Much has been written about Todd Defren’s template for a new generation of news releases, which he calls “social media press releases.” He reports 2500 downloads from his blog thus far.

I commend the folks at Shift Communications for marrying today’s digital tools to the staid old press release with the idea of giving it more legs than a “one-day stand” on a paid wire service. (Though I do wish they had called his new vehicle a “social media news release” in Defrence to the broadcast and online journalists on its receiving end.)

No matter how Web 2.0 (may I even use this term?) technology empowers the modern news release (ongepatshket?), the quality of the story and the language used to articulate it will continue to serve as the vital forces driving media pick-up and audience awareness. PR pros should not forsake these core competencies. Still, Todd’s template is important in its potential to minimize a common PR angst: the strong story that doesn’t find its audience (or vice-versa), e.g., “we built it, but they didn’t come.”

On that note, we arrive at today’s candidate for the bad pitch blog (which also picked up on the social media press release). The do-good folks at Greenpeace mistakenly issued a draft release that took a page from Todd’s template. Apparently, a junior PR staffer left an opening in the release for some incendiary language about a proposed nuclear power plant, e.g., “[FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE].”

A candidate for PR Watch’s “Spin of the Day?” Unlikely.

PR Greenpeace public relations media press release news release

Personally, I would have preferred that he be named to lead the EPA over the U.S. Treasury, but Goldman Sachs chief (and committed environmentalist) Henry Paulson has agreed to replace John Snow as Treasury Secretary. This is an astute move by a beleaguered President when one considers Mr. Paulson’s pristine reputation on Wall Street and beyond.

The incoming Treasury chief’s unwavering and “money-where-your-mouth-is” support for the environment — he chairs the Nature Conservancy – has certainly helped neutralize any criticism that might have flowed from his exceedingly generous pay package. (His net worth is estimated in the half billion dollar range.)

Even without Mr. Paulson’s PSR (Professional Social Responsibility) program on the environment, his success leading one of Wall Street’s gold standard companies will surely silence any of the CEO compensation police. (Let’s now hope that some of his thinking on the fragility of our planet seeps into the administration’s consciousness.)

Robert Nardelli, eat your heart out. With Memorial Day Weekend as a buffer, the Home Depot CEO is likely hoping that his major blunder last week will soon be forgotten. Portrayed as arrogant and uncommunicative with a few not unimportant stakeholders, e.g., his company’s shareholders, Mr. Nardelli and his board thumbed their noses when faced with questions on his pay package and the sub-par performance of the stock.

“This is one of the worst meetings I’ve seen in terms of the arrogance coming from the front table,” Richard Metcalf, corporate affairs director for Laborers International Union of North America, told Reuters on Thursday.

Virtually every major media outlet lined up against him.

What’s unfortunate is that Home Depot’s communications chief made a reasonable argument for Mr. Nardelli’s pay package. Unfortunately, it was buried, save for a letter-to-the-editor in The New York Times. It did not address, however, his and his board’s outright disrespect for company shareholders, which finally surfaced over the weekend in a statement:

“If the board of directors’ absence or the structure of our annual meeting offended any shareholder, that was certainly not our intent,” the statement said.

The company is now playing PR catch up big time. I guess the Web 2.0 value of stakeholder dialogue and engagement has not yet taken hold among the bricks & mortar set down in Atlanta.

“Arrogance will kill you,” said one investor, upset that most directors were absent and that Nardelli allowed no time for questions. “If you aren’t humble and decent, you will destroy this company.”

Let’s not forget transparent.

PR Henry Paulson Robert Nardelli public relations politics shareholder CEO compensation

The aspirationally named Center for Media & Democracy, which fronts for the PR industry’s self-anointed watchdog, PR Watch, has apparently succeeded in getting the FCC to take a look at the VNR industry. This, of course, follows the Congressional hearings that took place a year or so ago.

You may remember the organization’s study that showed how dozens of local TV news operations used institutionally-produced footage during their newscasts — B-roll likely — without properly attributing the source of the footage.

It was my contention at the time the study broke, as it is now, that the PR industry — in spite of the Center’s belief otherwise — has more than satisfied its full-disclosure obligations by identifying who’s paid for the satellite or hard copy-delivered video news footage.

I was amused by today’s coverage wherein the FCC described the footage as “video ads” as opposed to “news footage.” Geesh, if this is the work of an advertising agency, I’d say it’s time for an agency review. The content in question is typically raw footage with straight cuts (no dissolves, wipes, etc.) no music, voice-overs or chyrons, and pretty much without any stylistic embellishments that will render it unusable in a news segment. VNR’s, which are fully cut scripted news packages, are rarely if ever used nowadays.

Nonetheless, I agree with the Center in calling for TV news producers to be more diligent in identifying (and slating) the source for the video. Again, like the text-driven news release, the PR industry has fulfilled its end of the ethical equation by offering (hopefully) newsworthy and clearly identifiable news content tailored to the medium.

PR media VNR public relations FCC