Pirozzolo Company Public Relations

To Reach Next Level PR, Go Beyond News Writing Basics

This public relations how-to article explains how to push the limits of news.

In the rush to get out that next news release, blog post or tweet it’s easy to ignore the fundamentals of journalism.

That’s okay, but only if all you want are PRNewswire mentions, web content and, hopefully, some inbound links.

But if you aspire to Next Level PR—the kind of public relations that generates exposure in A-List traditional and online media, establishes your CEO as a thought leader, influences stakeholders, builds brand equity and generates qualified leads, then you must push the parameters of journalistic fundamentals to their limits.

MediaCollege.com lists the five basics of a news story to which Pirozzolo Company has added an additional five to help you get your client to Next Level PR. 

Let’s consider each one and how they can turn a ho-hum public relations campaign into a news-making powerhouse.

 Timing – people want to know what’s happening now as in “what’s new?”

As Media College states, “A story with only average interest needs to be told quickly.”

However, the enemy of corporate public relations timeliness is a multi-level review requirement for every routine release, tweet and blog post. It is far better to establish corporate guidelines for news releases as well as Social Media behavior, than having to review every bit of external communication. Sure mistakes will be made, but for the most part they can be corrected. Overall the campaign will be more effective if the C-Suite empowers employees serve as ambassadors of the brand and communicate with the best interests of their organization in mind.

Significance – A plane falls from the sky and everyone is killed; now that’s news. If everyone walks away, as they did in Miracle on the Hudson, that’s really big news. Walk away from a car crash in the Vons parking lot and it’s a snore.

Significance. though is in the eye of  the beholder. Let’s say you’re promoting a new app. Think about who the product matters to and focus on its significance for that audience. Too many news releases tout new technology as a state-of-the-art world-changer and a disrupter. Overreaching is counter productive, reduces creditability and will turn off editors and your target market.  

Dick Pirozzolo and Ted Kennedy, Jr. at American Polyfilm Grand Opening

Likewise, don’t think about significance only in terms of the market and investors. How does the new product impact employees and their families, does the new technology make the company a more progressive employer and thus more attractive to job seekers, does it open up opportunities for speaking engagements, how does the new product square with the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility culture and goals?

In the case of American Polyfilm's grand opening of its new manufacturing facility in Branford, Connecticut we capitalized on the national effort to encourage "Made in America" and hit all the notes in terms of significance to the local community, market reliability, and underscored the company's commitment to being a good corporate citizen, thus epitomizing the future of American manufacturing. CEO Victor Cassella underscored the importance of government-business cooperation in his remarks at the event. 

Cassella told well-wishers, “We have received ongoing support from the U.S. Small Business Administration, and Community Investment Corporation as well as The Guilford Savings Bank.

"The cooperation we experienced between our business and government agencies, clearly demonstrates the role government can play by encouraging forward-looking, energy-efficient, clean industries that support well paying jobs to locate and expand in the U.S.”

Proximity – Proximity isn’t only geographic. Media College advises that proximity can also describe a cultural, historical or social bond. Australians care about events in Singapore, because of its geographic proximity and the UK because of its cultural and historical proximity. Similarly, an event occurring in Israel will have more of an impact on Americans than one in Iceland.

Prominence – Pirozzolo Company has represented clients that are international household names. We have also established our clients’ prominence within geographic proximity or a community of interest such as the financial services,  foreign exchange, cybersecurity, or medical electronics sectors. 

Human Interest ­– Human interest stories, says Media College, “… often disregard the rules of newsworthiness; for example, they don't date as quickly, they need not effect a large number of people, and it may not matter where the story takes
place…”

For example, when Boston business leader Jeffrey Ornstein, CEO of J/Brice Design, was about to lose a valued employee whose visa had run out, he  launched not only a legal battle, but retained Pirozzolo Company to fight her case in the court of public opinion. Ornstein won and the employee, a talented young designer, remained working in the US, thanks in-part to a number of media outlets that underscored her value to the American economy including Wicked Local.

In addition, to these news fundamentals, consider Pirozzolo Company’s Next Level PR Basics: Controversy, Humor, Story, Consistency and Simplicity.

Controversy –  More than anything, the media love controversy, something the President of the United States has mastered to control nearly every news cycle.

