Author: Jim Eltringham

Political consultant specializing in grassroots mobilization, online media, and public relations.

McChrystal unclear

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

That General McChrystal’s rift with his commander-in-chief was aired in a Rolling Stone interview is a troubling sign for more reasons than simple insubordination.

NewsBusters notes the airing of previous greivances – although none of the situations are quite as bad as McChrystal’s.  But the Washington Post draws an interesting comparison that puts the real problem in context:

Much of McChrystal’s career was spent in the military’s secretive special operations community, which has little experience dealing with the press… The general’s relationship with the press contrasts significantly with that of Gen. David Petraeus, who spent a far larger segment of his career in Washington and is far more practiced in dealing with reporters and the civilian leadership.

Disagreements are not wrong, but clumsily airing those disagreements is.  Unless he’s angling for a dismissal and job as a military expert talking head (or a spot on the GOP ticket in 2012), McChrystal’s misstep seems to come from his lack of savvy in how his comments would look in print.

Combined with the previous criticism, the clear trend is that PR expertise is becoming a requirement fgor military leadership – along with an aptitude for killing people and breaking things, which is the core competency of the military.

Or at least, it’s supposed to be.

The smart move would have been to turn down the interview with Rolling Stone.  In this failing, McChrystal can’t be alone – surely there were several more information officers who thought the interview would be a good idea.  The concept of the “celebrity general” isn’t new – heck, we have one printed on our most-used currency, and several Presidents have followed.  But as with any project or campaign, the folks who speak to the press should be ready to do so – and not pushed out there because of an overly-politicized media environment that seems to demand that everyone have something to say.  It isn’t fair to the general, the troops, or the people watching the news.

It’s one thing to dress a spokesman up in a warrior’s fatigues for the cameras; it’s much more difficult to stuff a warrior into the civilian role of PR director.

Wait… who’s running in the actual race?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

In this commercial, Sen. Barbara Boxer is seeking reelection by fending off Sarah Palin – who not only isn’t running, but isn’t from California.

Meanwhile, Carly Fiorina is not only challenging Boxer, but Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Countless Republicans will take to the campaign trail in the next few months railing against President Obama, countless Democrats will dredge up the ghost of George W. Bush.

It’s an accepted (and effective) campaign tactic, made especially famous in 1994 when Republicans used then-new technology to morph images of opponents into Bill Clinton.  So why stop here?  Why not run against Jimmy Carter?  Richard Nixon?  Maybe President Mitchell from Dave (the real one, not the one that was actually Dave)?

3 more books that would make good movies

~ Jim Eltringham ~ 1 Comment

On today’s edition of his podcast, Matt Lewis and I talk about movies – and, like the guys from the Muppet Show who complain from the balcony, we do our share of kvetching because all the big summer blockbusters are either sequels (like Shrek 4 and Sex and the City 2) or remakes of iconic pieces of 1980s pop culture (like the A-Team and the Karate Kid).

Earlier this week, news broke that filming had actually started on another adaptation – a silver screen version of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.  Aside from having a network of near-guaranteed customers through the tea party movement, Atlas Shrugged is a great story and Rand’s a good, vivid writer.  Outside of being 1100 pages, it’s a book made for the movies.

Matt and I ran out of time before we could get to some other books that ought to be in pictures:

Advise and Consent

We started talking about this briefly.  Yes, this would technically be a remake, but the 1962 adaptation of Allen Drury’s 1959 novel about the politics of personal destruction missed the mark so completely that it deserves a second look.  Set against the backdrop of a Cold War (which the Soviet Union is apparently winning), Drury’s original work involves a Secretary of State nominee with alleged ties to the Communist party.  Drury’s work is decidedly character-driven, and the central theme is how people sometimes get lost in the machinations of winning and losing in political battles.

