Raising the bar on Dumb in Washington DC and Austin, TX.

Good morning, two stories have me scratching my head and wondering why people who should know better, just act stupid.

1. The President's latest jobs plan and the announcement thereof. Anticipation has been building for weeks. The President wanted to announce it before a joint session of Congress next Wednesday, September 7th. Fair enough but it's the same night as the GOP presidential debate at the Reagan Library.  The White House of course, knew this all along.

Speaker John Boehner officially gets to decide who speaks in the House of Representatives, although as a rule, you don't turn down the President of the United States. But the President put Speaker Boehner in a bad spot, who in turn asked the President to address Congress, and oh yeah, "We the people" on the 8th instead. It's my House and I'll cry if I want to.

Late night night it was announced the President will now deliver his speech on the 8th. All this creates another issue, the 8th is the opening night of the NFL season. Green Bay vs New Orleans. Cheese, Gumbo and rotten politics. Pass the Tums please. The White House says the speech will end before the scheduled kick-off, my guess without enough time for a response from the GOP.

Frankly, the GOP should have agreed to Wednesday, then just backed up the debate until after the speech. What an opportunity! Run clips from the speech, then have the GOP have at it. Don't like the President's plan? Then tell us how you'd do better.  I think we'd be well served by this sort of thing.

But no, cheap political partisanship by both sides is once again put ahead of the best interests of us folks who live on Main Street, USA and who of course, pay the bills. Wasn't August wonderful? September and beyond, not so much.

Shameful.

2. Let move on to college football. Earlier this year, the University of Texas announced an exclusive broadcast partnership with ESPN to create the Longhorn Network. All orange all the time. Great expectations Texas-style. This disclaimer: I'm a proud Longhorn Dad and we've lived in Texas twice. Everything is bigger in Texas, especially football. We heart the 'Horns.

All good right? Nope, quite the opposite. The season opener has Texas hosting Rice at Austin. Broadcast rights are exclusively on the Longhorn Network. One problem. As of now, other than a few tiny cable outlets, no major satellite or cable provider has reached an agreement to carry the network. Not even in Austin.

So we have a television network that makes it impossible to watch the team it was designed to cover.

LHN and ESPN are demanding lower tier coverage on all carriers and want (according to one report) 40 cents per subscriber whether or not they actually want to watch LHN. When you have companies like DISH Network or Time-Warner, you have customer bases of tens of millions of people and, well, you do the math. Those costs have to be passed on to those customers. But who cares about them?

So here we sit on Thursday morning, game day is two days away and it's quite possible most Texas fans around the country won't be able to watch their team on TV, since TV was invented.

LHN is urging fans to put pressure on the program providers. Flood the phone lines and their social media pages demanding they carry LHN! It hasn't worked.

Come on Texas. Put your money where your swagger is and while you're at it, put your fans first. If LHN is so good, offer it up to carriers at no charge and go out and sell advertising to pay for your $300 million investment. As an aside, most start up networks actually pay carriers to be included on their channel line-ups.

So here we sit, stuck in the middle again. In Washington, the people's needs are put last. In Austin, the fans needs are put last.

It's wrong, but sadly these days, business as usual.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations

Making the case for a la carte television programming

Pay Television customers are cutting the cable and ditching the dish by the hundreds of thousands.

There are a few reasons for this, not the least of which is the economy. Folks simply can't afford to pay over a hundred bucks a month for TV. The real reason is the alternative programming choices like Apple TV or the increasing amount of programming available on the Internet. You can receive local stations free off-air, many other channels are free via the 'Net and there's a huge amount of programming that yes, you have to pay for, but it's on demand and you only pay for what you really want to watch.

I love Entourage but don't subscribe to HBO. So I just wait for it to come out on iTunes and buy the season for under 20 bucks.

Here's the challenge satellite and cable companies face. It's the program providers themselves because of a process called bundling. When you purchase a programming package from a satellite or cable company, you do so in tiers. You can't just pick the channels you want to watch.

Here's how it works, and why satellite and cable companies are held hostage, then have to hold you hostage as a consumer. Let's say a hugely popular channel decides to add another one to its programming line-up. Maybe they come up with the "Best of George Hamilton" channel. With apologies to George, it likely would attract few, if any viewers. But darn it, they believe in it and want eyeballs.

So the company will tell the satellite and cable companies that if they want to carry the hugely popular channel, they also have to "bundle" the boring channels as well. Which costs more, and that cost is passed on to you. You pay for what you don't watch.

Think about it. Of all the channels you have available to you, how many do you actually watch at your house. 5, 10, 15? This out of a several hundred you're having to pay for. So Apple TV, or services like Netflix provide an alternative. You pay only for what you actually watch. Plus more and more channels are available free on the 'Net. Click, play, enjoy.

