Tell a Story

An idea can change the world, but without help it will be stuck on the editorial page forever.

What did Dr. Martin Luther King, Mahatma Ghandi, Max Bialystock, Lady Gaga and Jason Hatch have in common? Very little. Do you know who Max is? He may be fictional, but to prove that a disaster can be personally enriching, he dreamed up a Broadway show called Springtime for Hitler in the show The Producers. Do you know who Jason Hatch is? Most of England does. He climbed up the side of Buckingham Palace in 2004 to call attention to father's rights. Do you know who Lady Gaga is? Yes, you do. But if she didn't dress a certain way, she'd have given up music and become a public relations agent by now.

All of these people had ideas, and all of them knew that wasn't enough. You have to have a story, too. And an idea is not a story, and chasing press coverage for an idea is like holding water in your hand. You'll get some, but I'd not want to count on that as a survival stash.

Let's offer a hypothetical illustration, and then we'll move to some real-life illustrations. The Center for the Recognition of the State of Flux hires a communications director (they hire a female, because they perceive that people want to hear a female voice for such a cause. She's a good and solid pro, mind you), and tells that communications director "get press coverage for our cause of securing recognition for the official State of Flux" (which for those of you unfamiliar with it, is east of Gondwanaland). The PR person says "good deal - sure thing - important cause - I'm on board," and then sets down and types out some scenarios for generating news coverage for recognition of the State of Flux. Here's her first list of suggestions:

• Host a gala dinner, featuring all the celebrities that support Flux Statehood, paired with ex-presidents of world powers as dinner companions.

• Have a celebrity Congressional lobbying day in which celebrities deliver to lawmakers Flex shampoo with a card saying. "don't forget about us, and we won't forget about 'U.'" (Well, most of her ideas are solid.) 

• Assemble a press conference featuring a large collection of former White House press secretaries that support statehood, calling it "Flacks for Flux." 

 So our press person turns these in to her boss and colleagues. She expected them to dance, expected them to behave like that teacher in A Christmas Story who gives Ralphie an "A plus plus plus plus..." on his theme paper, expected a chorus of angels to break out into song... and she got silence.

... and a hush comes over her in the office. No one wants to eat with her in the cafeteria. Conversations keep ending whenever she enters a room. And a week goes by, and she asks her boss for feedback, and he brings in the senior staff, and one of them says,

"I like the ideas, but... couldn't you just get the press to write about Statehood for Flux? I mean, these are over the top."

And she is quiet for a minute, and nods gently, and then says, "if you want the issue to get over the top, then over the top is your playing field. That's where you need to be."

An idea can get sustained press coverage that changes history. But it can't do it as an idea. Imagine if Dr. King had told his aides "let's focus on writing op-ed pieces." Consider Ghandi, saying "hunger strike? But we'd get very hungry!" (full disclosure - joke borrowed from Woody Allen.) Think of a television commercial in which a man or woman just stands there and says "buy this product, because it's good, and it accomplishes the task it is produced for."

It just doesn't sell product. Yes, you can get an op-ed landed, and that will make you feel good, and you can send a copy of it to your donors in a fancy envelope with a personal message on it handwritten by your boss. But it won't get Statehood for Flux. Today's New York Times op-ed page features a set of opinions on what will happen if Qaddafi flees Libya - but absent the mass protests and Qaddafi's violent response to them, this sea of gray newsprint would not be a story, just op-ed page material. There's a monstrous difference.

In none of the Middle East countries currently undergoing geologic change have we seen any group of protestors choosing an editorial page-only strategy. They knew they had to take to the streets and produce pictures. The idea is democracy -- but the story is revolution. You can't get anywhere without the story. As the showstopper from the Broadway musical Gypsy teaches, "you gotta get a gimmick if you want to get ahead."

Mrs. Clinton

I'm glad to see such a steady hand at the rudder. She poked her finger in the eye of the Iranian President (He Whose Name Cannot Be Remembered) and also the Republicans in Congress, in the same interview.

It's really not stated enough how much Bill Clinton learned from this woman about how to operate in a hostile environment. He's always been frank about it, but most people incorrectly presume she learned it from him.

Lame Ending to Egypt Standoff? Maybe...

So the story of Mubarek ends that flatly, after all those amazing twists and turns? He says yesterday he won't quit, then today he quits? Whassup with that? Why would he do what he did yesterday and then do what he did today? What a bummer of an ending - it's like the ending of War of the Worlds, the Tom Cruise film, when all the aliens just go "poof."

Maybe not. Maybe there's more going on here. I have a theory. He got a phone call from Vladimir Putin (the only politician in the world who'd never resign after a shirtless photo incident.)

"Hosni, baby, Hosni. What am I going to do with you? You never pay attention. They want you to step aside? Step aside, already. Just do what I did. You choose a 'successor.' You make sure it's someone who quakes when you look at him. And you 'surrender power.' It's not rocket science, buddy."

Perhaps Mubarek then asked, "but isn't that a sign of weakness immediately, from a public relations perspective?" To which Putin may have added, "only for the short term.

"In the long term," he said, "it's totally great. You get all the good stuff that comes with complete power, and you don't have to do any of the paperwork, or state dinners, or ribbon cuttings. It's a win-win." 

So congratulations, Egyptians, on Mubarek stepping aside, quite definitely maybe. Stay tuned.