Witness

This has nothing to do with Harrison Ford or the Amish.  Whittaker Chambers was an editor for Time Magazine who risked his credibility and livelihood to out Alger Hiss as a former Communist.  (The Congressional hearing actually served as the inspiration for Advise and Consent.)  But Chambers’ life leading up to that – acting as a member of the Communist party and establishing Soviet ties – is actually thrilling, as is his and his family’s middle-of-the-night desertion from the Communist Party.  Because of the histrionics of Rep. Joe McCarthy, the extent of Soviet operations in America is one of the under-told stories of the twentieth century.  Obviously, it didn’t work out so well for them (with the only major casualty being Apollo Creed), but it is fascinating that they tried.

Reagan’s Revolution

This one might be a made-for-HBO joint, because of a limited appeal, but political junkies would eat up Craig Shirley’s account of Reagan’s 1976 primary challenge to former President Gerald Ford.  The decision to challenge a sitting President from your own party is difficult enough, but the Reagan campaign had plenty of issues, such as early fundraising challenges and lack of institutional support.  This could be educational – many Americans don’t understand how the Presidential primary process works – but, like any hotly contested primary, it makes for a great story.

Of course, based on Hollywood’s interest in making anything original or non-3D, I expect to see trailers for Airwolf, Go-Bots, and a remake of the remake of Dukes of Hazzard before Witness comes to a theater near you.

But we can hope, right?  What favorite books would you like to see made into a movie?

No one likes citizen journalism

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

This week may be called anti-indie journalism week.  Consider these three stories:

Each story, in its own way, is based on a lack of understanding of the modern media landscape.  But door number three is the most egregious.

Risen’s comments about bloggers could be appropriate – the downside of a media universe with more outlets is that there are more outlets tat just spew crap, and it is up to the reader to be more discerning.  He doesn’t summarily dismiss the concept of blogs, though he does come off as an arrogant schmuck.  Similarly, the “student” who questioned Etheridge never identified himself as a reporter, which would have been the smart thing to do.

The FTC, on the other hand, is just way out in left field.  The document, which outlines options such as granting tax-exempt status or other allowing reporters to copyright “hot news.”  Really, though, these recommendations are simply reactions to the fact that print newspapers have fallen on hard times:

Although many of the issues confronting journalism cut across different news media platforms, such as broadcast television and radio, most of the discussion in this document will use the perspective of newspapers to exemplify the issues facing journalism as a whole. Studies have shown that newspapers typically provide the largest quantity of original news to consumers over any given period of time. We include within the term “newspapers” online news websites run either by an existing newspaper or by an online-only news organization.

That an online news aggregator like the Drudge Report would seem to count as a newspaper to the FTC isn’t the biggest problem.  The big problem is the concept of establishment journalism, which is the bedrock of the FTC report: professional and somehow specially qualified reporters paid to investigate and package stories for consumption by the reader.   That mindset is what leads a reporter for a prominent newspaper to lash out at internet critics or a Congressman to take umbrage with a question from a reporter without a press pass.

When the reporter or the politician does thinks that way, it’s just stupid.  When the FTC thinks that way, it could also become the law.

Politics, policy, and the President’s speech

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Criticism of the President’s speech last night ranged from the lack of specific policy asks to the aggressive tone he took in describing what BP would be forced to do.  But those elements are what made the speech a short term winner – and possibly the only viable course of action.

Though it breaks a personal moratorium on referencing Ronald Reagan, the purpose of this speech should have been similar to the 1986 speech after the Challenger disaster.  That speech sought to restore confidence in American ingenuity, which had just taken a very dazzling and public hit.

Obama’s speech had a similar goal – channel and focus people’s emotions.  In his case, he wanted to empathize with Gulf residents and all Americans who will feel the environmental brunt of a company’s mistake.  The policy ideas he put forward are window dressing for the bigger message – he feels your pain, and he’s going to inflict some of it on BP through a relief fund that the oil company will fund but not direct.   (Something that would have been a good idea for BP to set up in the first place.)

Could he come out of this swinging and missing?  Could BP challenge the seizure of their assets in court – and, conceivably, win?  Perhaps, but after waiting 57 days to make this statement, it’s the best message the President has.

