DUMB QUESTION: Any laws govern PR firms? allowed to lie, etc?

[yurbud]

Are PR firms allowed to lie and provide misleading witnesses to public hearings?

Are there any requirements that witnesses and lobbyists in Congress disclose who funds them?

Are there any consequences if a PR firm helps a client lie or misleads the public?

Is there any conceivable argument against requiring things like this?

The thought was prompted by the news that a former DNC chair is now shilling for DIEBOLD, the vote rigging scourge of Democracy, and the only way to sell them is to hide or minimize their crimes.


Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. It depends

if someone says something under oath and its a lie, they can be held accountable. And there is defamation of character.

[greatauntoftriplets]

3. Exactly.

But there are no professional standards. Think of all the hyperbole that exists around stuff like new consumer products. PR companies spin the message to their clients' favor. As do advertising agencies. Same happens in corporate PR departments.

I should know, I've worked in PR for 30 years. But, it's a damn living.

[Raster]

2. the announcement that a former DNC chair will be shilling for diebold

should pretty much drive home the point that the dems are not the opposition party. They're not out to protect the country. They, for the most part, are part of the problem. Here's a simple little test when wondering about a dem in Congress' character: did they vote for the bankruptcy bill? It's been pretty much admitted that MBNA ghost wrote the bill. Seems the loan shark interest they've been charging isn't enought. If your dem representative or senator voted for the bankruptcy bill, they ought to be given their walking papers. Don't worry about them, they've already got another career lined up. As a lobbyist.

[serryjw]

5. You hit the nail on the head

It's tough for me to get excited over 2006/2008....If this shit continues we very well could take back the congress and the WH.....but what have we won?

[yurbud]

7. that lobbyist revolving door should be shut

they shouldn't be able to work for any for-profit business and draw a pension from us.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[mcscajun]

4. No special laws govern PR firms...just the usual ones...

...they have no special defense against libel and slander laws, for example.

First, though, you have to catch them, then you have to have really deep pockets for very, very good lawyers.

PR firms aren't always lobbyists, nor are lobbyists always PR firms.

Lobbyists are bound by regulations in their conduct with our government, as well as the usual laws governing anyone's behavior.

See above for "First, though, you have to catch them..."

[yurbud]

11. If Bush regime falls, we will have window of reform & PR should be on list

For a brief time, public demand to clean house will outweigh their deep pockets.

We should have a reasonable, well-thought out set of rules in mind that we can demand Congress pass.



Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[GarySeven]

6. I run a PR agency ...

My clients are involved in good works for other people: helping people fight injustice, find solutions, etc. The PR I do for my clients is designed to highlight that work in the hope that others with problems will see the media coverage and hire my clients to solve those problems. I don't manipulate the press - I tell them about some amazing people who solve problems, or I tell the media about the cases my clients are dealing with: cases that involve regular people dealing with flaws in the system that need redress.

I know that PR people have a bad reputation and I know that journalists (I used to be one) think poorly of them. But I also know for a fact that the majority of us are interested only in getting the word out about our clients in a positive way. Yes, publicity allows our clients to make money; yes, that allows ME to make money - but it also means that people know there are solutions out there and that there are professionals who can help.

[yurbud]

9. if you are doing good works, would these simple rules hurt your business?

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[GarySeven]

12. for one thing, my clients are private citizens

engaged in private enterprise. In a word, they help people for money - but in the same context that doctors help people in exchange for money (and less in the context of a prostitute).

That being the case, I don't want any regulation of my business or how I do things. I don't want any public scrutiny - and I don't think I owe people the right to examine my business, my business practices, or the motives of my clients. I believe I owe the public the truth about their work and the effect of their work, which is what I provide. I assume that if you work for someone you do not want them to over-supervise you, but to trust that you are doing a good job in an ethical and mature way.

My business operates on trust - and I suppose that seems an untenable or unreliable form of regulation, but that is the way - I think - it should be.

[yurbud]

14. how well does trust work for regulating other kinds of business?

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[GarySeven]

16. I can't answer that question ...

I only think that it is a sad commentary on PR and other professions that they have devolved to the point where that question can even be asked.

[Canuckistanian]

8. They can and have done

Remember back in the first Gulf war, the story about Iraqi soldiers stealing baby incubators?

That (false) story was made out of whole cloth by the firm of Hill & Knowlton.

And this story was presented to the Congressional Human Rights Caucus without verification, corroboration or any documentation whatsoever. And the 15 year old who told the story? None other than Nayirah Al-Saba, daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador.

Since then, any attempts to question the Al-Sabah family about clarification of the story have only been met with angry refusals.

[yurbud]

10. I was thinking of Kuwaiti incubators too.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[wli]

13. fraud? libel? slander?

I'm not sure what the technical standards really are.

[Wizard777]

15. NORML vs. PFDFA Brain Waves PSA

National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws vs. The Partnership For a Drug Free America.

The PFDFA produced a Public Service Announcement commercial called "Brain Waves." In this PSA teh fraedulently represented the ECG brain waves of a 70 year old woman that had been in a comma for 7 years as the brainwave of a 16 year old after smokeing marijuana. They countered with this is just a premis.We dodn't want to harm a 16 year old toget his ECG brainwaves for the commercial. But smoking Matijuana slows and reduces brain activity. Basically saying it makes you stupid. NORML introduced studies of Marijuana smokers brain waves and expert witnesses. They proved in Court that Brain activity can increase by as much as 164% after smoking marijuana. The Court decission was that truth in advertizing laws do apply to PSA's.

My personal opinion is that they would also apply to political ads. in respect to things that have or are happening. But Canidates have an unrestrained reign on future visions. Basically you are not allowed to lie about past or present events. But it is harmless to lie about your visions for the future. The only one you fool there is yourself. Those unabandoned visions would come under regulation as the Future passes to present and then on to past.