We constantly scan the media for current events and issues. More recently we capitalized on the controversy involving Russia hacking our elections and tied it to the Republican National Convention to generate coverage for Stealthcare, a cybersecurity consulting company. The firm's CEO appeared on CBS-TV Cleveland and other national business and professional media outlets where he commented on the foreign involvement. 

Humor – There are times when funny will get you a lot more positive exposure than deadpan.

Washington Post humorist and syndicated columnist Gene Weingarten once interviewed our client Hilla Ovil-Brenner, founder of WhiteSmoke, a turbocharged writing engine that includes advanced editing and spellchecking.  

Columnist Weingarten quipped that Ovil-Brenner probably didn’t like it when people learned to spell because it would hurt her business.

She quipped back, “If I sold plus-size fashions, that would not mean I want women to be fat, it means I want them to feel good, look good and be successful in their lives. Just like WhiteSmoke helps people with become more successful communicators….”

The WhiteSmoke-Weingarten interview was hilarious and got picked up by newspapers nationwide. Product sales soared. 

Story – Too often organizations forget that their CEO is a real life person whose heart, skills, challenges, obstacles and conflicts make for far more interesting reading than canned quotes about how, “Delighted we are to announce Rebecca as the new VP engineering at Techno Pants Corp.”

Stop sanitizing CEOs. Let them be human, let them talk about how they resolve conflicts with the board of directors, investors or the government and include information about their personal relationships and activities. Make them come alive. We love knowing about Ben and Jerry, Jobs and Wosniak, Bill and Melinda and Richard Branson because we see them as real people with exciting, committed lives. Few people know anything about the CEO of Dell or American Airlines and their PR suffers.

Consistency – While representing institutional investment managers, a journalist once mused, “How come 75% of all money managers are in the top quartile when it comes to their performance releases?” That’s because the poor performers hide in the weeds when their numbers are down and emerge only when their numbers are up.

Want to win the respect of journalists, build credibility and generate positive press over the long haul? Be accessible when the news is bad. Get it out, get it done and move on. When it’s time to deliver good news, you will be far more credible and will have a trusting relationship with the editors and reporters. They will credit your for your candor and their coverage will be more positive and prominent when the news is good.

Simplicity – Keep it simple. How many times do we use jargon like OEM, FX or Q4 without thinking that the journalist who makes the first cut on a news release might be new to manufacturing or finance to say nothing of the reader. Journalism critics note that The Wall Street Journal, whose readers are supposed to be mostly business types, does better job of explaining business and financial terms than a The New York Times, whose readership is more general.

Kim Wallace of the market research firm Wallace & Washburn in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and author of “Why People Don’t Buy Things,” puts it this way: “Liken new concepts to what we already know. If you want to reach customers who had never seen snow tires before and need to explain their benefit say: They are like snowshoes for your car. Everyone will understand the concept instantly." 

Try to incorporate these news-making criteria into your next public relations foray—if you want to establishes your company’s CEO as an influencer, maximizes awareness and build brand equity.

That’s Next Level PR!

Dick Pirozzolo is Managing Director of Pirozzolo Company Public Relations in Boston, whose PR campaigns have helped startups become publicly traded companies or be acquired by major public corporations. Dick lives in Wellesley, Massachusetts.

Trump’s Tweets fuel tension with North Korea, as scholars and diplomats seek peaceful solutions at Boston Global Forum symposium

Guest Blog By Nguyen Anh Tuan

Cofounder and CEO of Boston Global Forum

Scholars and international relations authorities gathered at Harvard University recently to urge a diplomatic solution to the US-North Korean conflict and an end to the maelstrom of threats and personal insults. The symposium, organized by the Boston Global Forum (BGF) and the Michael Dukakis Institute for Leadership and Innovation as part of its annual World Reconciliation Day events here and in Japan, was moderated by former Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis, who cofounded the BGF think tank in 2012.

Among the international relations authorities were Prof. Joseph Nye, Asst. Secretary of Defense during the Clinton Administration, who called for employing soft power diplomacy to reduce tensions with North Korea, and Professor Sung-Yoon Lee of the Fletcher School of Diplomacy, Tufts University, who offered his analysis of North Korea.

Gov. Michael Dukakis told the delegates, when rhetoric overshadows reason, “a single misstep can turn political brinksmanship into a global conflagration. Nowhere is there a greater risk today than with North Korea.”

In keeping with the reconciliation theme, Nye told 20 delegates and journalists, “Reconciliation with friends means one thing, but in the case of North Korea, there is similar second level of reconciliation possible that means reduction of enmity, which is extraordinarily difficult when the President talks about turning North Korea into a sea of fire and fire and fury.”

Nye added, “We must be careful not to mistake reality for rhetoric. The North Koreans are not suicidal. North Korea is extremely rational — and has chosen a set of means to get to an objective of preserving the current regime.” He emphasized that while there is a low probability of nuclear war one must then ask. “is there a probability of conventional war?”

Historically, Nye noted, “The temptation of escalation is always there. If you ask whether the Russian Tsar and German Kaiser intended a war in 1914 in which they would lose their thrones and their see their monarchies dismembered the answer is no. They expected a third Balkan war lasting for three weeks and never expected four years of armed conflict. Moreover, Japan did not act irrationally,” when it bombed Pearl Harbor. “If Japan had done nothing, the nation would have been strangled by a US oil embargo, so they hoped for short war believing it would be better than certain strangulation because of the embargo.”

While political hawks may be tempted, a decapitating strike against North Korea that seizes the nuclear weapons or kills Kim Jong Un does not seem realistic observed Nye, “Hospitality between North Korea and the US goes back to Kim Ill Sung who, in June of 1950, crossed the 38th parallel,” invading South Korea. Though hostilities ended 1953 with an armistice, both North and South Korea are technically still at war. “There have been seven decades of enmity with 100,000 North Korea troops remaining on the border,” and a highly militaristic society.

The hostilities over nuclear weapons began in 1993 when North Korea violated a treaty by reprocessing plutonium, which they at first denied and tried to cover up. When their deception was discovered, the country withdrew from the proliferation treaty rather than abide by its terms because North Korea believes nuclear weapons are the only way to preserve its existence. The North Koreans don’t believe America will treat them normally if they don’t have such destructive power. “So North Korea continues its tests, which included a thermonuclear bomb five-times more powerful than previous devices, and has a stated goal of miniaturizing the bomb so that, in a few years, they can credibly say they can hit the US.”

Is reconciliation possible? 

Cultural commonality and exchanges can contribute to enemies becoming friends, or at minimum a reduction of enmity. North and South Koreans, for example, compete on the same soccer teams, and Kim Jong Un is enamored of American movies and presumably American popular culture.

Nye looked to other historical lessons, pointing to international security communitiesthat have evolved to a point where there is no likelihood of war among, say, the Scandinavian nations or, in Western Europe, where war between Germany and France would be unthinkable today. “There are few examples of democracies, especially liberal democracies going to war. However, there is also no likelihood of North Korea developing into a liberal democracy.”

 “in 1895 the US and Britain almost came to war,” says Nye adding that, “Britain accommodated the US because, with the rise of Germany and Russia, it could not accommodate instability in Europe and also police the Western Hemisphere. So the Brits swallowed their pride and accommodated the United States.”

Similarly, the US and China fought against each other in Korea in 1950 when China crossed the Yalu River and we demonized Red China. In 1964, the US, under Linden Johnsen, contemplated preemptive nuclear strikes against China, but finally by “1971 with Nixon’s visit to China, the US accommodated China to stem Russian influence and maintain the balance of power.”

Is it like the Cuban missile crisis?

“When The US and Soviet Union came close to war during Cuban missile crisis – the positive outcome was to demonstrate that the path we were on could potentially lead to disaster.”
John F. Kennedy responded by delivering a speech in which he said we cannot continue on the path of extreme hostility with the Soviet Union and this resulted in the eventual signing of a treaty to reduce underground testing of nuclear weapons, followed by nuclear nonproliferation pacts with the Soviets such as the SALT and START talks. “While this led to a set of agreements that lowered tensions with Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin, tensions have reversed with current Russian leader Vladimir Putin.”

To negotiate effectively with North Korea, the US needs a reduction of enmity to assess what is realistic. “Appeasement is not a bad thing per se and there is nothing wrong with appeasement if you have assessed your opponent’s objectives and found they are willing to accept the status quo rather the being a revisionist nation that wants to kick over the table.”

What are the goals of North Korea — status quo or revisionist? If we miss-assess the goals, we lay out greater problems for the future. We did not understand Hitler’s goals but with China we can compete and have strong differences by largely accepting the framework of the current order, Nye points out.