Plus, if BP weasels out of the bill some how, the President will still have a chance to make them the bad guy.  Just because a James Bond villain jumps in an escape pod and eludes capture doesn’t make Bond’s effort any less heroic.  It just means that Obama will have to find new and creative ways to hold BP accountable – something like tax credits for owners of local BP gas stations  owners who want to change  their affiliation.

It may not be good policy, but it’s good politics.  As the old saying goes, when you see a mob coming with pitchforks and torches, either grab a torch and join the crowd or start running in another direction.

BP slogs, Exxon blogs

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

This week, Exxon Mobil launched Perspectives, a blog about “issues, policies, technologies, and trends” surrounding energy development.  Yes, that includes oil, and yes, they kick off by talking about the mess in the Gulf of Mexico.

No, Lionel Osbourne is not a featured blogger.

BP has received the lion’s share of the public scorn since the spill, but other companies remain vulnerable to regulations and increased taxes.  It isn’t an immediate challenge, but Exxon Mobil didn’t wait for the problem to come to them.

It would have been easier, in the short term, for Exxon Mobil to act like the accomplice of the kid who gets punished for a grade school food fight – sit on their hands, let BP continue to be yelled at by authority figures, and keep quiet hoping none of the outrage falls on you.  The problem with that strategy is that, eventually, the story will not be about BP’s specific failings but the failings – and potential failings – of the industry as a whole.

Of course the blog is biased and slanted, but Exxon Mobil makes no effort to hide its involvement.  Perspectives is clearly branded as the official Exxon Mobil company line – take it for what its worth.  And doing that now will help Exxon Mobil’s credibility (at least somewhat) in future discussions about what their obligations should be.  Plus they’ll likely to have some thoughts on what BP’s obligations are too.

Fantastic.

Tell me, who the #$%& are you?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ 3 Comments

Politics in the Carolinas has been good for comedians over the last few weeks, and Congressman Bob Etheridge was able to keep it going with this now-famous video:

“Who are you?”?!?  He’s a guy with a camera, genius.

That’s what makes this so hilarious:   Etheridge had all the cards and lost the hand.

Option A: Some scrubby little schmuck with a camera and a blue blazer comes pointing a camera in his face, and apparently asks if he supports “the Obama Agenda.”  A smile, a polite question back (“Well, what do you think the ‘Obama Agenda’ is, sir?”), and a re-framing of the issue (“I support policies that will help my constituents, and I’ll work with anyone who wants to help – yes, if they’re the President of the United States.”) and this go away.  Congressman Etheridge walks away laughing, and the kid with his face blurred out has no good footage.  Or, if he’s feeling especially saucy, he stays and has a civil discussion – after all, he has to have an intellectual foundation for what he believes in.  If camera boy doesn’t want to be civil, chuckle and invite him to your office sometime for coffee to talk further.

Option B: Grab his arm, bear hug him like you’re posing for a picture, and ask him who he is.  Gain internet fame.

Etheridge, who has obviously never heard the phrase, “Don’t lose your temper except on purpose,” chose B.  He chose poorly.

The fallout could go beyond Etheridge’s own district, too.  The video offers another example of Congressional egotism and entitlement.  News media outlets like to talk about an anti-incumbent sentiment among the electorate, but that can’t exist without folks like Congressman Etheridge stoking the flame.

What’s spreading faster, oil or failure?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

A local television station in Louisiana ran into some problems trying to interview some spill cleanup workers – and in doing so, highlighted one more way BP is not helping itself in its response to the spill:

Cleanup workers might not be media savvy, but they remain the best face that BP could put on their cleanup efforts (certainly better than a clearly foreign CEO).  Whether the glorified rent-a-cop in this video (and his backpack-clad sidekick) are following orders that contradict BP’s official statements on press availability or they are carrying out a legit safety function isn’t clear.  What is clear is that they are not communications experts.

At least BP can rest easy knowing that, no matter how sophisticated their PR strategy, they weren’t coming out of this oil spill clean.  The administration’s inability to escape criticism is particularly fascinating (and means I have to eat a plate of oil-soaked crow).

