A few months ago, in the early days of Twitter, an interesting thing happened. Twitter was pregnant with inclusive, bipartisan promise way back then. The future looked bright, like M.J. circa 1988 or Britney before she married K-Fed. Here’s what happened: some of the PR folks at Monsanto responded to the many angry attacks on [...]]]>

A few months ago, in the early days of Twitter, an interesting thing happened. Twitter was pregnant with inclusive, bipartisan promise way back then. The future looked bright, like M.J. circa 1988 or Britney before she married K-Fed. Here’s what happened: some of the PR folks at Monsanto responded to the many angry attacks on that unpopular brand with one or two charmingly personal tweets. They wanted us to know that Monsanto is not staffed by child-eating hobgoblins; that they don’t sprinkle their cafeteria food with the salt of human tears; that they do, in fact, have lovely families, noble intentions and big hearts.

You know what, it’s easy to believe that’s true. I’ve not only met lots of “communications professionals,” I’ve been one. A few are total creeps, like this one slick dude I remember talking to several years ago who was trying to sell bottled oxygen. (A quick search revealed conclusive evidence that the product was worthless, except as a placebo, but did that deter him? No. He informed me that the manufacturers were in the process of commissioning their own scientific study which would tell the customers what he wanted them to hear.) But most are just doing a necessary, inevitable job, and some good souls have even dedicated themselves to the enlightened proposition that doing real good is the best PR play a company can make.

But the size of the hearts of public relations and marketing pros unfortunately, has little to do with the consequences of public relations and marketing. The problem with PR is that you get paid to do it. There’s an enormous bias built in.

Countless millions of dollars are paid to really impressive, intelligent, good people, so that they can tell us all about the positive side of organizations that have a strong financial interest in having us believe nice things about them. At the same time, these good people are being paid not to tell us the negative side, except as necessary damage control during a crisis. The bias is simple and obvious: huge companies like Monsanto can easily afford entire fleets of highly talented PR professionals. But you’re very unlikely to find one of these pros working for the non-profit and consumer advocacy groups that take up the other side of the question. There’s a windy silence over there, poorly filled by volunteers, amateurs, and the thin resources of what’s left of indy journalism.

If there’s evil in public relations and marketing, it doesn’t proceed from the moral qualities of those in the profession. If proceeds from the fact that PR people and marketers have to eat, and pay for their mortgages. Look for them, and you will find them working diligently, honestly and with the best intentions for whatever company and whatever political party has the necessary cash. The net effect of the entire profession, no matter what individuals in it may aspire to, is not the unveiling of truth or the pursuit of the public good, but more power to money.

[This post was brought to you by someone who wasn't paid to write it, and therefore will probably never write something like this again. He has to eat.]