“Now if North Korea is interested in the status quo— if they really want weapons to prevent an overthrow of the regime, a peace treaty will let the country grow economically, the nature of their society will change and the matter is relatively easily resolved,” according to Nye, who is quick to point out, “If they really are revisionist, then given the nature of the region, a family dynasty of three generations and a belief that they are the heart of the Korean people and want to unify the Korean people under the North,” then appeasement is not possible.

Unfortunately, US knowledge and its ability to assess the situation in North Korea is limited. Nye, said President Bill Clinton believed a North Korean regime that was presiding over starvation while a nation across the border was prospering would last only a decade. “We were wrong and should admit we do not know much about what goes on inside North Korea. Additionally, we have a record of failure and of US presidents drawing redlines and Americans accepting the unacceptable.” Nye said, adding, “North Korea exploits the power of weakness and uses it to bluff and take risks.”

Nye said, “I don’t see much prospect in the use of force and we can’t wait and let them have a nuclear weapon. In 1994 we contemplated a strike, but the South Koreans said no. Sanctions may have some effect but not get to the core” of changing the behavior of a government willing to see ten-percent of its population starve.

Add that to the fact that China’s ability to solve the problem is limited because President Xi Jinping does not want to cause chaos on its border with North Korea, so the options are not impressive. “However, a China centric approach with gradual reduction of tensions over time could work,” says Nye. The US would assure China of our limited interest in deposing Kim Jong Un, and China would use its leverage to prevent escalating the North Korean nuclear threat. “The US would then gradually relax sanctions and expect North Korea to integrate with the world.”

 As part of the agreement, the US would offer a peace treaty calling for North Korea to stop testing or exporting of nuclear weapons and for their eventual elimination from the peninsula. At the same time, US would retain its deterrence capacity if North Korea doesn’t live up to the agreement. The best argument, says Nye, “The current policy has failed for 30 years so we could take some risks to get a recession of enmity. I propose this as a way to go this but the administration is not likely to follow.”

The Trump factor

Llewellyn King, a nationally syndicated columnist and host of the PBS program "White House Chronicle," took a pessimistic view. He doubted the status quo would hold and suggested that there would be a "hard intervention" by the Trump administration. This, he thought, could be a missile shot down or some other action short of outright war. “Trump he said had been so belligerent in his remarks he must have directed the Pentagon to find a way of humiliating North Korea in the short term.”

Tufts University Prof. Sung-Yoon Lee of the Fletcher School of Diplomacy and an authority on the Korean Peninsula stated that he is not so sure Kim Jong Un will be satisfied with the status quo. “North Korea is a revisionist state whose greatest threat is the fact that across the border we have a legitimate, pleasant alternate Korea that serves as a magnet for 30,000 North Koreans who have escaped to the South. This enormous wealth disparity between two countries sharing a border is the challenge North Korea cannot overcome.”

Lee, who is the Kim Koo-Korea Foundation Professor of Korean Studies at Tufts, added this trajectory does not favor North Korea becoming the legitimate sole government for a unified Korean state and “calls into question why North Korea’s continuing existence is necessary,” in an environment that has fostered South Korean economic development during seven decades of freedom and prosperity. “Most regrettable is the extreme suffering of the North Korean people and crimes against humanity committed by the Kim Jong Un regime, which according to a UN study, have no parallel in the world.” If these conditions are acceptable, then the status quo is extremely better than increasing the risk of war by a US preemptive strike. Will the status quo hold for the next decade and will more Americans reconcile to a nuclear North Korean state across the border of South Korea?

Lee said he expects North Korea to continue to menace South Korea, kill South Koreans, murder Americans from time-to-time such as it did with two officers they hacked to death when they went to trim a tree in the demilitarized zone or when, in 1969, North Korean jets shot down a US spy plane killing all 30 airmen aboard. We did not respond militarily at the time and then four months later the North Koreans shot down an American helicopter, killing three American military people.

Said Lee, “We have spoiled and conditioned North Korea to feel it can get away with murder. We have not put pressure on the regime sufficient to reduce its aggression.” The regime even managed to hold the US hostage by effectively censoring a satirical movie about the assassination of its leader. Sony, producer of the film The Interview, gave into North Korean demands after the regime hacked its computers by pulling the movie from theatrical distribution. In so doing North Korea was able to censor a nation that prides itself on free speech.

