Just another point about Clinton's spokesman, Mike McCurry. The Vanity Fair article by Todd Purdum that had Clinton up in arms name-checks McCurry and why his PR was very effective. The article is posted here and the reference is made in the first 1/5 of the extended feature.

I thought as PR professionals, we were bound to a code of ethics. I was always taught if something truly conflicted with my ethical or moral compass, the best thing to do was resign.

This shows me nothing more than a horribly shady character. Whether it's Bush convincing the US we need war or a used car salesman selling junkers down the street, this guy is an unethical, immoral jerk who's making money off his lies and deception.

He could have resigned if his conscience was so bothered. But he chose to stay, knowing full-well the rewards he'd reap by writing this little expose. It's repulsive.

Thanks, SW.

Anyone who's been in PR for any length of time knows we often don't get information until late in the process. This is a constant complaint. The business reason is that we often are susptected as the most likely source of leaks. Keeping info from the PR person until absolutely necessary is a common way to protect confidentiality and in many organizations is standard operating practice. We can complain, but as I said, Scott McClellan just fed into this mindset.

I'm sorry, I have NO sympathy for a man who sat quietly (literally, according to many) during the discussions and decision making process, and then towed the "company line" completely complicit, and when the time is right he makes millions on a tell all book and suddenly finds a conscience. It's a bit too much to swallow.

Do some reserach and you will find that his mother, a complete nutjob, is an unsuccessful poitician in Texas. Her campaign slogan in a failed run for gov, was "One Tough Grandma". I guess the PR expert son, Scotty, came up with that great line.

Why Bush ever hired the guy is the real question here.

Tim makes a very good point. ("...my problem is that Mr. McClellan wrote a tell-all book in the first place. As PR people, we have access to proprietary information and debate prior to decisions being made and policy being formed.")

I hadn't thought of it that way, Tim. But you know, McClellan really hurts us all by planting a seed of doubt in our clients/managers' minds.

It's hard enough to get that "seat at the table." The last thing I need is senior management wondering if I'm going to spill inside information down the road for a few bucks and a nice print run.

Sooo, what's the real "crime" here? Lying to sell a war? Spinning it in the first place? Not standing up to Bush and Co.? Or selling out now that the public has turned on the president? McClellan didn't write this book when the president was still somewhat popular.

I am disgusted with Scott McClellan for a number of reasons. If he knowingly lied to the public - shame on him. He should have resigned, pure and simple. If he truly wanted to fight for the truth - why didn't he do so when he had the chance? Instead, he waited three years and took the coward's way out confronting his boss after the fact and not even in person but via the written word. He reported on private conversations (akin to those in an attorney-client relationship)and blasted them to the world in an environment that is heavily anti-Bush - doing HIM the most good. For goodness sake, the book was the lead story on yesterday's NBC news! Of course the timing was planned! What do you think sales would be like after this year's elections? His performance while spokesperson for the president was painful to watch. He has done all PR practitioners a disservice with his ethics - both in and out of the White House.

Eric,You're absolutely right. I spoke too soon and regret it. McCurry IS the gold standard and he doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the likes of McClellan.

Michael, stay on topic. Clinton himself lied during the Lewinsky scandal. Your critique of his PR people is off-base and not well founded (Read Jeff Toobin's "A Vast Conspiracy" for background). Mike McCurry, Clinton's spokesman during much of the time, did a stellar job of standing before the press and actually answering questions (with some natural dodges or professions of ignorance). Moreover, he never caged the media or limited availability the way Bush's people (Fleischer-McClellan-Snow-Perino) do. Insofar as the White House spokesman needs to be both accountable to his boss and to the taxpayers who pay his salary, McCurry is a gold standard. That cannot be said of Bush's flacks.

Unfortunately this IS largely the state of much of P.R. these days, and it's especially unfortunate in government. In the military, in national, state, and local government we have these folks called "Public Information Officers," and some time ago someone figured out they could be turned into spin doctors to sell the agenda of whoever is in charge, rather than simply ensure the public is objectively well-informed.

My humble opinion, but I'm quite certain it is true!

If at all possible, let's keep the focus on McClellan's behavior. (And heaven knows, it's probably impossible as the death count in Iraq and Afghanistan rises FOR ANOTHER DAY and we pay more and more at the pump.) For a second, let's not mix administration politics or rhetoric with a publication relations practitioner's actions. So...focusing on the actions: Is that what you would do? (If focusing on yourself is difficult, as yourself is this what I want to see my child doing?) Or would you hold yourself to another (higher) standard? You see, we're living it right now. So in our current roles, in your current areas of influence, we are setting a tone and holding forth right now. Are we honest? Are we our best selves?