Spiderman: Turn Off The Lights

Well, the critics just said no more. In public relations terms, it was a revolt.  The media will do it from time to time if anyone's being too clever with them for too long, and New York's theater critics had finally had enough of the fraud they were active participants in:

The New York Times: "After 15 or 20 minutes, the central question you keep asking yourself is likely to change from 'How can $65 million look so cheap?' to 'How long before I’m out of here?'"

The New York Daily News: "The show reportedly cost $65 million and that's clearly gone into mechanics, hydraulics and aerial rigging. It seems only 10 cents has gone into the confusing story and humorless dialogue."

The New York Post:  "Another new character is the spidery mythical figure Arachne. Pulled from the depths of Greek mythology, her role is confusing. Is this webslinger real or merely a figment of Peter Parker’s dreams? Why and how does she come back from wherever she was, and why does she leave again? Inquiring minds would want to know, if only they cared."

We all love producer Julie Taymor and Bono, but we all have bad days.  And when the Spiderman team lost control of the critics, the resulting carnage was the marketing counterpart of the physical injuries caused by the hard mishaps. The critics say they'll give the show another look if and when it finally opens, but Ben Brantley of the Times wrote that he thought the show "is so grievously broken in every respect that it is beyond repair."

 

Years ago, when I was a volunteer on a political campaign and was as politically clueless as can be, I was told by a press handler to stand in a certain spot and not to let the reporters past it to speak to a certain media hog of a politician.  The press stopped at my barricade, annoyed but compliant.  Then the politician, 25 yards behind me, waved to them and motioned for them to come, and they ran me over as if I wasn't there.  

I don't know what the musical's team could have done to prevent today's review debacle. But they certainly must have had a spider sense it was coming.

Non-Lovable Losers

Today's lesson in public relations: don't add new negatives. Case in point, my childhood love, the New York Mets. 

The Mets have received much news coverage for the past two weeks. None of it that I can recall has had anything to do with hitting a ball with a stick, running, sliding, or catching. No, what the team I have loved since birth has gotten press for is being the number one client of one Bernard Madoff, the most hated man in New York and quite possibly the world.

Bernie Madoff makes Bin Laden blanch.  He destroyed the retirements of hundreds of people who thought that when they retired they would be buying a home in Coconut Grove and are instead stuck in fleabag motels in Sunny Isles. But the Mets owners made loads of money with Bernie.  They spent it on talent that usually ended up flopping (there's an odd symmetry about that).


Throughout their early years, the Mets were lovable losers - that was their negative. Later, as the second team in town to the Yankees, the lovable loser label got them by and kept their faithful in the flock. "The Mets have shown me more ways to lose than I even knew existed," said manager Casey Stengel. While the Wall Street barons snacked on brie at Yankee Stadium, Mets fans drank Shaeffer Beer. (The beer's jingle was "Shaeffer is the one beer to have when you're having more than one."  It was later rewritten to assuage the social responsibility police.)

Now? Their new negative steps on their old negative.  They're still losers - but lovable? Not unless they get sold.  I'd hate to be the ticket manager right now.  I certainly would have to shower if I bought a ticket...

Come Back When You Can Act More Mature

The young man who joined a team of Puerto Rican nationalists to hijack a plane to Cuba in 1968 never got arrested before that, never got arrested since that, voluntarily returned to the United States and turned himself in, and is now an old man who is going to jail probably for the rest of his life.

Am I soft on crime if I have an issue with that?

Luis Armando Pena Soltren said he did what he did when he was 25 because of “lack of experience, lack of patience and lack of maturity." He's 67 now, and headed to the pokey for 15 years, meaning until he's 82. Hopefully, the federal judge who sentenced him must think, he'll be more mature in his 80s.

Soltren had not asked to get off without prison time for his crime, only that he serve no more than four years because of his age, his voluntary surrender and clean record. 

This situation shouts out for a presidential pardon, but only a conservative Republican president could politically manage such a pardon.  But if I'm counsel to Mr. Soltren, or a family member, I'd reach out to columnists all over the nation to press a conversation about whether a 67-year-old should get 15 years in jail for something he did when he was 25 in which no one was injured.  I'm surprised this one hasn't percolated into opinion pieces, but it's only a two-day-old story.

Online Poker

"Michael Isikoff writes: Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader from Nevada, is pushing ahead with his efforts to legalize Internet poker before Congress adjourns this year, despite new criticism from state lottery officials, including a former Democratic National Committee chairman, that Reid's plan was an “outrageous” reward for big Las Vegas casino interests that heavily backed his campaign for re-election."

Actually, the big Las Vegas casinos were the ones who pressed for the earlier law that, while not banning online poker, made it vaguely illegal for banks or credit card companies to process transactions for consumers that are related to onlike poker... except that the rules never fully kicked in, and the banks thought they weren't really enforceable based on the language of the statute.

 The reason the casinos wanted the practice banned was because they weren't controlling it - the biggest operators are overseas.  And as far as online poker competing with Las Vegas casinos or state lotteries, the academic studies that exist seem to indicate strongly that the audience is young males 21 to 34 who are more financially successful than the median for their group. And the social impacts surveys that have been done indicate the greatest threat of online poker to an individual is how rapidly an addiction can lead to economic destruction, because you can play so many more hands per minute than you can at a casino.

The Dems decided to try to legalize it and tax it partly out of a sense that trying to stop it in the modern Internet world is foolhardy and partly because the big casino operators started yawning when asked if they were still opposed.  Meanwhile, critics like Republican Senator Jon Kyl, whose 2006 legislation capped a nine-year effort to put restrictions on internet gambling, didn't really weigh in with opposition to the trial balloons. 

And now you know, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story.