Ron Levy (4/21):
My wife's brother was told he'd have about six years to live after he got lymphoma, a blood disease related to what Ted has, but Joe lived and worked happily and painfree for 26 years following reatment at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.
Just as top doctors save patients, look-ahead PR teams are saving companies by sponsoring health research. If you're at a large company that faces a crisis, the public may decide "maybe six people are guilty, not the whole company," or else "all those bastards in management should go to prison!" PR can cause the difference. If your management's PR has gotten 100 million Americans to feel their necks and armpits for lumps (one in every three of us will die of cancer) and if the 100 million know your company is trying to make it one-in-five or one-in-ten, we can judge how many of the 100 million may be inclined to buy what you sell and to want that the government should not hurt you.
The public remembers.
A Burson-Marsteller executive reports in a college textbook: "Visuals remain in a person's mind long after oratorical appeals to action have faded away." Visual opportunity: at the announcement news conference, your CEO is pictured amidst top doctors telling how they are trying to save us from cancer. On the platform curtain is the hospital's logo and your company's.
In Washington, if you're giving a million a year to fight cancer, legislators may much prefer to attack a company with less "good guy" status. You could call it the PR Princple of Reciprocal Protection--the public tends to protect those who are trying to protect the public.
Joe Honick, GMA International Ltd (4/21):
Ron, can we not merely wish Mr Pincus all the best and marvel at his energetic c ommitment to life?
Ron Levy (4/22):
Joe, we can do more than wish him well and we should. We can urge support of medical research that could save some of the 100 million Americans now livig who are likely to die of cancer. If more research had been supported ten and 20 years ago, Ted might today be in good health. We can make a case to PR communicators, some of whom sit on the boards that donate billions a year to good causes, that supporting medical research may not only save the lives of patients but also save the necks of companies that sponsor research.
When the public learns that a company has been accused of something, many people--perhaps most--figure the company is probably guilty or else why would the accusation be made. But if an accused company is known for supporting medical research that could save people from getting cancer, most people may prefer that our government should not harm the company. Even if they are presumed guilty as hell. Even if they ARE guilty. So it's not enough to wish Ted well. We should promote research that could have saved Ted and may save him yet. It can mean millions of lived saved--and repeated worldwide media coverage for a sponsoring company.
Companies spend $40 million or $50 million sponsoring an Olympic team. Can you imagine how much good it could do the public--and the sponsors--if that money is spent on medical research? |