Post 9/11, the US Treasury found alternate ways to choke off the money supply to Iran by targeting the banks it dealt with in a bid to get their leaders to the bargaining table. The strategy worked and Lee suggested employing the same treatment with banks doing business with North Korea. Simply put, the US gives the bank a choice, continue doing business with North Korea or face the prospect of not being able to business in US dollars. The banks invariably agree to cooperate and those that cheat, face crushing fines.

Both the banks and North Korea favor the US dollar over other currencies giving the US tremendous leverage on this score and we have seen some progress on the financial front. Lee also believes China is likely to support these measures. “Awareness that this will work is no guarantor of sustained financial pressure. There is always the risk that Trump will accept political expedience over sanctions that will take at least three years to be effective.”

Though solutions to the crisis are not easy, discussions such as those being held by Boston Global Forum, in which cooler heads gather to develop and propose reasoned and peaceful solutions is a step in the right direction.

Nguyen Anh Tuan, author cofounded Boston Global Forum with Michael Dukakis

Established in 2012, The Boston Global Forum brings together, in an open and accessible public forum, an eclectic and engaging spectrum of highly regarded academic leaders, real-world experts, thought leaders, media experts and promising young leaders.

BGF’s mission is to identify emerging threats to peace and stability around the globe, suggest realistic solutions, and identify possible actions that can be taken to avert armed conflict. The Forum’s ultimate goal is to lessen tensions, promote peace and security, and foster conditions that lead to greater social justice and broader economic prosperity.

Delegates are available for media interviews and comment by contacting the Boston Global Forum press office at 617-959-4613 or dick@pirozzolo.com

Gov. Michael Dukakis, Chairman of the Boston Global Forum; Prof. Joseph Nye, Distinguished Professor of Harvard University; Prof. Thomas Patterson, Harvard Kennedy School; Prof. David Silbersweig, Harvard; Prof. Nazli Choucri; MIT, Prof. Ezra Vogel; Harvard, Prof. Richard Rosecrance, Harvard Kennedy School; Prof. John Savage, Brown; Mr. Llewellyn King, White House Chronicle Producer and Host; Prof. Sung-Yoon Lee, Tufts University Fletcher School of Diplomacy; Mr. Allan Cytryn, Former CTO, Goldman Sachs; Prof. Derek Reveron, Naval War College; Mr. Dick Pirozzolo, Media Liaison; Member BGF Editorial Board; Rokuichiro Michii, Consul-General of Japan in Boston, and Michael Pizziferri, Delegate of the Quebec Government Office in Boston

 

 

North Korea peace initiative is focus of Boston Global Forum Symposium - Sept. 9 at Harvard University

Media Alert, coverage is invited.

Soft power innovator Joseph Nye (r) and Gov. Michael Dukakis will address media, diplomats, scholars, and business leaders at World Reconciliation Day Event.

“A single misstep can turn political brinksmanship into a global conflagration. Nowhere is there a greater risk today than with North Korea,” Gov. Michael Dukakis, chairman and cofounder of The Boston Global Forum 

Throughout August, Boston Global Forum scholars and experts on international relations (www.bostonbglobalforum.org) will develop innovative solutions to the nuclear missile crisis posed by North Korea; with recommendations to be aired during the World Reconciliation Day Symposium at 8:30 AM to Noon, Sept. 9th, Loeb House, Harvard University, 17 Quincy Street, Cambridge, Mass.

Media coverage is invited. 

For press credentials contact: Dick Pirozzolo dick@pirozzolo.com, + 1 617-959-4613 or Tuan Nguyen tuan_nguyen@bostonglobalforum.org +1 617 286 6589

Professor Joseph Nye former dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and a member of The Boston Global Forum Board of Thinkers will deliver The Hoa Sen Distinguished Lecture on Reconciliation on the value soft power in reducing international tensions—especially with regard to conflict with The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

The Hoa Sen Group is Vietnam’s foremost manufacturer of sheet steel and building components.

The event has been organized by the UNESCO Chair on Global Learning and Global Citizen Education UCLA and The Boston Global Forum. The Boston Global Forum was founded in 2012 by Gov. Michael Dukakis and Nguyen Anh Tuan along with a dedicated group of internationally renowned scholars and political leaders as a think tank dedicated to finding peaceful solutions to contentious issues between nations and other events that decrease the safety and freedom of the World’s Citizens.

