PR Week’s “PR Person of the Century” Harold Burson has lately described our industry in Dickensian terms: “the best of times, the worst of times.”

Between the new reputational lows from agency scandals or the bridge-and-tunnel party promoters who many now believe epitomize what we do as professionals, the PR industry remains a most misunderstood calling.

When I think of the best and worst of times, I’m led to the Bush Administration. Most in our line of business, I dare say, believe that the PR practices deployed by this administration may be the most efficient (and effective) in history. They give kudos to the masters of spin in the White House. Nothing sticks. Agendas advance.

Conversely, following the massive corporate scandals, there is a growing movement within the business world for greater transparency in constituency communications. “It’s the right thing to do,” many proclaim. Those who embrace it are reaping the rewards for their new-found corporate social responsibility.

So what is good PR: the ability to command and control the message? Or a fresh openness and honesty that embraces those whose lives your decisions affect?

Enjoy your Memorial Day weekend.

The news today that Viagra may cause blindness in a small number of users has had the expected negative impact on the share price of the ED drug’s maker, Pfizer. This will be short-lived — unless of course the class action lawyers smell blood (excuse the pun). Without second guessing the world’s largest pharmaceutical company, Pfizer appears to be working aggresively and responsibly with the FDA to put Viagra’s surprising possible new side effect into perspective.

(However, as of this writing, I don’t see the statement on the company’s home page.)

Both the number of incidents out of the whole user population and the number of patients in the clinical trials were provided to the news media. Also, from its statements, Pfizer seemed amenable to altering the warning label and committed to invest in research to fully determine whether there is a causal relationship. This story will persist for the time being given Viagra’s folk hero status.

Also, this deflating news comes on the heels on another big Viagra story – that of convicted sex felons qualifying for Medicaid reimbursment for their Viagra prescriptions. I wonder which story will have the greater impact on sales of the popular drug?

Talking about “Access Hollywood,” I flipped the dial in early fringe last night to see what competitor “Extra” was up to. I was aghast. While “Access” was promoting its upcoming Scientology infomercial featuring PR command and control celebrity Tom Cruise, “Extra” was airing its own infomercial for a line of cosmetics under the guise of its regular “Hot New Stuff” segment.

Either this was a brilliant PR “placement,” or the manufacturers of the featured products were advertisers on the program. It likely passed muster with “Extra” because some B-list celebrities were featured even though their financial relationship with the touted products was murky to say the least.

It’s no wonder FCC member Jonathan Adelstein is putting pressure on TV programmers and marketers to tone down the insipid practice of product placement. I know Access and Extra are not governed by the same rules as TV news programming, but I also suspect that most consumers don’t make the distinction.