Every other year, inside every communication association I've ever covered, the brass clips the ends off big cigars and discusses whether the association ought to start an "advocacy program." Meaning, the association will speak out on behalf of the profession, when issues or news stories arise that affect communicators, or that communicators affect.
And then everyone bursts out laughing. Yeah, right, like we're gonna stick our necks out and take a position on something, and potentially step on the toes of a dues-paying member! Hahahahahahahahaha!
Thats why I stood at my desk and cheered when Stephanie Cegielski, the vice president of public relations for the Public Relations Association of America—which is traditionally just as as marble-mouthed as its chief rival, the International Association of Business Communicators—published a violent takedown of the world's largest PR agency.
The post, which originally appeared last week at the association's blog and was re-posted this week by Ragan.com, excoriates Edelman PR's Lisa Kovitz for an error in judgement "so egregious that it stops us all in our tracks." Her target was a news-jacking blog post by Kovitz on the Edelman website "about how Robin Williams' death was a carpe diem moment for mental health professionals."
I'll leave it to you, if you're interested, to read Cegielski's well-written post (as well as some strong criticism of it) at PRSA's blog.
I think Cegielski is dead-ass right in this case, and I think all the criticism of her is craven. But that doesn't matter. What matters is this precedent-setting moment, whereby the head of PR at a PR association—and maybe it's easier for the head of PR than for the actual head of the assocatiation—said something straight and strong and honest and timely, in criticism of a PR agency 70 of whose employees are members of the association.
And the world didn't evaporate. And Edleman issued a mealy-mouthed apology "to anyone offended by this post." And I hope PRSA members young and old observed with raised eyebrows: Hey, it appears our profession is legitimate enough and confident enough for the official association's brass itself not just to participate in but to launch a public ethics debate, by calling out a member it thinks is out of line.
And the next time some knowing volunteer muckety-mucks group-agree that "advocacy" can't possibly, couldn't prudently, better not be and never has been done by an association of professional communicators, I hope somebody says, "Hold on a cotton-pickin' minute. What about Stephanie Cegielski?"
I tip my hat to PRSA and Stephanie Cegielski. This is a classic example of how professional associations should do things; i.e., speak out when there’s a genuine reason, not just for the sake of speaking out. And in this case, PRSA was the right (and only**) group to do it. Kudos to them for doing it.
I think I understand what Kovitz was trying to do – well, I’ll give her the benefit of a very strong doubt. Yes, there are some good PR lessons coming out of last week’s sad news. But as some commenters pointed out, neither the post nor its timing were appropriate; they turned what could have later served as a teaching moment (or even a business opportunity) instead into something insensitive and too self-serving.
If Kovitz was genuinely concerned about maximizing mental health awareness at this difficult time, she could have done it one-on-one (i.e., in private, not online). Imagine, if you will, if Edelman had reached out to a couple of key mental health advocacy groups and offered to work with them – pro bono – to launch a major outreach initiative! It could have become a feather in Edelman’s cap (and a long-term business builder) while potentially touching and saving people’s lives. A win-win opportunity, rather than a poor reflection on one of the largest PR firms.
Instead, Edelman blew it by allowing this post to go online. I’d expect a savvy PR organization to recognize the pitfalls and counsel against it. The fact that Edelman didn’t do that makes me wonder: if they give themselves such bad advice…
I’m sure they can do better.
Again, kudos to PRSA for properly calling them out on this. May we all learn from it.
(**I don’t think this would have been an item for IABC to comment on; PR is only one facet of its much broader scope. But I hope the association’s new leadership will help it finally develop its own meaningful advocacy strategies and practices.)