 “As we are acutely aware, relations between many of the world’s nations have become so hostile that a single misstep can turn political brinksmanship or a regional conflict into a global conflagration. Nowhere is there a greater risk than with North Korea, its neighbors and the United States,” said Gov. Dukakis in announcing the first Annual World Reconciliation Day event. Please visit Boston Global Forum for details.

The Boston Global Forum has addressed multiple world issues such as improving working conditions in Asia, conflict in the South China Sea and enhancing cybersecurity amidst numerous state-sponsored, rogue actor and other cyberthreats.

World Reconciliation Day, is hosted annually by UNESCO-UCLA Chair on Global Learning and Global Citizenship Education, UCLA and the Boston Global Forum.

Llewellyn King on Scaramucci’s Quest to Stop the Leaks

 

Anthony Scaramucci makes an impression on The New Yorker

When Anthony Scaramucci first showed up he began with Italo-American gangsta-rap while speaking to Chris Cuomo on CNN's New Day and slid into vulgarity of the worst stripe with The New Yorker. He's made an impression all right and. Now as far as the PR profession's hand-wringing over Sean Spicer's ethics as White House communication chief goes—boring. The Mooch has laid raw the real PR problem: he came into an organization in disarray, with no clear direction from the CEO and communication department staffers spending all their time watching their own butts. If he thinks he can fix the messaging by simply shutting them up, well fuhgeddaboudit! 

That's pretty much how Llewellyn King, PBS-TV's White House Chronicle host and Inside Sources columnist sees the President's hard line on leaks and his effort to plug them. 

Scaramucci’s Vain Quest to Stop the Leaks

By Llewellyn King

There’s a new sheriff in town. He has strapped on his shooting irons and has been hunting down varmints — varmints right in the ranch house.

The sheriff is Anthony Scaramucci, the new White House communications director, and the varmints are the “leakers.” Watch out!

Scaramucci has threatened to fire people. He says he may be contacting the FBI and the Justice Department. He has also hinted that the leakers are high officials who are using juniors to contact the press.

This is a strange interpretation of “communications.”

The White House is leaking because it isn’t talking coherently. The Trump administration is not rooted in policy or philosophy, and the White House staff is divided against itself; a deeply unhappy place wanting in direction and internal clarity.

So, it leaks. It leaks for personal reasons. It leaks for patriotic reasons. It leaks out of frustration. And it leaks because no one

Llewellyn King

is in charge administratively: too many assistants — including Scaramucci — are reporting directly to the president, eschewing the line of command that normally flows through the chief of staff and the national security adviser. With Scaramucci on the loose, Reince Priebus is chief of staff in title only: a male nipple.

The communications failure is enormous and extends down to the inability of the press office to answer simple questions, like who was playing golf with the president? One wouldn’t assume this to be a state secret, but reporters ask and get no answer. They aren’t rebuffed, they’re just not answered.

In this instance, a question not answered is a revelation of another sort: the communications staff members are willfully kept in the dark. It isn’t claimed that state secrets and initiatives are being discussed on the greens. It’s a simple matter of the president’s recreation. Is Trump ashamed of the company he keeps?

The avalanche of leaks are cries for clarity in a chaotic administration. They are the symptoms, not the disease.

The leaks may just get worse. But the mechanics or leaking will get more inventive as Scaramucci ferrets around, suspecting his colleagues who will live in increasing fear.

Leaking is as old a journalism and was going on long before the invention of movable type. Journalists regard it with equanimity, as part of the trade, an integral part of the job — also as part of their right to collect the news, and the public’s right to know.

However, leaking does have large consequences when it comes to how the government makes decisions. The anti-leakers have a point here: Nowadays, ideas can’t be batted about inside government with abandon. Particularly, they can’t be committed to writing without the fear of them getting into the press.

Leaking classified information is criminal. WikiLeaks troubled many journalists; delicate choices in a democracy.

But that’s not what Scaramucci is fishing for; he wants to end the embarrassment of the president.

For those who keep secrets, technology has made the job a thousand times harder. When I was a young reporter, a congressman or White House staffer wishing to show you some document — to leak it — either had to tell you what it said or allow you to see and copy it by hand. This was risky, as only a few hands would’ve had access to the document or letter.

The Xerox machine changed that instantly, and the arrival of the digital age put a leak a keystroke away. Privacy and secrecy aren’t what they used to be.

But the hunt-and-kill mission Scaramucci is on won’t stop this White House — this seething hive of fear and ambition, this policy free for all, this scarcely controlled chaos, this gyre of half-formed purposes — from leaking.

