from the world's big
Howard Bragman Advises Media People
Howard Bragman is Hollywood's premier public relations professional. He founded Bragman Nyman Cafarelli Public Relations and Marketing (BNC) in 1989. The Company is one of the most respected public relations agencies in the United States with billings of more than $15 million annually and a blue-chip client roster of celebrities, consumer products and events. In 2001 BNC was purchased by Interpublic, one of the world's largest holding companies for marketing companies. He founded a strategic media and public relations agency, Fifteen Minutes, in 2005.
Bragman is a nationally respected crisis counselor and has provided litigation support for a significant number of high-profile cases and individuals. These include: Joseph Steffan who was kicked out of the US Naval Academy for his sexual orientation; The Lewinsky Family; and Sharon Smith in Smith v. Knoller, a high-profile civil rights and justice trial involving a tragic dog mauling death. Bragman was also an adjunct professor of Public Relations at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communications for six years and has been honored for his teaching excellence by his students and the University. Bragman has written articles for publications including: Advertising Age, The Advocate, The Los Angeles Times and Playboy. A frequent television guest on issues involving the entertainment industry and popular culture, Bragman has appeared on local and network news programs more than 100 times. He has been a featured speaker for numerous groups including The US Conference of Mayors; The UJC Youth Congress; and many others. He is also the author of Where's My Fifteen Minutes?: Get Your Company, Your Cause, or Yourself the Recognition You Deserve.
Question: How should journalists interface with publicists?
Howard Bragman: I’m glad I have a journalistic education, a journalism degree, and have worked with journalistic outlets. And for me, what’s most important is that I still respect the journalists. There are a lot of Hollywood publicists who like to have power over journalists and like to intimidate journalists. I’m never been that way, even if I am in a situation where I have a superstar, it doesn’t mean I can’t be courteous and nice to a journalist, because we’re all trying to achieve the same thing, okay? And I’m trying to make friends, not enemies, out there in the world. What I’ve learned is speed, integrity, kindness… And, you know, I had a client recently who was getting a divorce, and this client said to me, “Well, just lie.” And I said, “I will say I’m not going to comment on that because it’s a private matter,” but I said, “I’m not lying. My reputation is something that I’ve achieved over many years in this business, and I’m not going to take 30 years and throw it away when your husband’s living in a hotel and everybody knows it,” you know? So you really have to understand that your reputation and your integrity are what you have, and people know. Don’t think journalists don’t talk to each other. Don’t think they don’t know who the nightmares are versus the people who are smart. And it goes back to my first job in PR, why did I get into PR? People weren’t reading my magazine and I thought, “All you got to do is read the magazine.” I look at that today, I look at people in my office and I’m like, “If you want to pitch somebody in the LA Times, you don’t call the editor-in-chief of the LA Times.” You say, “Well, I want to be in the calendar section and this person writes about TV and this might be the right person because they cover this particular nuance,” you have to do your work and you can’t be a good PR person without being a good consumer of media. And from my friends who are journalists, I would say that not all PR people are [flaks]. A lot of us have a lot of respect and a lot of integrity and a lot of professionalism, and give us a break, too, and communicate with us like we communicate with you. If somebody doesn’t return my e-mail or a phone call, I get frustrated the same way they would if I didn’t return theirs, and we sort of need each other. It’s not going to work for either of us as well without each other, I promise you. Question: How would you advise newspapers as they grow digitally? Bragman: I think there’s one misunderstanding out there and that is that young people don’t care about the news. I think the opposite is true. I see the young people in my office and the young people that I know online, on the web, going to TMZ, going to Perez Hilton, almost multiple times per hour, in a way where we, our generation, would wake up, read the newspaper and go on with our day and watch the news at night. So I wouldn’t mistake it for a lack of interest. I think it’s really the vehicle, and it’s like the trains back in the early part of the last century. They made the mistake of thinking they were in the train business and not realizing they were in the transportation business, and I think newspapers have to understand they’re not in the newspaper business, they’re in the news dissemination business. And if you’re the Chicago Tribune or the New York Times, you’re losing some advertising, you’re losing readers and you have some real challenges. But at the same time, you bring some things to the table in terms of history, in terms of credibility that these bloggers can’t compare to and you have to play to your strengths, and there may be some painful times, but I don’t think they’re going away. I think they may reincarnate themselves. I think they will come out in new forms. When I’m doing a campaign, it really depends who I want to reach. If I want to reach older, more traditional people, I’m going to go for print and traditional broadcast. If I want to reach young people, I’m going to be viral there. And for most campaigns, it’s like food, you don’t just want to eat meat or you don’t want vegetables or you don’t want carbs, you want to mix it up. As I go and promote my book, I have a mix of online, I have a mix of radio, I have a mix of print, I have a mix of broadcast, I have social networking. You want a pretty balanced diet out there to reach the broadest possible audience. Question: Where do you see the New York Times in the future? Bragman: I think the New York Times is going to become something you read on your personal computer device that is your phone and your iPod and all these things at once, and I think they’re going to have to adjust to this reality. At the same time, there are people who are never going to be happy unless they get the paper on their front steps or they buy the paper at the newsstand, and that’s