Qu'ils mangent de la brioche...
In a breathtaking PR exercise, a well known store has laid out its environmental credentials in yesterday's View from tesco Seaton.
The £1000? Well it's been in the carnival committee pot for some time now so it isn't worth commenting on...what is interesting is the perception of "sponsorship" that you might get about the carnival...well fair enough, but perception is a double edged sword for some....for example, if you're a member of a committee that takes a financial contribution from a company or individual, it is fairly obvious that you are looking after the interests of your organisation, in return, you gratefully acknowledge the benefactor..who gets what exactly?
Of course, if you were also say, a councillor with a remit to be unbiassed in your outlook, the perception works that you were somehow involved with said grateful recipient/organisation, and it could be seen that you have compromised that unbiassed opinion you were democratically elected to hold...and hell yes, I was elected for having an opinion about getting the right deal for Seaton**** ...but it doesn't mean I get involved with financial transactions that could make right-minded members of the public think I somehow "done-a-deal", however innocent or arms-length they might be.
And in the end, my real topic of this post isn't about prejudicial interest at all, but with thePR dogsTesco spin machine effort about "environmental issues"...hmmm, some carnival procession floats are incredible efforts, but from a creative point of view and, unfortunately, from an environmental impact point of view...so when I hear that £1000 has been donated to help stage said "best ever" bread and circus event, I am left somewhat bemused at the juxtaposition of it all;0)
****those with an axe to grind would do well to remember that SU4S is a conceptual platform, not an organisation (as verifed by the local government watchdogs), and I still haven't been invited to any secret meetings of it...poo, I must roll the trouser leg up higher or summat:-)
The £1000? Well it's been in the carnival committee pot for some time now so it isn't worth commenting on...what is interesting is the perception of "sponsorship" that you might get about the carnival...well fair enough, but perception is a double edged sword for some....for example, if you're a member of a committee that takes a financial contribution from a company or individual, it is fairly obvious that you are looking after the interests of your organisation, in return, you gratefully acknowledge the benefactor..who gets what exactly?
Of course, if you were also say, a councillor with a remit to be unbiassed in your outlook, the perception works that you were somehow involved with said grateful recipient/organisation, and it could be seen that you have compromised that unbiassed opinion you were democratically elected to hold...and hell yes, I was elected for having an opinion about getting the right deal for Seaton
And in the end, my real topic of this post isn't about prejudicial interest at all, but with the
****those with an axe to grind would do well to remember that SU4S is a conceptual platform, not an organisation (as verifed by the local government watchdogs), and I still haven't been invited to any secret meetings of it...poo, I must roll the trouser leg up higher or summat:-)
Labels: PR for the masses
posted by archmaster @ 8:00 am
4 comments