With Sheriff Scaramucci nosing around, casting doubt on everyone, the leaking might accelerate but will be more devious: Tell a junior to tell friend to tell a reporter, rather than telling the reporter something directly. Email and telephones will be eschewed, or used with great care.

If the communications director wants to control leaking, he should try communicating. He shouldn’t send the press secretary out there looking like a pudding before the custard is poured over it, without her knowing what the president’s policies are or what he meant by his latest enigmatic tweet.

Sheriff, calm the chaos, and start communicating. Then, pardner, the leaks will dry up like them thar desert.

 

For InsideSources 

Vietnam-US Relations Key to Power Balance in Southeast Asia, Anders Corr, "Great Powers Grand Strategies"

Vietnam Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc's recent visit to the White House underscores the importance the United States-Vietnam relationship that has evolved positively over the past four decades. 

Vietnam, a nation of 90 million people, is today not only a trading partner but a key ally in the projection of US diplomacy and Naval power in the South China Sea— a region where China's rapacious behavior over shipping lanes, fishing, and other natural resources, as well as China's building of a military runway on the Spratly Islands has created an ongoing threat to peace.  During the visit Phuc told President Trump, the relationship has undergone significant upheavals in history, but that the two countries were now "comprehensive partners." 

In the  mid 90’s the US granted Most Favored Nation to establish open and vigorous trade relationships with Vietnam, which was seen as a new frontier to sell US brands, get cheap labor and buy agricultural products. Phuc is now replacing the cheap labor positioning with quality manufacturing given his county's nearly universal literacy, education, entrepreneurship and eagerness to learn strategies needed to penetrate the US market. This was evident when I took part in a panel discussion for Ho Ch Minh City's top 100 CEOs a couple of summers ago.

Vietnam has also become a hip travel destination for the been-there-done-that crowd. Some 400,000 Americans and 100,000 Canadians expected to visit Vietnam this year according to Vietnamese government figures.

Over the past two decades, The US-Vietnam relationship has become much more intertwined and multifaceted.  Americans now buy more Vietnamese products including electronics, clothing, rice coffee and oil than they sell—$30.6 billion, with US exports to Vietnam at $6 billion.  Cultural and academic ties are far more numerous and Vietnam has also become the key US ally in maintaining the balance of power in the Pacific.

In this environment comes fresh insight by Anders Corr, PhD in his forthcoming book, Great Powers, Grand Strategies: The New Game In The South China Sea, "This book is relevant to Vietnam, which is especially attentive to shifts in power between global powers in the South China Sea, including China, the U.S., Russia, the U.K., and France."

Anders Corr displays The Philippines Flag off Scarborough Shoals in the South China Sea

The book, Great Powers, Grand Strategies offers the analysis of a dozen experts on big picture approaches to the South China Sea dispute," according to publisher U.S. Naval Institute Press, "By exploring the international dimensions of this regional hotspot, coauthors Bill Hayton, Gordon Chang, Bernard Cole, James Fanell, and others examine how the military, diplomatic, and economic strategies of the major global actors have both contributed to solutions and exacerbated the potential for conflict."

 

 

 

As editor of the volume, Dr. Corr juxtaposes the grand strategies of the great powers to determine the likely outcomes of the South China Sea dispute, as well as evaluate the ways to possibly defuse tensions in the region."

As part of his research Dr. Corr, who is also the publisher of The Journal of Political Risk  visited all South China Sea claimant countries,  undertaking field research in Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Brunei. Dr. Corr has also conducted analysis for USPACOM, CENTCOM, and NATO, including work in Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Ukraine. Dr. Corr is also and active member of The Boston Global Forum, a think tank with ties to Harvard University Faculty, that focuses on peaceful solutions to global conflicts, including the current  tensions that plague the South China Sea.

Boston Global Forum was founded by Tuan Nguyen, who is the UCLA Chair for UNESCO and brought a free and open internet to Vietnam, and former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis.

Great Powers, Grand Strategies by Anders Corr is available from the U.S. Naval Institute Press

Dick Pirozzolo is managing director of Pirozzolo Company Public Relations in Boston and coauthor of "Escape from Saigon" with Michael Morris that focuses on the events of April 1-30, 1975, the last month of Vietnam War.

