This MediaBistro story regarding a vague pitch is a an excellent illustration how PR folks can earn a negative reputation.

Does anyone really care about a media personality who’s profiled in a New Orleans magazine about Hurricane Katrina?  Even in our 140 character, text crazed world, you should still take time to explain why a story might be news worthy. Is there anniversary angle? Was an award won?  Were lives saved?

In the Dog Days of Summer … you have time to pitch better than this.  Please?

Pitch one:

Shepard Smith graces the cover of New Orleans Magazine for his Katrina coverage http://www.livingneworleans.com/?p=3988

Pitch two:

Go Shepard Smith!!! He’s on the COVER of New Orleans Living Magazine for Katrina! http://www.livingneworleans.com/?p=3988

Third time’s a charm:

Shep rocks: http://www.livingneworleans.com/?p=3988

The Kindle and iPad have made digital publications tangible and, in many cases, a more enjoyable experience than holding a newspaper.

Five years ago, social media was a fad for college kids. Today, there are more than 290 social networking and media channels.

A study by the Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism concludes that decline of newspapers continues at a rapid pace while trust in the Internet begins to erode. Yet, Wikileaks relied on the mainstream media to validate (or rather interpret, source and report) the more than 90,000 military documents about the war in Afghanistan.

I believe that there will always be a place and a critical need, especially in a democracy, for an informed public and professional journalists.  However, I’m not convinced there’s a need for the daily newspaper in printed format.  Local and news weeklies and special interest magazines serve a more specific purpose – news and analysis that you can take with you and read when you want.

Daily news demands immediate consumption.  The Internet, radio and TV provide more effective delivery channels. After reading the Wall Street Journal on the iPad, I canceled my print subscription.  I wish the Washington Post would create a more compelling app so I can cancel that print subscription as well.

In all this hand-wringing about the fate of journalism, what does it mean for the PR professional?

No profession remains constant in its practice. PR and journalism are in the relationship business. Thus the basics of our craft still apply. As technology continues to alter how we engage in building and maintaining those relationships, its important to remember that honesty and integrity matter. The only thing that follows you is your reputation so make sure you are managing it effectively both in your offline and online interactions with reporters.

Many successful PR professionals and TV reporters (especially on FOX) are blonde.  When I named my blog, I purposefully played on my hair color and the wisdom invoked by my favorite accessory — Blonde Pearls PR Blog.

Ten, even five years ago, I would not have been so comfortable doing so. I’m pleased that constraints of rigid expectations have been loosen so that women can be more feminine in the workplace and in our expression.

Yet, we still have hurdles to overcome. Reading Howard Kurtz’s profile on Diane Sawyer, an anchor with an edge (and a role model I have long admired, along with Peggy Noonan who also is blonde), however, made me pause.

There it was. In the third paragraph. A reference to her looks. “This is the non-glamorous side of Sawyer, who at the moment — with her untamed hair, pale skin, black-rimmed glasses and plain white shirt — looks like a 64-year-old housewife in need of a cup of coffee.” Would he write that about NBC’s Brian Williams? CNN’s Anderson Cooper?

Thankfully, the rest of the article gave Sawyer the props she is due — an accomplished journalist bringing critical thought and improvement to her craft for the benefit of the viewers.

Yet, after decades of advancement for women in the workplace, why isn’t there more parity in reporting on the lives and professional accomplishments of men and women? Because stereotypes play a powerful role in how we think about women. Sans makeup, we are housewives or homebodies. Once we paint on the mask we are business women, soccer moms or teachers. Or in the case of female politicians once perceived as homely because of the wrong shade of lipstick, an “image” made over.

I long for the day when stories about women — executives, politicians, anchors, First Ladies — forget to mention designers, makeup and such. Better yet. How about covering men in the same fashion?

Unfortunately, that day is likely far away. The blogosphere is aggressively critiquing Elena Kagan’s makeover for her Senate confirmation hearings to become the next Justice on the Supreme Court. Female presidential appointees and candidates in an electronic age should care about their appearance, just as men should. The challenge is managing the unjustified scrutiny that accompanies women wherever they go.

Wendy Kaminer in The Atlantic recently posed the question: “Would Elena Kagan’s sexuality be a subject of so much speculation if she looked like Sarah Palin, or Kim Cattrall?”  Yes.  However, the commentary would be more flattering, but none-the-less denigrating and distracting from the discussion of her qualifications.

I met with a colleague awhile back to seek advice on job interview strategies. One of her cardinal rules, based on research, was to wear my hair in a bun or french twist so that it was off my face. While I often sport a pony tail on weekends or sultry summer days, I couldn’t bring myself to heed her advice. It just wasn’t me.

My advice in media training to women who appear on TV:  Befriend and trust the make up artist. But decline the lip gloss if you wouldn’t normally wear it.

You have to look comfortable in and with the accoutrements you choose — be it for a televised appearance, job interview or business meeting.

When I conduct media training, I draw upon several examples of politicians and business leaders who forgot “the mic is always on” during a TV or Radio interview. Helen Thomas and Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown being among the most recent victims. McChrystal’s Rolling Stone interview now tops my list of how not to engage the media.

Critically, it will be hotly debated if McChrystal should lose his job as a result of his disparaging remarks about his Commander-in-Chief and other administration officials.

As for his apology, it meets the sincerity and contrition tests for an effective mea culpa.  Yet, like so many others (Helen Thomas, for example), it lacks a critical ingredient — the measure of improvement, the action by which the injured party can evaluate the effectiveness of the apology.

There are several lessons that can be gleaned from this error reputation management.

1) Reporters are not your friends; they are image makers. It’s important to remain consistent in your messaging and presentation.

2) You — and everyone of your staff aids attending the interview — are always on the record.  I’ve pitched similar “follow me” interviews — they can be very effective for sharing process and personality. Be sure to provide media training and guidance not only to the primary spokesperson but also those will be playing a secondary role in the interactions.

3) Define your messages and objectives.  Know what you want the outcome to be and plan accordingly.

4) Rehearse.  We don’t call media role playing a murder board for nothing.

5) Stay positive. (Or “Never let them see you sweat.”) It doesn’t matter if you’re fighting a war, deflecting criticism for an environmental disaster or answering questions about a new product launch that isn’t meeting expectations. Showing your crankiness and criticizing others isn’t effective. Leaders take responsibility regardless.

Finally, remember that controversy is the heart of compelling news headlines.

July 1: An updated version of this post appeared in the Capitol Communicator. And while I did not seek permission to share the cartoon below, I trust Mr. Wasserman and the Boston Globe won’t mind the additional publicity.