Out of the tens of millions of people who use satellite or cable, the loss of a few hundred thousand may not seem like much. But I remember back in the day when satellite companies came along and the cable companies laughed at the few hundred thousand original customers companies like DISH Network or DIRECTV offered. The cable companies long since stopped laughing. Actually a few tears were shed.

To be fair, no one has fought harder to keep programming costs down than DISH Network's Charlie Ergen. His battles with program providers are legendary. He's already adapting his company for the new way people watch TV, when and where.

In the toughest of economic times, the last thing people will give up besides food and shelter, is television. But they are no longer interested in, and can no longer afford to pay for programming they don't watch in the first place.

It's time for consumers to have the freedom to pay for only what they watch, a la carte. People that produce programming, and the companies that distribute it better wake up to that fact and find a way to make it work.

There's a counter-argument that a la carte programming would cost consumers more. It's akin to another argument (from Washington) that the states would never pass a balanced budget amendment. In both instances why not let us make that decision? "We the people" pay the bills. We're not "Monetary" units." We're customers.

(I've offered a friend in the industry equal time)

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations

Loose lips sink ships. Why it's important to always be on message.

Teachers, salaries, pensions and benefits remain very much in the news. The recent ruckus in Wisconsin is a high profile example. To be fair, here are two recent stories about where the situation stands from the Weekly Standard and Huffington Post.

A lot of contention, opinion and emotion remains on both sides.


My point here is not what side you may take in this issue or any other, but why it's important for everyone involved to be on message. Just like the old saying "Loose Lips Sink Ships," loose lips can also sink a cause or movement.

Case in point: I was watching the news yesterday and there was a story about people lining up two days in advance of the opening of the new IKEA Store in Centennial. (Why this is "news" in the first place is another story)

A reporter asked one lady who is spending a full two days in line how she could afford to do it. "I'm a teacher, we get the whole summer off," was the reply. Oops. One could almost here the groan of the National Education Association all the way across the country.

When you, your organization or cause is in the middle of a high profile campaign, everyone and I mean EVERYONE has to be on message all the time. Even when standing in line to buy furniture.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you" (And teach your team to help manage that conversation)

Blood in the Media Waters and the Sharks are circling.

A pundit said the other day there are two types of journalists: Those who work for News Corp and those who compete against News Corp. The latter are having a field day. There's blood in the media waters and it's attracting crowds. Even a shaving creme pie.

Led by Uber Media Baron Rupert Murdoch, News Corp became arguably one of the most powerful media companies in the world. A powerhouse in print and broadcast with online affiliates, often making headlines for the headlines and stories they broke.

Now it appears they might have broken the law while breaking headlines, hacking into the cell phones of political leaders to crime victims in England. A rogue operation within an organization led by a powerful rogue. Executives have been sacked or arrested, a whole newspaper was shut down.

The media business is highly competitive. Make that incredibly competitive. The outlets with the most eyeballs make the most money. And News Corp outlets like the Wall Street Journal and FOX News have the eyeballs. Just ask CNN or MSNBC.

So when a competitor is down, all's fair in love, war and journalism. Let the kicking begin!

Right now the lawbreaking appears to be contained only to England. But unsubstantiated reports have News Corp hacking into the cell phones of 9-11 victims here in the USA. Again, unsubstantiated reports. But there's enough smoke that the FBI is checking for the smallest sign of fire.

There's plenty at stake. News Corp owns several local television stations as part of it's US holding  and they're licensed by the FCC, which if laws were broken, could yank those licenses. The White House, no doubt, is also watching with no small amount of glee that FOX News, which it considers to be "unfriendly" could be impacted by all the fall-out. Guess who likely called in the FBI?

Commentators on FOX News often take potshots at their lower-rated competition. Now the competition is returning fire. All are devoting significant air time and resources to covering the Murdoch saga with great enthusiasm.

I'm not taking sides in this other than if laws were broken or journalistic ethics compromised, those guilty need to be punished. I have my favorite news outlets and so do you. There are plenty to choose from. That said, everyone has to play by the rules. But the story is a juicy one and as long as it has legs, you can bet those who've been bested by News Corp will spare no expense or resources in covering this story. You can also bet there will be a movie about it.

To be fair, the coverage here on this side of the Atlantic has been fair, but also tough. FOX News isn't shying away from covering the story either, helping hold as it were, the spotlight that is on all News Corp properties.

What's next? Stay tuned. There will be no shortage of coverage--and it's great fun to watch.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations

When it's smart to say you're stupid.

