Well, I’m in trouble again.

This time, it’s for something I wrote in Ragan Report. Actually, that’s not quite true. I’m in trouble for writing something that somebody else said, to be more precise.

Here’s the background:

In my front-page column for RR, I was talking about how PowerPoint is overused, misused, and abused in Corporate America. And I told an anecdote about a corporate meeting I was at recently, where an executive got up to speak, and threw up an unreadable PowerPoint slide, filled with arrows and numbers and boxes and other crap.

Here is a small part of what I wrote in RR:

“Right away, someone from the back of the room yelled out, ‘Not another PowerPoint!’ And someone at the table where we were sitting let out a huge sigh and said, under his breath, ‘Jesus, does he expect us to read that shit?’”

Well . . . that last sentence made one RR reader very angry. Her e-mail to my editor at Ragan started this way:

“Please stop sending my ANY material written by Steve Crescenzo. I find his use of vulgarity to be extremely offensive and unprofessional.”

Oh, but she wasn’t finished. She also said:

“Two problems here: the Lord’s name in vain (yes, some of us do consider that offensive, and the use of ‘shit’). I am not above swearing indeed I can hold my own in this area. However, any organization representing itself to be expert at communication, surely can search the available vocabulary to find language that supports its key points rather than stooping to the lowest, most base choices. I believe Mr Crescenzo thinks himself to be quite sophisticated, the ‘shock jock’ of professional communicators. I find him to be crass, unprofessional and easy to dismiss.”

Okay, first, I’m offended that she thinks that I think I’m sophisticated. How insulting. Second, if I was easy to dismiss, why didn’t she just dismiss me instead of writing a letter?

But the real point here is that I think she’s dead wrong.

Because . . . what I wrote was a direct quote! If I was just throwing gratuitous references to Jesus and shit all over the place, she might have a point.

But I was quoting what someone else said!

And you know what? It was a good quote. It was a quote that summed up the feelings in the room. As a writer, you live for quotes like that.

I supposed I could have changed it. I could have softened it a tad, maybe. I could have changed “Jesus” to “Geez” or “Dang” or something similar. And I could have changed “shit” to “crap” or something softer. But somehow, “Geez, does he expect us to read that doo doo” doesn’t have the same effect, does it?

And besides . . . that is not what the man said!! Changing an executive's quote because he sounds like a corporate robot is one thing. I've done that before, and I'll do it again. But changing a direct quote in Ragan Report is unethical. The only thing I maybe could have done is the old sh** option, which is not an option, as far as I'm concerned.

And somehow, I think that if I wrote: "Jes**, does he really expect us to read that sh**?" the woman still would have been upset.

I offend enough people with what I write myself. I can’t worry about offending people with direct quotes from someone else, can I?

In my last post, I wrote about how I offended a woman when I didn't even mean to, by running a quote that had "Jesus" and "shit" in the same sentence.

It got me to thinking about some of the other times I've gotten into trouble on the Ragan Report. Two times in particular come to mind, and they're both pretty good stories.

The first time, I was just a jerk. And I can accept that.

Ragan Report has a regular back-page feature called, "And Finally . . .".

It's where we put stupid quotes, weird news, editorial mistakes, goofy headlines, and other silly stuff.

Well, one issue we did some kind of weird headline about a fire. I can't remember what it was, but it was one of those headlines that you can't believe a newspaper actually ran. And it was pretty funny, in a macabre sort of way.

But . . . since someone actually did die in the fire that was being written about, one reader wrote a letter ripping us for making light of the situation. SHe was really, really upset.

I, of course, ran her letter, which was full of references to the fire, and how awful we were to make light of such a thing, and what kind of person would make fun of someone dying in a fire, and etc. etc.

And with her letter, I also wrote a headline:

"RR Reader Hot Under the Collar"

Whooooeeeee!! You thought she was mad the first time around? I thought she was going to come to Chicago and burn our offices down.

The second time I angered quite a few people was even funnier, I thought. While going through my stacks of employee publications one day, I came across a retiree publication. And on the cover was an old man. I mean, old. You could practically see the old-man spittle running down the corner of his mouth.

And this old man was sitting in a chair, surrounded by all these baskets. The story was about how this retiree had found happiness making baskets. And the headline read:

A Tisket, A Tasket
Earl Makes Excellent Baskets

Well . . . I just thought this was ridiculous. I mean, come on. Is this the best you can do with a retiree publication? Stories about fossils making baskets? And the picture certainly didn't do Earl justice, either. He looked half-dead. Which, in fact, led to my comment on the story. I wrote:

"If you're going to run that kind of photo and that kind of story, you should at least be honest with the headline:

A Tisket, A Tasket
Earl's got one foot in the casket"

And MAN, you wouldn't believe how many people that pissed off. I think we lost about 15 subscribers over that one.

