Tips for dining out

1. Never go to an establishment that has a sign out in front that says "Help Wanted" or "Manager Wanted".

2. Fast food isn't always fast.

3. Never eat at a place where the cook wears baggy pants. How do you think he is keeping them up?

4. Don't complain about the food until after you have finished.

5. Don't leave a tip if you don't get good service, that is what the tip is for.

6. If you go to a drive through and the parking lot is full and the drive through line is backed up either go someplace else or plan on a wait.

7. If you go into a fast food place and there are 10 or 11 people sitting around with no food, go somewhere else or plan on a long wait.

8. Never go to a restaurant on "kids eat free" night unless you have kids who eat a lot. Something has to make up for all the screaming brats sitting around you.

9. If you want a really good meal at a fast food restaurant order the salad otherwise go somewhere else.

10. McDonalds really does have the best french fries.

What news?

What is with the networks now days? You can't watch the evening news without them "covering" the latest reality show on their own network. Someone ought to tell them that this isn't news, it is advertising. News today has turned into a self-licking ice cream cone. In fact, most of what they cover today isn't news. Michael Jackson, who cares? The media has sensationalized this freak show to the point of insanity. They put more emphasis on movie stars and pop singers than they do what impacts our lives like the loss of lives in Iraq and Afganistan. It doesn't make sense.

I am concerned about the opposition to public radio and television, if the powers that be are successful in getting the funding cut or somehow limiting these two real news outlets the US is in trouble. I base this on 25 years of working with the media, most of the time the only coverage you get from the network news in a difficult situation is negative at least NPR or Public Television will give you balanced coverage. I suspect that is the issue. Not that they lean one way or the other but that they present things from both sides. How can you convince people of the sensationalism if they hear both sides? What is really behind the assault on public radio and TV is loss of revenue. I am sure there are many people, like myself who surf right on by the network news and the "all news" channels. We have more choices but it is like saying you have three choices tonight for dessert, vanilla ice cream, vanilla ice cream, or vanilla ice cream and none of them are really vanilla ice cream. The alternate sources for news, such as the internet, cut into that profit line also. I guess survival of the fittest will force networks to change or to die. I for one am doing my part to make sure public radio and television survive.

Academia

I was speaking to a friend of mine the other day about attending college, studying PR. His complaint was that most of what he is learning is not applicable to doing a job. I remember when I was getting my degree, I had the same complaints. Theory, that is what academia teaches. I wonder how long they would last if a college opened up that taught students how to be better employees, rather than the rote memory book learning curriculum they currently teach. Imagine that, a college graduate with skills to do the job you have hired them for. That begs the question why isn't there more hands on experience for students and less theory. I suspect that academia (sorry for generalizing but if the shoe fits, wear it, if it doesn't then don't wear it) have their noses so high in the air that they don't even realize that the theory they teach is only applicable to their career fields. When was the last time you thought, oh this falls into this theory, when you are trying to solve a problem or market your product? I suspect never, I know I don't. I challenge some the business executives of the world to start a college that focuses on the skill sets needed to succeed in today's world and put the academics out of work.

Corporate Responsibility

I see many flyers, brochures and emails regarding Corporate Responsibility, it sounds like a fascinating subject. What I am wondering is why is there nothing on Government Responsibility. How do the feds know what the American public expects of the government? Is there a standard. If not then why not? Did you know that the US federal government is the largest employer in the nation? If you break it down by agency the Dept. Of Defense is the largest of them all. Even when you exclude all the other agencies in the federal government the Dept. Of Defense is the largest single employer in the country. Yet all the focus is on Corporations. I think that the PR field is missing the boat when they neglect to acknowledge government PR people. It is a tough job, so many rules and regulations to restrict what can and can't be done. Yet many government PR people run effective programs with little money and even less support. Corporate and agency PR professionals could learn much from the government PR professional. The Army has already recognized that they can learn much from Corporate PR. They acknowledged it by developing training with industry program. This program offers an opportunity to the upper managers in Public Affairs an opportunity to spend 6 months working in either an agency or corporate environment. I have yet to see a corporation knocking down the doors of an army organization to provide a "new" perspective on PR for their folks. You know the old saying, ...Walk a mile in my moccasins...

Media training, whose got it, who doesn't and why aren't the trained doing the talking?

This has been a debate for some time in my circle of friends. We spend years perfecting our ability to talk to the media and then we have to put the top guy on camera. He isn't even believable when he passes you in the hallway and says "how are you doing?", now we are putting him in front of a TV camera? I know there are many PR professionals that don't agree with this, but does this make sense? Engineers design and build very technical things, but, for the most part they aren't good communicators. I have had conversations with engineers and lawyers about the public's understanding of the meaning of a word. This frustration, I am sure has caused many a communicator to role his/her eyes in dismay many times. This came up because I had a student ask me recently, when do you put the CEO instead of the press secretary in front of the camera.