Remember the recent incident involving TSA and the 95 year old cancer patient? They made her get out of her wheel chair and remove her diaper. People, justifiably, were outraged at what happened. TSA's official response, no doubt carefully vetted by a cadre of bureaucrats, was they were following "established procedures."

What TSA needs to do is have some established common sense. That includes simply saying what happened was stupid and they'll re-think a similar situation next time instead of making a 95 year old woman, with cancer, in a wheel chair take off her diaper.

TSA serves a critical role in keeping us safe when we travel. Sure, it's a hassle going through security these days but the acts of others make it necessary.  I travel a fair amount and in most cases going through security is  usually done with a minimum of hassle.

But what TSA gets attention for is making 95 year old cancer patients take her diapers off, or patting down young kids or the infamous "touch my junk" episode. TSA does nothing to promote the human side of their mission, so instead they are perceived as being inhuman.

Google "TSA Grope" and you get 765-thousand hits. It's too bad. Arguably TSA's role is as important as our military fighting over seas. The difference is TSA is fodder for viral videos and the source of punch lines by late night comedians.

And far too many negative news stories.

TSA has fallen into the trap of hiding behind rigid "officialese" and so far at least, resisting any attempt to put a human face on the agency or it's mission and most importantly the people that carry it out. They aren't alone. When you hear "BP," what comes to mind?

It's avoidable of course. Sadly, that's the stupid part.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations

1st Amendment Ramblings this July 4th.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

These words make us unique in the world, what we commonly call "Free Speech." Simple in concept, difficult in execution.


It's OK for the Westboro Baptist Church to protest at a fallen soldier's funeral spewing all sorts of vitriol. The huge majority of us want them stopped. But the Supreme Court says it's OK for them to continue. The Court also says it's OK for video game companies to sell extremely violent games to teens and younger.

All because of the 1st Amendment.Free speech.

But don't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. That will get you arrested. Don't describe the President as a male organ on a cable news program. That will get you suspended from work.

A newspaper can voice its opinion about who we should vote for on the editorial page. But journalistic ethics prohibit, at least in theory, a reporter from expressing personal views in a story about politics.

What's the difference? I have no idea. I'm not a lawyer. So while the 1st Amendment is far from perfect, it sure beats the alternative.

The precious right to sound off on just about anything, regardless of whether anyone agrees with us is just that, precious. Certainly something to contemplate as we celebrate our freedom this day.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations.

Weinergate: What's "Law" got to do with it?

It's been a fascinating couple of weeks following the whole, sordid scandal involving now former Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York. He posted dirty pictures of himself to more than a few women other than his wife on Twitter He then called in the  national news media to his congressional office and lied about it Then, caught with his PR pants down, literally, admitted he lied. He then resigned. Game, set and Tweet.

This comes on the heels of former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger fathering a child with his house keeper, about the same time he did the same with his own wife.Weiner is a Democrat, Schwarzenegger is a Republican. Stupidity apparently knows no political bounds.

I could go on about other recent scandals, but there just isn't enough time or space. More than a few PR pros are weighing in on this, and a myriad of articles are being written about the "lessons learned."

What surprised me most was all the political pundits analyzing all of the above with a constant theme. Were they" breaking the law?"

Excuse me?

To borrow from Tina Turner, "What's law got to do with it?" When you're in the public eye, especially when you make the conscious decision to do so, you don't set the standards for behavior, the public does. There isn't, and never will be a PR professional skilled enough to dig you out of that hole.

To borrow from Nike, "Just don't do it."

Is it fair? Weiner and Scharzenegger aren't the only guys who've done something stupid. What sets them apart is they were elected representatives of "We the people." We may sin ourselves, but we expect a higher standard from those in public office. Which makes the whole concept of "law" laughable.

Years ago, when starting out my career as a news anchor, my wife and I went out to eat on a Friday night. I was done working for the week, over 21 and had a cocktail with dinner. Like about everyone else in the restaurant. My wife drove us home. The following Monday, my boss gets a call complaining I was seen "drinking" in a bar. My first lesson about life in the spotlight. The expectations for my behavior, however legal and responsible were set by someone else, not me.

Perhaps it's old fashioned to expect a certain level of moral and ethical behavior from those who serve us in government; that their personal standards should at least, if not meet, the standards of office where they conduct the people's business. Heck, they swear an oath to do so when they take office.

If, when Anthony Weiner's behavior is excused, at least by some as being "within the law." then this government of the people, by the people and for the people, shall indeed perish from the earth.

Law has nothing to do with it.

What's especially sad is there is life and money to be made after scandal. Look at Elliot Spitzer. He now has his own talk show on CNN.

Brian Olson
Founder/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations