A PR Lesson Courtesy of Angelina Jolie

Angelina Jolie
Yesterday, I shared an example of a bad public relations practice. Today, we’ll examine a technique that worked very successfully – Angelina Jolie’s New York Times op-ed about her decision to have a preventive double mastectomy because her doctors estimated she had an 87 percent risk of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer.
Why do I consider Jolie’s announcement a successful use of public relations? For starters, she used an op-ed as the vehicle to convey her message. Op-ed articles are one of the rare public relations tools that allow individuals and organizations to choose their own wording and phrasing when they communicate with the public. With it comes to press releases, press conferences, speeches, interviews and other public relations tools, the journalists who report those stories select the parts (if any) of those materials that make it into their news accounts.
A PR Lesson Courtesy of Wally Backman
I am a big baseball fan – a New York Mets fan to be exact, and that has not been easy the past few years. On the other hand, thanks to their colorful and controversial off-the-field activities, the Mets often provide valuable lessons in public relations, which I’m teaching at St. Bonaventure University over the next five weeks.
Over the years, the team has presented plenty of challenges for Jay Horwitz, the Mets’ vice president for public relations. He’s had to deal with players who were involved with illegal drugs, barroom brawls, sex scandals and countless additional unsavory activities. Read more…
Why Joe Biden and the Dems are still smiling today
Unlike the first presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, there was no clear cut winner in Thursday’s vice-presidential exchange. Polls and pundits are reaching varying conclusions, and each candidate scored enough points to convince his supporters that he came out on top.
From my perspective, I have to give the edge to Democrats, and here is why:
Much has been made of Vice President Joe Biden’s demeanor during the debate. He often was seen smiling, laughing and smirking while his Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, was speaking. And Biden frequently interrupted the congressman to rebut and challenge his statements.

In fact, it is the vice president’s behavior that is dominating much of the conversation in the aftermath of the debate – not any of the substantive arguments either candidate made.
During the 90-minute exchange, Congressman Ryan repeatedly reminded viewers that the economy is suffering, that he feels the Obama Administration mishandled the Libyan embassy incident and many of the promises the president made during the 2008 campaign have not come to fruition.
If I were part of the president’s re-election team, I’d be ecstatic that people are talking about Joe Biden’s facial expressions instead of the economy, Libya and broken promises.
For Republicans to capture the White House, they need to change the conversation. However, their immediate response fits right into the Democratic script. Within minutes of the end of the debate, the GOP was out with talking points, ads and social media postings about the vice president’s facial expressions and the number of times he interrupted Ryan.
The criticisms are valid, but they are unlikely to translate into large numbers of votes for the Romney-Ryan ticket since they resonated most strongly with voters who already are on the GOP wagon. For Democrats, it was just another case of Joe Biden being Joe Biden, and nothing that happened at Thursday’s debate is likely to make them jump ship.
It’s always the folks in the middle, the undecided voters, who determine which way close elections go. And the longer the conversation remains on Joe Biden’s laughter and smirks – and away from the more serious and more important issues – the more difficult is becomes for Republicans to win support from undecided voters.
# # #


