Not mentioned much in all the sturm und drang over the Jay Rosen brouhaha is the clear perception most non-PR people evidently have of us. Here’s a smattering of remarks from the comment section of Rosen’s initial post:

“The term “PR blogger” raises credibility questions—- how do we trust people who make a living doing “spin” to tell us the truth about anything? This idea that “PR bloggers missed the boat” and journalists got the story assumes that “PR bloggers” wanted to be on the boat in the first place. They don’t—- they want this story buried, because of where it could lead. If it explodes in the direction of PR firms, it won’t just be about “taxpayers dollars” being funnelled to journalists—-it will be about the whole range of underhanded manipulation of public perceptions that Ketchum and everyone else in PR engages in.”

“Moreover, the PR industry is, by definition, a shady business.”

“The blogosphere is at enmity with the PR industry. The role of PR is the manufacture of consent. The role of the blogosphere is the deconstruction of such consent, in the hope, I think, of trying to establish a more universal consent. Trying to find a place along the line that separates the two is impossible. Hence, the term PR blogger is an oxymoron.”

“Most PR practitioners engage in promoting products and services - simply one more element of the sales/marketing process.”

And there was one other—one I responded to—that now seems to have been removed in which the author said simply, “PR is PR” as he explained why there’s no point in giving PR bloggers any respect or credibility.

To be sure, there are other comments, some defending PR bloggers (and some of those come from PR bloggers). Even Rosen suggests that some of these anti-PR comments are a bit over the top. But the fact that reasonable people believe this about us and our profession should be a bigger wake-up call than the original catalyst for Rosen’s article. I’ve said it before: It’s astounding that a profession that makes a living building reputations and images can’t seem to manage its own.

Yes, a lot of PR people are engaged in product PR (or marketing communications). A lot aren’t. I’ve never worked on a product or service effort in the 28 years I’ve been in the business. I do corporate work—financial and investment, internal communications, media relations around business issues, crisis work, but never product. Maybe we need a clearer distinction between the corporate affairs type of PR and the product type.

What I’m sure of is that we need to police our own behavior. When there’s a breech of the magnitude of Ketchum’s, the associations that represent us (IABC, PRSA, CPRF, IPRA, etc.) need to call them on it. And we need to do a much better job—orders of magnitude better—of shining the light on the many ethical and professional efforts in which the vast majority of practitioners do engage.

I hope this generates some discussion, here or elsewhere. What do we, as a profession, need to do—tangible, actual work—to begin swinging the pendulum of perception?