Breaking News, Multiple Deadlines, the Rush To Publish and the Quest for Truth in a Hostile Political Environment

The president routinely calls hard-working professional journalists the enemy of the people, a media giant like CNN fake news and unnamed sources nonexistent.  

When a politician wants to whip up populist frenzy, the press is an easy target. After all the media are liberal  Eastern establishment hacks who don't understand ordinary people and will publish leaks based, let national security be damned in exchange for headlines and breaking news.

To find out whether journalists and their media outlet employers have gotten slipshod and are playing fast and loose with the truth, let's take a look at the role of the press in America from the perspective of Charles J. Glasser Jr. who knows his way around journalism and the law.

For over a decade, Charles, was global media counsel to Bloomberg News, responsible for litigation, ethical newsroom issues and pre-publication review, and was responsible for handling the work of more than 2,100 journalists on a 24-hour basis. 
Prior to becoming an attorney, he worked as a journalist for 16 years giving him a keen sense for the pressures journalists face with multiple deadlines and a “breaking news” media environment and the care they put in to “getting it right.” 

Charles was the guy Bloomberg reporters had to face when they were about to go with a story right on deadline and their editor says, “Great work, but we gotta run it by legal first.”  Here are his views on how professional journalists deal with those pressures and the consequences of their actions from his five-part series on Enterprise and Investigative Reporting he wrote for Talking Biz News. 

 

“This Just In and the Rush to Publish"
by 
Charles J.  Glasser, Jr. Esq.

 

Weighing the public interest against when to publish is a particular challenge for enterprise and investigative journalists, so I thought it would be valuable to hear from Amanda Bennett, the executive editor for Bloomberg News’ projects and investigations team who often manages stories that have been months in the making. 

As a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal and The (Portland) Oregonian, respectively, Bennett won the Pulitzer Prize in 1997 and again in 2001 for National Reporting and for Public Service. Given the long lead time that her team’s stories have and the often controversial nature of investigative reporting, Bennett refuses to let the convenience of a publication schedule affect her judgment of when a story is ready for publication. “You must approach the subject and allow them the chance to poke holes in what you think you learned,” says Bennett.

Emphasizing transparency and fairness, Bennett notes that younger reporters have a tendency to “hold their cards too close to the chest” by waiting too long on making the call for comment, fearing that the subject will either dish a watered-down version to the competition, start pressuring sources to recant, or launch some other pre-emptive attack on the story. “That’s the cost of doing it right,” Bennett says, and expecting honesty from her reporters, adds that reporters first approaching a story subject “should never obfuscate” what the thrust of the story is.

Unlike breaking news, Bennett notes, enterprise and investigative stories may be complicated by negotiations with the company or story subject. Deal-making is sometimes necessary, Bennett says. “Companies will often say ‘If you hold off from publishing, we’ll give you an hour with the CEO’, or they offer to provide access to documents.” In her experience, “making reasonable accommodations to include the subject’s point of view or allowing them to show you where you might be wrong is the ethical thing to do, and we are better off if this happens sooner, rather than later in the process.”  At the same time, reporters should never show anyone outside the newsroom a draft of a story as part of a deal, Bennett adds.

Here is my Checklist for Public Interest when the pressure to publish is building

• Ask yourself if your reader will be demonstrably smarter, safer, healthier, wiser, or able to make more informed decisions as a result of your article.

• Show the impact on lives that the facts about which you report will have. Don’t assume that readers see how a story affects them.

• Separate merely interesting or previously unknown tidbits from genuine information that the public ought to know. The former may not enjoy a high degree of legal protection while that latter almost always will.

• Don’t let yourself be accused of sandbagging a subject. If you have been working on a story for three weeks, it’s unfair to call them for comment or denial the night before publication.

• Be honest with the subject about what you are writing, but never ever show them notes or a draft.

• Use great caution in making deals with story subjects, and use “check quotes” or “quote approval” very sparingly. This almost always gives the subject an opportunity to re-write what they said. Confer with your editor or newsroom lawyer before making any such deal: it might be a binding contract.

Dick Pirozzolo, APR  www.pirozzolo.com  is a member of the Foreign Press Association and The Society of Professional Journalists. His  Pirozzolo Company Public Relations  builds positive relationships with journalists and the media for his clients.

 

Charles Classer, is the author of “The International Libel and Privacy Handbook” and consultant on media law and corporate communications issues He can be reached at www.charlesglasser.net or charlesglasseresq@gmail.com For the complete series visit: Talking Biz News.