I don't know what he knew or when he knew it, but I do know he did the job and was never said to have questioned it by his colleagues or by the White House press corps, who repeatedly indicated that other White House spokespeople expressed much more independent thought on numerous occasions.

That said, my problem is that Mr. McClellan wrote a tell-all book in the first place. As PR people, we have access to proprietary information and debate prior to decisions being made and policy being formed. I think all of it should be treated the same way lawyers treat attorney-client privilege, and fear that if more PR people wrote tell-all books after the fact, we'll lose trust and credibility in the board room, where we can really make a difference. Mr. McClellan wrote a book, dis-honored confidences, made some money and serves the needs of partisan politicans, but he did nothing to advance the trust of the PR profession.

Wow, 30 pieces of silver AND a press tour!

Here's what I'm wondering: will we ever get to candor and authentic conversations in the press conference?

There's so much out there about how enterprises have to be authentic and straight up inside and out to thrive in our new social media era.
(Thinking of the Arthur Page Society Report here:
http://www.awpagesociety.com/images/uploads/2007AuthenticEnterprise.pdf)

So is this ever going to extend to live press conference? It should, right?

Cynthia, interesting response: "Let's not take down one of our own." I suppose I didn't think of it that way. While all of his peers cut him loose, the colleagues in his profession should stand by him.

Here's the problem I have with that. McClellan was selling a war, not pitching a product. I think that pushes him into a higher league of scrutiny. How many of our words help cost someone their life?

Plus, this establishes a bad example--just as Clinton's PR people did with the Lewinsky scandal--that lying on behalf of a client is okay. McClellan's doing it for the president; I can do it for XYZ company.

Leaving politics aside and focusing on the implications for PR professionals, I agree with Cynthia. From what I've heard McClellan say (and I have not yet read the book), he now realizes that his remarks about the reasons for the war were disingenuous, but did not fully realize it at the time.

Cynthia is right to focus our attention on how we PR professionals can avoid making the same mistake. It is so easy to get caught up in our client's or employer's line of thinking to such an extent that it clouds our perspective or causes us to not recognize that we are not being completely truthful. Of course, the clean-up has to start with PR professionals challenging what they are told by clients/employers, asking lots of questions and demanding clarification of points that give us pause.

This serves as another reminder of just how perilously close we sometimes come to crossing the line between ethical and unethical practices in our profession, and just how critical it is that we avoid drinking the company kool-aid.

Disgruntled ex-White House employee tells all? Come on, how else is one going to whip up sales for a book they've authored? To me, it's just a promotional gimmick.

Oh puhhhh-leeeeeze. You say, "Thing is he faced the press day after day and convinced them of a talking point he knew was disingenuous. There wasn’t a gun to his head." You're choosing to ignore several points, based on what McClellan himself is saying, including the basic fact that in a number of cases, he wasn't aware his talking points were 'disingenuous.' Don't tell me that you, in your career, haven't spun the company line at least once (likely more) knowing that the message was perhaps not quite factual. Or perhaps your corporate leaders simply gave you a message to share, and off you went to share it. Imagine the pressue put on the person 'standing at the podium' when it's the White House. We all know this Bush administration is less than truthful about their activities; let's not take down one of our own for doing what he had to do at the time. I doubt you would have walked away at the first sign of nastiness either. I applauded McClellan when he left the job and I applaud him again today. We do what we can in this profession to uphold the highest level of ethics, yet often, reality dictates we do what we are told. It ain't pretty, but it's real. What we should be doing is focusing our collective ethical efforts on ensuring we're getting the real story out of this government of ours and supporting those who have the guts to finally walk away.

Another Bush insider drops a dime on the current administration revealing what we suspected all along. We were duped into a war by a manipulative administration, an eager press and a climate of fear. So sad.

I am a veteran of the Vietnam era and I am one of the lucky ones who served during that time. I personally know many --not just a few -- classmates who were among the victims of that outrage. Some are living today with liver transplants, cancers, and other diseases borne of that war, and others were killed at 19 and 20 years old. Not to mention the pain and suffering of the families living with those memories all these years. The Iraq war is creating more of the same. Stop the madness.