Shame on you, Burson Marsteller

A complaint too often heard from Public Relations pros is, "We get no respect."

It's not hard to see why many in this field feel that way.  We often get ignored by the media, with pitches and calls unanswered.  Clients think what we do is easy and that all you have to do to get coverage is be good friends with a reporter or producer.  

Ours is not an easy field, and it's hard to earn respect... from media and from clients.  Some lack of respect may, unfortunately, be justified because many in PR act less than professionally.  I cringe when I hear friends in the media tell stories about PR people who call constantly, never taking no for an answer and lying, begging or crying to convince a reporter to use a story or interview a client.  I've heard too many stories about PR people who are then unresponsive when a reporter finally does call for information.  And of course, there are more stories about poorly written news releases.

Those in PR who do conduct ourselves professionally often have to work even harder to prove ourselves because of the badwill caused by the PR hacks and untrained/unsupervised junior people.

One would think that one of the top-ranked and oldest PR agencies in the nation would have high standards for all aspects of the work it does, and especially in terms of ethics.  That's why it's disheartening to read that Burson Marsteller has seriously breached the ethics of our profession.

It's come out today that Burson has been waging a smear campaign against Google, on behalf of its client Facebook.  USA Today earlier had reported that Burson was trying to convince media people to write negative stories about privacy concerns with a Google G-mail product called Social Circle.  Evidently, this has been going on for several days, without Burson saying who was actually behind the negative assertions.  The information Burson was spreading for Facebook has, in fact, turned out to be false.

I don't care one bit whether or not the assertions about Google are true.  It is 100% wrong and unethical to try to plant stories in the media without disclosing where they are coming from.  The highly-paid bigwigs at Burson should know better, and they should have ensured that their middle managers know and adhere to a basic code of ethics.

Fraser Seitel, a respected PR practicioner and counselor, had this to say in Ragan's PR Report: “Good, solid, substantial firms, like these, should conduct themselves ethically above board,” Seitel said. “If Facebook has problems with Google, then it should have the confidence and decency to express the reasons why, from the mouth of a Facebook executive. Sneaking around, conducting negative research, surreptitiously placing anonymous hit pieces, based on one-sided bias, is normally associated with PR bottom feeders in Washington and L.A., not respected firms like Burson.”

The PRSA (not one of my favorite trade groups) has a code of ethics that frowns upon such behavior.  A comment in one of the PR trade journals today quotes PRSA Chairman Rosanna Fiske as saying only 14 of the 2,200 Burson employees are PRSA members and therefore subject to its code of conduct.

Hogwash!  As one of the biggest PR agencies globally, Burson has an obligation on many fronts, including to the PR profession as a whole, to uphold high ethical standards.  This behavior is what one might expect of a "hack" PR shop or a K Street lobbying firm in DC, pulling stuff out of its bag of political dirty tricks.  Remember Nixon's Watergate scandal?

Shame on Burson Marsteller for putting a stain on the Public Relations profession!  You, of all agencies, should know better.

No doubt, we'll be hearing more about this as the story unfolds and gets spun.  But the damage is done, and now here's another reason we get no respect.  Because when a shop like Burson pulls crap like this, maybe we simply don't deserve respect. 

 

 

Comments

[Jeanne Byington]

David,

I hope nobody covered BM's "news" proving that they, too, are untrained and unsupervised. A basic rule of PR is to make clear who/what you represent. If this isn't apparent, a reporter should know to ask before setting finger on keyboard or lips to microphone.

I don't need PRSA or any other organization or their rules to run an ethical PR business. Most of us don't.

My heart sinks when I read of any PR agency, big or small, that sleazes and cheats or I hear about any PR person who lies, overstates, and blah, blah, blahs his/her way to what he/she wants--be it a placement or a client.

That said, I don't in any way feel that BM and the way it conducts its business reflects on my ethics. I have worked years to protect my reputation, as have you. It’s the most valuable thing any business person has.

However something bad does happen when PR firms promise the world to clients and cheat to achieve unrealistic results: It inflates clients' expectations, setting standards that legitimate PR people can't meet.

Some of BM's clients will look to smaller businesses to represent them. This will mean more business for those who conduct themselves the way they should. That's the good news.

[Judy Gombita]

via Twitter...

Believe me, you do NOT want to be "shamed" by David!

[David Reich]

Here's an official statement from Burson Marsteller about this issue...
This is from their online Newsroom.

The following statement was released by Burson-Marsteller on May 12, 2011.

"Now that Facebook has come forward, we can confirm that we undertook an assignment for that client.

The client requested that its name be withheld on the grounds that it was merely asking to bring publicly available information to light and such information could then be independently and easily replicated by any media. Any information brought to media attention raised fair questions, was in the public domain, and was in any event for the media to verify through independent sources.

Whatever the rationale, this was not at all standard operating procedure and is against our policies, and the assignment on those terms should have been declined. When talking to the media, we need to adhere to strict standards of transparency about clients, and this incident underscores the absolute importance of that principle."

[David Reich]

O'Dwyers has the story and then links to my 2 cents for "added perspective." Nice.

http://www.odwyerpr.com/blog/index.php?/archives/2532-Facebook-Says-It-is-Mystery-Client-in-Burson-Flap.html

[Alan Hirsch]

The piece on "Shame on you, Burson Marsteller" was interesting but a little confusing because of the subjects it brought up. I'd like to address some of this "confusion."

1. Article says "Some lack of respect may, unfortunately, be justified because many in PR act less than professionally."

Response: Most lack of respect is justified, because most people in PR act less than professionally. This is to be expected, because anyone, anywhere only needs to say "I am in public relations" to be in public relations. It is exactly the same for other activities such as journalism, radio/tv, blogging, speechwriting, research, book and magazine writing, photography.

This is not the case for professions such as law, medicine, dentistry, accounting, teaching. Here standards for knowledge must be met and yet all of us have plenty of complaints against lawyers, doctors, dentists, accountants and teachers. Incompetency is common even for those highly regulated professions, so why shouldn't there be great incompetency in the PR field, where there is no regulation.

What should be understood is that many people working in many professions and/or crafts are incompetent. The PR field is not a solo practitioner for incompetency. It is just one of the players.

2. "Good PR pros have to work even harder to prove ourselves because of the bad will caused by PR hacks and untrained/unsupervised junior people."

We can say that for all professions and skills. It is especially easy to understand, if one has had the pleasure of having a bad teacher, a bad doctor or a bad lawyer.

3. It's disheartening to read that Burson Marsteller has seriously breached the ethics of our profession.

I'm not surprised that Burson has breached any ethics, any more than I am surprised at what happens in the NY State Senate, or at BP, or at the NYPD or the U.S. Naval Academy, or at the White House.

I once had to threaten a major national pr firm when it was on a campaign to hire our (very small firm) employees, because they were good and they were trained properly. I simply said to its CEO that if he condoned the hiring of one more person from our staff that he would have a very big problem. The raiding of our staff stopped immediately.

Why should Burson Marsteller be expected to conduct itself in an ethical manner, when our own NY State legislature allows its members to work for law firms and clients and not reveal who they are working for on the side? Conflict of interest?

4. "When a shop like Burson pulls crap like this, maybe we simply don't deserve respect."

You got that right, which reminds me of when my CEO tipped his hand and I discovered he would sell me down the river in an instant, even if I was 100 percent right in a client conflict. When I told him of my discovery that he would betray me on a dime, he said with a straight face "you got that right." I worked 20 more years for the guy but at least I knew the picture.

[David Reich]

Thanks for your thoughts, Alan.

The guys at B-M probably were blinded by the money and let that trump ethics. But they got caught. I wonder how often this happens and we never hear about it.

[Ray M]

Wow. You've made PR into the "niggahs" of media, without the help of jack hole journos. Congrats.

[David Reich]

Ray, I don't appreciate your use of the N word on my space, even if you say it in quotes.

I haven't made PR into anything, however. The honchos at Burson Marsteller, with their bad and greedy decision to accept a sleazy assignment, are the ones who have hurt the PR profession.

[Mary Deming Barber]

via Twitter ...

Great piece!

[Seattle pr firms]

Whatever the reason, it was not the normal procedure and it is against our policy and the task, the conditions should have been rejected. When you talk to the media, we must comply with strict standards of transparency about clients, and this incident highlights the absolute importance of this principle. "