britain's most famous spin doctor, but it's certainly winning him more free press coverage. "Alastair Campbell's book on his time in government is selling well but his first literary accolade is an unwelcome one. The Blair Years has topped a list of the books most often left behind in hotel rooms," writes the Independent.

"In the rather less coveted list of books left behind by hotel guests, Mr Campbell was in the company of people he might prefer to avoid. Piers Morgan, the former editor of the Daily Mirror, with whom he had plenty of run-ins during his years in Downing Street, was runner-up with his book Don't You Know Who I Am? and Katie Price, better known as the model Jordan, was third with her A Whole New World," the newspaper goes on to add.

Surprisingly (or not, for those who failed to failed to retrieve the weighty book), number 10 on the list is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. If you left behind your copy in a distant hotel room and would like to refresh your memory before (or after) reading the last in the series, the best bet would be your local Travelodge (since they conducted the study, I'm guessing they have more than a few copies clogging up the lost-and-found room). I doubt they would ask for identification.

Pulped Faction is the story's headline on Channel 4's website.

Battle to regain reputation

Two countries as different from each other as possible, yet both struggling to regain there reputations for being great nations. At the heart of the matter for both the US and China is one of the biggest PR wars they have ever had to wage...

USA
The domestic PR war over Iraq is about to begin in earnest.
When the war in Iraq did not progress as quickly as the Administration had hoped, President Bush resisted comparisons with Vietnam. In 2005, he said, "I don't see the parallels."
But as this discretionary war has dragged on and on, he has relented. Almost a year ago, he conceded in an interview that the escalation of violence last October might be comparable to the Tet offensive, which marked a turning point in Vietnam.
Wednesday Bush is going one step further.
In a speech to the VFW Missouri, Bush will argue that Iraq is like Vietnam ... but unlike Vietnam, we shouldn't pull out because our departure won't stop the killing. (Reminder: he did not serve in Vietnam.)
In other words: let's think of Iraq like a mulligan, a do-over: we caused a bloodbath by leaving Vietnam so if we don't leave Iraq, there won't be a bloodbath.

Read the story Bush Compares Iraq With Vietnam; PR Battle Begins

China
China has launched a new campaign to restore international trust in its products with a weeklong television series defending the country's safety standards.
The new television campaign titled "Believe in Made in China" follows discoveries of high levels of chemicals and toxins in a range of Chinese exports from toys to toothpaste and fish.
The first program in the series aired Sunday on China Central Television's economic channel and featured the head of a quality watchdog criticising the recent furor over the quality of Chinese exports as "demonising" China's products.
"Personally, I believe it is new trend in trade protectionism. Although recalls are necessary, it is unfair to decide that all products made in China are unqualified," Li Changjiang, director of China's General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, said on the 90-minute segment.

Read the rest of China's tainted-products scandal gets PR makeover

Power to the people

Universities, government agencies, corporates, big organisations, politicians even media companies -- in short, people and institutions in power have abused it at some point. Not always are there reliable measures in place to keep checks and balances on the misuse of power, particularly when it comes to the spread of false information in a deliberate attempt to hide the truth and dupe the public.

One Wikipedia fan has however come up with an ingenious method to name and shame the worst of the offenders. Try the WikiScanner and delve into the dark secrets of the online misinformation campaigners. Just type the name of the organisation you wish to find out about, or alternatively the Wikipedia entry you are interested in. Lo and behold, there appears a list of IP addresses. A click or two away is the list of entries where anonymous edits were made by the online offenders.

PR is good for companies and necessary for the dissemination of information through the right channels. But using spin to hide uncomfortable truths from the public sphere is unconscionable. The tool devised by Virgil Griffith will go a long way in restoring the faith in Wikipedia and the Internet, while damaging the reputations of the individuals and institutions that hoped to gain favourable publicity through underhand means.