why we’re going through this transition. I think what [Kendall] has done for books really is the future of books. It’s too expensive to print things anymore. It’s bad for the environment to print things, other than my book, which is good for the environment, but most books, most newspapers, it’s bad for the environment. You read this thing for a half-hour, you throw it in the garbage, and you start, again, there’s a lot of waste there. And I just think, economically, we’re not going to be able to afford it. But I don’t think we’re at the place we need to be where you have a beautiful 8-1/2 X 11 reader that has everything clear and it’s thin and it’s transportable. I think we’re just a few years away from that and I think that’s when the New York Times is really going to understand what their future is, as well as the Chicago Tribune and the LA Times. Question: Do we still need mainstream media? Bragman: You know, it’s interesting and there’s a very symbiotic relationship. Sarah Palin kept complaining about the media during the presidential campaign and she said she wanted to operate without a filter. Well, Hollywood celebrities have been starting to do that. Owen Wilson had a suicide attempt last year, and his first interview when he came back was done with his director, and I think it was done on MySpace or Facebook, where he did an interview, and that way, he didn’t deal with a traditional journalist. However, traditional media outlets still got that story out there after he did the interview. And in my own PR life, I worked with Al Reynolds, who is a college professor and a financial expert. Probably well known for being married to Star Jones and we were approached by every mainstream media outlet in the world to do the first interview. And I knew they would sensationalize him. I knew they would sleaze him, so we conducted our own series of interviews, put them on YouTube, and then released him to the mainstream media. And, you know, we needed the mainstream media or we wouldn’t have gotten out there. We were very journalistic in the way we approached the questions and answers with him. We asked all the tough questions [and the outlook] would ask us, which is why we didn’t face a lot of criticism from it. So I think they work together, and you really have to understand that they work part and parcel with each other, and it’s important to understand what’s going to play with mainstream media and which you can get away with on YouTube and MySpace and some of these social networking sites.
Howard Bragman explains the mutualism that binds journalists and publicists and makes some predictions for the New York Times.
Join multiple Tony and Emmy Award-winning actress Judith Light live on Big Think at 2 pm ET on Monday.
A new study looks at what would happen to human language on a long journey to other star systems.
- A new study proposes that language could change dramatically on long space voyages.
- Spacefaring people might lose the ability to understand the people of Earth.
- This scenario is of particular concern for potential "generation ships".
Generation Ships<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a1e6445c7168d293a6da3f9600f534a2"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H2f0Wd3zNj0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Many of the most popular apps are about self-improvement.
Emotions are the newest hot commodity, and we can't get enough.
The team caught a glimpse of a process that takes 18,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years.
- In Italy, a team of scientists is using a highly sophisticated detector to hunt for dark matter.
- The team observed an ultra-rare particle interaction that reveals the half-life of a xenon-124 atom to be 18 sextillion years.
- The half-life of a process is how long it takes for half of the radioactive nuclei present in a sample to decay.
Frequent shopping for single items adds to our carbon footprint.
- A new study shows e-commerce sites like Amazon leave larger greenhouse gas footprints than retail stores.
- Ordering online from retail stores has an even smaller footprint than going to the store yourself.
- Greening efforts by major e-commerce sites won't curb wasteful consumer habits. Consolidating online orders can make a difference.
A pile of recycled cardboard sits on the ground at Recology's Recycle Central on January 4, 2018 in San Francisco, California.
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images<p>A large part of the reason is speed. In a competitive market, pure players use the equation, <em>speed + convenience</em>, to drive adoption. This is especially relevant to the "last mile" GHG footprint: the distance between the distribution center and the consumer.</p><p>Interestingly, the smallest GHG footprint occurs when you order directly from a physical store—even smaller than going there yourself. Pure players, such as Amazon, are the greatest offenders. Variables like geographic location matter; the team looked at shopping in the UK, the US, China, and the Netherlands. </p><p>Sadegh Shahmohammadi, a PhD student at the Netherlands' Radboud University and corresponding author of the paper, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/26/tech/greenhouse-gas-emissions-retail/index.html" target="_blank">says</a> the above "pattern holds true in countries where people mostly drive. It really depends on the country and consumer behavior there."</p><p>The researchers write that this year-and-a-half long study pushes back on previous research that claims online shopping to be better in terms of GHG footprints.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"They have, however, compared the GHG emissions per shopping event and did not consider the link between the retail channels and the basket size, which leads to a different conclusion than that of the current study."</p><p>Online retail is where convenience trumps environment: people tend to order one item at a time when shopping on pure player sites, whereas they stock up on multiple items when visiting a store. Consumers will sometimes order a number of separate items over the course of a week rather than making one trip to purchase everything they need. </p><p>While greening efforts by online retailers are important, until a shift in consumer attitude changes, the current carbon footprint will be a hard obstacle to overcome. Amazon is trying to have it both ways—carbon-free and convenience addicted—and the math isn't adding up. If you need to order things, do it online, but try to consolidate your purchases as much as possible.</p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>