I was at the keynote as well. I think there seemed to be overreaction from the audience. I do not believe Penelope intended to use it in a bad way.

I think people should have reacted more harsh when MITCH ALBOM used the word “spin.” Why? Because Mitch is a journalist and I feel he used it as a strike on PR pros. But people didn’t seem to notice it as much because Mitch is a good story teller and everyone was wrapped up with hearing about Morrie from Tuesdays with Morrie.

As long as PR practitioners are being honest with their messages, that’s the important thing.

I direct communications for Washington State University Spokane. In my office, with a staff of 3.5 for a campus of 3000+ students, we handle PR, community relations, events, mktg, media relations, web/online, advertising, emergency communications & crisis response, internal communications, community relations, & government relations w/an integrated communications approach.

One of the comments above said “PR only talks about the GOOD stuff.” Not in my office, and this idea that PR people are all Sunshine Sally is a common misperception.

We work on the PUBLIC in public relations. How do we understand what members of the public (defined in terms of various audiences witih differing interests) think, understand what we do in teaching, research and outreach, and describe our work in ways that connect effectively with where they are in their thinking so they will understand and support us?

This includes things like emergency communications and issues work, where we include statements grounded in our values and principles as we talk about difficult topics and differing views.

I think people have gotten so cynical in general–not just about the way issues are presented to the public by an organization–that even these sincere statements sound like so much fluff.

Any really good PR firm–Desautel Hege in my city of Spokane comes to mind–works with clients to prepare them for talking clearly and effectively about problems, things gone sour, and negative outcomes. It’s not just cookies and confetti work.

@BarbChamberlain
http://www.spokane.wsu.edu

One dot represents what’s going on with the company and the other dot is what is going on in the world around me (or what the media is interested in). In my mind, it’s the job of PR to connect them and communicate how their client/company is relevant to the world/culture/community.

To me this isn’t spinning, it’s just connecting.

I myself draw a line between the regular PR practitioner and a political strategist, due to my dislike of today’s political world. Likewise, as you do David, can draw different definitions of the word spin.

The same can be said for the term “wordsmith”; it means to polish for them, spin for the other.

All in all, the English language is a beautiful thing.

What about the idea of being authentic and using our position/profession to build relationships with the public instead of trying to de-authenticate them? Isn’t that what “spinning” is doing after all? Like it or not, spinning may just be “polishing,” but to our audience is that really how they perceive it? Is that how we perceive it as consumers? When our client does something amazing we don’t see much “spin,” we get the truth. When they screw up–this is where the “spin” factor comes into play–why not share a client’s experience (or mistake) and then focus on the great things that were done to fix it. Bottom line, spinning, only goes so far in my opinion. If you aren’t authentic, real, and tell the truth, you won’t survive anyway. There are companies out there who are, and on top of it, are publically willing to learn and recognize their mistakes. Who wouldn’t value that?

So as PR professionals why not focus our energy on building relationships with the public? When there comes a time we start worrying everything is going to go up in flames, the people you spent the time building relationships with are going to be the same ones spending their time defending you.

As an editor, whenever I get pitched by a firm, I automatically know that the person on the other end will NEVER tell me the whole truth about what they are pitching, because to do so would hinder the PR process. This is what journalists are for, to dig the truth out of whatever it is being pitched.

You really get a clear picture of this with product pitches. PR peeps will give me everything wonderful about said product, but it takes an objective journalist/reviewer to give me the real deal, warts and all. That’s not to say journalists are always looking for the negative (though many PR peeps would say otherwise), it’s just that we understand that the PR firm is being PAID by said product company to put their product in a positive light and any type of negativity associated with their pitch can hinder the process of getting coverage or can result in negative press.

We all know this. This is the game we all play and have played for decades. This is no secret.

Regarding social media as a PR tool, the keyword with using Twitter, blogs, etc. is SUBTLETY. If you’re going to keep tweeting about said client multiple times, it gets annoying. Just as it gets annoying getting multiple phone calls or emails. (Note: If we’re interested, we’ll reply back, I swear!) The abuse of social media will be a PR person’s downfall.

Your date analogy was right on – we don’t aim to mislead, but traditionally, the role of PR is to optimistically position our company/client so as to present the best, most appropriate version for the audience.

This topic is one of the reasons marketing through social media is so great – it forces authenticity and brings the “spin” (however you define it) out into the open.