Most recently, the President compared the oil spill to 9/11.  Perhaps that’s his way of getting tougher on BP – as the polls are apparently asking for him to do.  The problem of course, is that the President is doing everything he can do – and that just isn’t that much.  After coming into office with promises that he could make government work for people again, the spill underscores that government simply isn’t qualified for the job.

Ultimately, that puts the US government and BP on two sides of the same coin.  Both wind up despised by the people – BP for wielding too much power; the government for impotence.

Being the media

~ Jim Eltringham ~ Leave a comment

Last night I spoke at the Leadership Institute‘s Public Relations School on writing effective press releases.  It’s a talk I’ve been giving since 2002, but since then it has obviously changed pretty considerably.

The most significant change has been in the forms a press release has taken.  Eight years ago a basic press release was a one-page document written like a news story that was emailed and faxed to a media list, or distributed through a press release service.  Today, through formats like social media releases, plus tools like easy blogging and media hosting platforms (like Flickr and YouTube), organizations and campaigns can augment their news releases with all kinds of extras.

And frankly, if they aren’t doing that, they’re missing out.

The media landscape has changed, too.  Bloggers and power social network users can reach thousands of people.  There’s no reason to wait for traditional media outlets to create content that can be picked up virally.  The Washington Times mentioned how this helped insurgent candidates circumvent the media in upsetting candidates hand-picked by political parties:

Just as important, platforms such as YouTube have given long-shot candidates ways to circumvent political reporters reluctant to cover campaigns they don’t believe have much chance of success…Most prominent is Florida, where former House Speaker Marco Rubio, a darling of the “tea party” movement, had nearly 20 times the video views in late May as Gov. Charlie Crist, whom Republican leaders had recruited into the race. Mr. Crist has since fled the Republican Party to run as an independent.

One key element of public relations hasn’t changed, of course: the importance of having a strong, well-framed message.  If a tree falls in the forest, and no one’s around to tweet about it, it won’t make the front page – but the tree has to fall first.

Strasburg: Obama or Palin?

~ Jim Eltringham ~ 1 Comment

Merry Strasmas!  With California, Arkansas, South Carolina, and other states taking a turn as centers of the political universe, Washington, D.C. is free to be the center of the baseball universe today thanks to Stephen Strasburg.

Strasburg, has little professional baseball experience, yet is already the standard-bearer for his team.  In that way, he’s a little like the 2008 versions of both Barack Obama and Sarah Palin.

DC likes to claim to be a secular town, but it’s a town that looks for saviors almost constantly.  Whichever political party is out of power and seeking a way back in looks for the Chosen One who can at once articulate his or her side’s philosophy while appealing to wide demographics of the electorate.  The list of would-be saviors is truly bipartisan: Howard Dean, Newt Gingrich, Fred Thompson, Wesley Clark, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Bill Bradley, and John McCain have all been set up at various times in the last decade and a half to ride in on the white horse and save their party from ruin.  Stephen Strasburg’s role as the savior of a franchise coming off consecutive 100-loss seasons and mired in last place is appropriate for the dialect of his new home town.

Having been mostly dominant in a quick ascendancy through the minors, Strasburg certainly looks like he belongs on the next level – just like both Obama and Palin looked like they were ready for the big stage of national politics in easily winning a Senate seat and a governorship, respectively.  Both stumbled a bit out of the gate – allowing interviewers or non-scandals to take them off message.  But Obama was prepared and came back from early hiccups to win his primary and, eventually, establish the perception of polished confidence.  Palin never really got on track, and her debut on the national stage seemed rushed.  Accounts of John McCain’s Vice Presidential selection process seem to confirm that she was rushed through the minors.

When Strasburg, who has been pitching professionally for less than a year, toes the rubber tonight, the Nationals will hope he is a player whose time has come, albeit earlier than most expected, and who will trust his stuff through the inevitable early struggles.  They will hope they haven’t given the ball to a pitcher who isn’t quite ready for the big leagues.

They will hope for the pitching equivalent of Barack Obama.  They will not, however, want Barack Obama actually pitching.