Rosanna Fiske, head of the PR Society of America, a sinkhole of false financial reporting, undemocratic practices and caveman-level press relations, yesterday lectured New York Post financial columnist John Crudele on “ethics” in a letter-to-the-editor.

John, you don’t have to take this and I hope you look into what goes on at PRS (I leave the “A” off because it has defiled that name with its noxious practices that this website has documented repeatedly).

fiske, crudele
Fiske, Crudele
The July 19 Crudele column, headlined “What this country needs is a good PR person,” said President Obama is “not cutting it in the make ‘em-feel-better department” and suggested that “PR” could put more emphasis on the “good news.”

The press, he said, would have to correct happy talk such as corporate earnings being up 7.5%. Most of the gain, particularly in energy and materials companies, is coming from inflation, noted Crudele. Without those two groups, profits would only be up 1.8% in the quarter, he said.

Crudele’s remarks did not sit well with Fiske who, with PRS h.q. staffers, has been on a rampage lately reaming out anyone who makes an alleged ethical transgression.

The staffers recently criticized the Redner Group of the West Coast for threatening to blackball negative media.

The Society has an official blackball against the O’Dwyer Co. which was delivered to our offices March 19, 2010 by chair/CEO Gary McCormick and president/COO Bill Murray.

Crudele Definition of PR Faulted

Fiske’s letter said Crudele’s definition of what PR pros do “couldn’t be further from reality.”

Crudele, she wrote, “wrongly believes that America needs someone ‘whose job is to make bad news sound not so bad.’”

What citizens need most is “someone who will give them a realistic view of the state of affairs” of the country,” she wrote.

“Good, ethical PR professionals in government can certainly do just that while still advocating for our country,” she concluded.

Our view is that what America needs is PR pros who help the press to get their questions answered.

PR pros are supposed to give “hard answers” to the “tough questions” of reporters,” Tim Russert told the 2007 annual conference (link, sub req'd).

PR pros today are under heavy pressure from legal, marketing and finance to stay “on message.” This reporter has never seen them under such tight control.

Common practice today is not only to say “No comment” to a reporter’s questions but to not acknowledge receipt of the questions at all. Silence from PR has reached epidemic proportions. At institutions and corporations, communication with media is only via e-mails which are closely monitored by legal/finance/marketing.

We urge Crudele to contact Fiske, Murray and Yann and see if they’ll talk to him.

We have extensive documentation of any of our statements about the Society and are only too eager to present to them anyone. Fiske, a PR professor at Florida International University, is at 305/668-0449, [email protected]; Murray at 212/460-1401, [email protected]; Yann at 212/460-1452, [email protected].

PR Society members follow a press policy that requires them to check with VP-PR Arthur Yann before responding to reporters’ queries about the Society.

Society candidates are answering none of the questions we sent them this year because of this policy.

Official policy of PRS to us is that we should be “beaten to a pulp,” a threat that was delivered by an Assembly delegate to us last Oct. 15 in front of the Washington Hilton and which he repeated in an anonymous letter to us in January.

This website has documented failure of the Society to follow rules of the Financial Accounting Standards Board which require that dues income be booked over the period involved (one year in PRS’s case).