The only other time I remember getting someone so mad was when I made a fat joke. I forget what the context was, but I think it involved a fat midget or something like that.

Well, a reader wrote me a two page letter, screaming at me that it is NOT okay to make fun of fat people.

"We have learned not to make fun of people for the color of their skin, or their ethnicity. But somehow, it still seems okay to make fun of heavy people," he wrote. "Well, it is NOT okay, and I found your comments to be highly offensive."

I answered this man myself, by sending an e-mail saying I was sorry I offended him. And I included a post script:

"P.S." I wrote. "I'm fat, too."

I never heard from him again.

Well, I'm at lunch on the first day of my new seminar, "The Master Class of Employee Communications: 100 Great Ideas That Work."

We're kicking it off in Chicago this week . . . and it's a fantastic group. In fact, in all my years of doing seminars, this might be the most intelligent, and best looking, group I've ever had.

We just had some folks from McDonalds come in as guest speakers---Brian Kramer, Steve Finkelmeyer, and Lisa Grover, whom I just discovered carries the unofficial title, "Blog Czar."

Watching their presentation, you really feel hope for the future of technology in internal communications. I mean, these guys are good. Global customization, a great content management system . . . these guys are ahead of the curve.

While they were speaking, their COO was doing a live blog---fielding dozens of questions from around the globe. And according to Brian, the COO had a great line while he was announcing the live blog to a group of people at corporate headquarters:

"I'm going to be doing a live blog next week," he told the crowd. "If you don't know what a blog is, ask your kids."

This guy is also podcasting his regular sales message, and doing a regular blog that he updates about once a week.

"This guy wants to do all the latest things," Brian told the crowd. "We're lucky to have him."

Yes, indeed. In fact, McDonalds is rolling out a blog pilot program where other employees will be able to get their voice out there. It's in its infancy stages, but that doesn't scare these guys.

"Hey, it's a pilot program," Brian told us. "If it doesn't work perfectly, shame on us I guess. But we're going to try."

He also had some advice for getting this kind of program past Legal.

"Bring them into it early and often," he told us. "Make them feel a part of the process. The truth is, you probably have the policies in place already, if you have online communication policies. You just have to adapt them for blogs."

I have to head back down now. I'll post more later . . .

Well, the Chicago seminar is going great. Wonderful group, tons of questions and arguments and jokes and crazy stories . . . the perfect seminar.

But boy, did I put my foot in my mouth today. Sometimes, I can't believe I even have a job.

I was talking about this interactive, online tool that one big company has on its intranet. It's a way for employees to ask the top guy questions, and the top guy is great about answering anything and everything. And the guy has really grown into the tool . . . in fact, he loves it now. He brings it up in meetings, and tells employees about it when he sees them in different corporate settings.

And in trying to capture his enthusiasm, I said to this group of mostly women:

"This guy tells everybody about his tool!"

Thank God everybody laughed . . . but I was mortified. I mean, making jokes is one thing . . . but referring to an executive's tool is something else entirely.

Sometimes, I suck at public speaking.

I'm on lunch at day one of the Master Class seminar in Vancouver . . . another great group, and more weird stories of life in corporate America/Canada.

One story from the Chicago seminar last week that I wanted to share, in the "You think YOU have it rough" category.

We were talking about doing informal focus groups with employees, when one woman said that would be impossible to do at her company.

Why? I asked.

"I have a large union that dominates much of my workforce," she said. "And the head of that union is a real jerk. Whenever I invite any of the employees from that union in for a focus group or meeting, he comes with them, uninvited, and tells them not to answer any of my questions."

Ouch, I said. That is rough. But she wasn't done yet.

"To make matters worse, this guy is a witch, and a druid. And because of his religious beliefs, he is allowed to say the most inappropriate things to other employees . . . such as what he does to himself in order to get in touch with his male essence."

She then when on to explain that "get in touch with his male essence" = "masturbation."

So . . . all you bright and intelligent communicators who read this blog . . . here is your challenge: What to do about THIS person?

A union president who won't let his employees talk to the communicator . . . and who also happens to be a witch, and a druid, and who is constantly getting his male essence all over the place---and telling female employees about it, too.

And you thought you had it bad.

Well, here it is Day Two at the Vancouver meeting . . . it's pure hell to be in one of the most beautiful cities in the world . . . and not leave your hotel for two days except for a quick dinner. But . . . it's worth it because of the stories I get to hear about life inside organizations.

I heard a good one this morning. We were talking about employee recognition . . .and how if you're going to do it right, you have to commit to really only recognizing people who truly earn the recognition. And how programs where employees can nominate other employees for "always having a smile on her face," or for "being a team player all the time," and such aren't really worth anyone's time.

And one woman told a story about a feature in her publication called: "A Virtual Bouquet." It shows a big picture of a bouquet of flowers, and then a list of employee names who have been nominated for a "Virtual Bouquet."

Well . . . it's pretty cheesy, and the employees have all taken to making fun of it. In fact, the most common expression at the company now is:

"What, do you want a Virtual Fucking Bouquet for that, or what?

As in: "Hey, Herman in IT finally finished a project on time. Let's give him a Virtual Fucking Bouquet!"

This should serve as a reminder to everyone just how cynical employees can be. Don't insult their intelligence, or it will come back to haunt you.

There have been a lot of stupid things written about “the power of blogs.” But I think I just read the most ridiculous statement of all.

I found it in a new white paper written by Edelman PR and Intelliseek. It’s titled: “Talking from the inside out: The rise of the employee blogger,” and can be found at www.edelman.com.

Now, first I want to say that overall, this is an excellent white paper and worth reading. There is tons of good stuff in there about how companies can use internal blogs, and a great section on setting up blogging guidelines.

But the way the writers choose to lead the white paper is so overblown, so idiotic, that I almost didn’t even read it.

Here are the first two lines of the white paper:

“The rise of the blogosphere has the potential to empower employees in ways not unlike the rise of labor unions in the late 19th and 20th centuries. Although more subtle than those shifts in the labor-management dynamic, employee bloggers, in many cases, have tipped the balance of influence in their favor to establish levels of credibility that many CEOs can only dream of.”

Now, what do you suppose would make someone write something that silly? Why would someone try to compare the birth of labor unions—and the violence and bloodshed that went with that birth—to some employees tapping out little bloggie items on their lunch hour?

Why would someone compare an employee blogger to the CEO, in terms of having power and influence in the organization? Why would someone try to overstate the importance of blogs like that?

I think there are four possible answers to these questions. Take a look at them and decide which one you think it is:

1. Greed. The authors of the paper—Edelman PR and Intelliseek—both make more money the more popular blogs become. Edelman will help you set up an internal blogging program, and monitor external blogs for your organization. Same with Intelliseek, from what I could see on its web site.

In other words, is it any surprise that two organizations that stand to benefit big-time if blogs become really important are writing white papers saying that blogs are already really important?

2. Bad writing. The writers were looking for a dramatic way to bring readers into the paper . . . and they went too far. It wouldn’t be the first time a writer tried too hard for a dramatic lead and in doing so ruined the credibility of the rest of the story.

3. Ignorance of history. Maybe the paper was written by some 23-year-old junior staffer, who was busy building his own web site and text messaging his buddies when he was supposed to be studying history. Maybe he doesn’t know the history behind labor unions, and what workers went through in order to get them established.

4. They really believe it. This is the biggest stretch for me . . . because even if they believe that employees blogging will have the same effect on organizations that the blood-and-guts labor revolution did . . . do they really also believe part two of the opening statement—that employee bloggers have already gained influence that the CEO can “only dream of?” Maybe they do. Maybe they also believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, too.

What do you think?

This is one of those headlines you’ll never see in an employee publication:

“American Express Sues CEO Over $241,000 Topless Bill.”

Unfortunately, that headline did appear on the Chicago Tribune’s Web site this morning. And it ought to make for some interesting moments at the company’s next Town Hall meeting, no?

The story says that Robert A. McCormick, CEO of Savvis, Inc., a communications company, was in Scores, a New York City strip club, with at least three other men. And the four them allegedly ran up a bill of $241,000.

According to a source in the study, it’s relatively easy to run up that kind of tab at Scores’ super elite “President’s Club,” where men “spend thousands of dollars on single bottles of champagne and tip strippers as much as $10,000 for lap dances and for spending time with them.”

The CEO says he was overcharged. He doesn’t deny being there. He doesn’t deny spending lots of the company’s money on strippers and liquor. But he’s pretty darn sure he didn’t spend that much money. So he’s not paying.

So not only is he a scumbag . . . he’s a deadbeat scumbag.

God, would I have loved to have been a fly on the wall when this low life got the news about the bill. I can see him sitting behind his big desk, surfing his bookmarked list of porn sites, when his admin comes in the office:

Admin: “Uh, sir? We . . . uh . . . I mean, I . . . uh . . .the corporate American Express bill just came in.”

CEO: “So? Pay it, Betty.”

Admin: “Well . . . uh, I’m not sure I can, sir. It’s a little higher than normal.”

CEO: “Oh, right. Well, I charged my new swimming pool and accompanying cabana house on there . . . but I’m going to use it to entertain clients, so it’s all legit. Oh, and I also had to put my wife’s trip to Greece on there, but she’s . . . uh . . . going to be doing some research for us over there on global expansion. So it’s cool.”

Admin: “Yes sir, those expenses are certainly understandable. But . . . uh . . . there is also a charge on here from a place called Scores Gentlemens Club, in New York, and it’s . . .”.

CEO: “Oh, that’s okay. Mort and I had to take a couple of clients there. They’re into buffalo chicken wings, and Scores has the best wings in New York City.”

Admin: “But . . . uh . . . the bill is . . . uh . . . $231,000. That seems like an awful lot of chicken wings, sir.”

CEO: “Aaak.” (He throws up onto his mahogany desk.)

And then the loser has to look at the bill. And can you see his dilemma? He knows he was there. He knows he spent some thousands on lap dances and God knows what else.

But he also knows that he is being overcharged (apparently, Scores has a bit of a reputation for overcharging drunk high rollers, and has been sued before).

What does he do? Does he eat it, in order to keep a lid on the whole thing? How does he account for it with the bookkeepers? He knows if he sues, the word is going to get out. And how do you explain to the employees that while they couldn’t get their bonuses last year, the CEO was spending a cool quarter of a million dollars on nudies and booze?

Obviously, the CEO had to go public with it, and hope nobody noticed. But somebody did! And now it’s all over the press.

I just checked out the company’s web site and . . . surprise! There’s nothing there about this mess! Not a word. Imagine that.

Next time, maybe the CEO will learn his lesson and do what all the other executive perverts do when they go to strip clubs: Get a couple hundred bucks worth of singles, so there’s no paper trail.

Hey, guess what? I'm getting my 15 minutes of fame! I'm a movie star!

Granted, it's only a 30-second movie . . . and it's not exactly in all the major theaters. In fact, it's not in any theaters. And it's not even a movie. It's a web commercial . . . but still, that sort of makes me famous, doesn't it?

If you haven't seen the commercial, check it out by hitting the link over to the right on this page. Or go to www.ragan.com and you can get to it from there.

But remember: They say the camera adds an extra 10 pounds . . . and we were using four cameras at once. That explains why I look so fat. I'm actually very thin and in shape, but the damn cameras distorted everything and made me look like a cross between Orson Wells and Curly from the Three Stooges.

There are a lot of reasons to like New York City. The shows, the food, the museums . . . it is certainly one of the great cities of the world.

I like it for all those reasons, but also because every time I go to New York to do a seminar, someone from the class sponsors some rounds of drinks at the bar. Every time. Without fail. This doesn't happen at any other city.

And this time it was no different, as the great and wonderful "Anna" offered to pick up the tab (I can't use Anna's real name, in case she was fudging her expense report, and wrote down something like "Dinner with very important potential client" or something, instead of "martinis with crazy bald guy," which is what it really was).

And Anna did it the right way, too. She announced that her company was paying before we ordered, so we could go top shelf. Nothing is more depressing than choosing a lesser quality drink so that I'll have something left out of my per diem for food . . . only to find out after the session that someone else is putting it on their expense account!

Anyway, we were drinking and chatting and chatting and drinking, and we got on to the subject of employees who don't have access to computers.

"My boss calls them the 'Bend and Lift People,'" Anna said. "So at our company, we have the 'Point and Click People' and the 'Bend and Lift People,' and talk about two different audiences!"

I like that a lot. In fact, I like the whole idea of there being different "Tribes" of people in the corporate world. The Point and Click Tribe and the Bend and Lift Tribe are probably the two biggest . . . but I think you also probably have a lot of sub-tribes within those two tribes.

What about:

The Duck and Run Tribe: These people are the ones who always have to "pick my kid up at the dentist" or "have hernia surgery" every time there's real work to be done.

The Crap and Leave Tribe: These are the sons of bitches who come to a meeting, spew forth a lot of "ideas" in order to look smart . . . and leave everybody with a shitload of extra work to do.

The Piss and Moan Tribe: These people are never happy. Never. Ever. You find a lot of these people in corporate design departments, for some reason.

The Kiss and Suck Tribe: These people spend 99 percent of their time kissing ass, in order to get ahead. There is a heavy presence of Kiss and Suck Tribe members in most sales departments.

Sociological note: You often have heavy co-mingling between the Kiss and Suck Tribe and the Duck and Run Tribe. So much so, in fact, that some corporate sociologists make the case for a new tribe: The Kiss and Suck Then Duck and Run Tribe. Sort of like what happens when a Frenchman marries an Italian.

And of course, at any company, there is always one or two individuals, usually found in The Land of Middle Management, who are honorary members of all of these tribes. Though rare, if you keep your eyes peeled at off-site boondoggles and other corporate "retreats," you will find a member of the Duck and Run and Crap and Leave and Piss and Moan and Kiss and Suck Tribe . . . but if you do see one, approach him with caution. They can be very dangerous, if riled.