Stop playing around with GMA’s image

Now that the opinion polls have indicated that people are either confused with GMA’s image or find her frequent shifts incredible, maybe that terribly influential publicist of hers will stop playing around and leave image building to the professionals. It should have been obvious that all this ka-plastikan, from "isang bala ka lang" to "ina ng bayan" pleading "kailangan ko kayo" aren’t going to fool anyone. It was simply stupid to think that the "masang tanga" are that "tanga" to buy all that.

The problem with this self-styled publicist is that he thinks he is a PR professional simply because he has a flourishing PR practice. There are, as you may know, PR professionals and PR practitioners. There is a world of difference between the two. The professionals are trained in the trade with years of practice. Anyone, however, can be a practitioner.

But I will concede that many practitioners can be very effective, specially if they are well supported by what is often euphemistically called "logistics." GMA’s publicist, for instance, can have anyone appointed director in a government owned corporation. If you have that power, you can’t help being effective, at least with the gatekeepers in public communication.

Unfortunately, these gatekeepers can have credibility problems of their own that affect the effectiveness of their communication. This is why when you want a public communication effort that involves developing a public image or changing one, you have to talk to the professionals.

Here, the tools of the trade are honest to goodness surveys to test every step of the process. You cannot just wake up one morning and produce a commercial declaring GMA as Ina ng Bayan. You should not risk causing her harm by launching a campaign that had not been pre-tested. I am not surprised that the opinion polls declared those attempts to toy with GMA’s image as big failures.

The problem with local PR practitioners is that they end up with the illusion that just because editors and reporters buy their stories, they think they can go a step forward and try more esoteric things like image building. That’s the portion of the PR assignment that is equivalent to brain surgery and should only be entrusted to those who know what they are doing. Quacks, in both cases, can do irreparable damage.

The people who are good at image building spent years in marketing and advertising where they learned the discipline of developing brand personalities. Off the top of my head, Minyong Ordoñez, Mon and Abby Jimenez, Yolly Ong are examples of people who are capable of doing this sort of thing. I am sure, none of them will play around with GMA’s image based on sheer gut feel.

Image building is serious business. A wrong move can be disastrous to a brand or a political career. Ayan na nga, nabulilyaso na yung Ina ng Bayan. I only hope, for the sake of this country, that GMA and her publicist have learned their lesson. I’m not willing to bet on that, however, knowing how big some egos can get and I don’t mean GMA’s.

Actually, GMA should only be herself, the way Tita Cory was. If GMA is normally combative, so be it. She cannot be made to appear what she is not. People can feel the ka-plastikan and she suffers the resulting loss of credibility. What is more important is the delivery of results. If she is able to produce results, the people will take her for what she is.

Ina ng Bayan? Baka "Ate ng Bayan" puede pa. GMA, pretty and petite as she is, hardly conjures the image of motherhood. Older sister, maybe but even that must be tested. What kind of image is she comfortable with? But don’t try to make her look what she is not. Whatever it is, never ever do anything as serious as building an image without trained and experienced professionals calling the shots.

No to tariff

Ray Orosa reacted again to our defense of Mar Roxas’s justification of saving jobs as reason enough to impose protective tariff on cement. Many jobs in our industries are doomed but many new jobs are also opening up. Government must just institute re-training instead of delaying the inevitable. Here’s Ray, again.

Over the next 15-20 years, one of the most significant effects of globalization will be the rationalization of industry. This will have a particularly devastating effect on local industry. The days of so many of these assembly and packaging operations are in fact numbered. This will mean even more closures and only a few will probably be able to make the re-engineering needed to become a world class business.

I dare say that we will see evolve a form of "new economics", the major difference being that development models and theories will have to undergo major revisions. The economic war in Asia in fact is "over". It has been won by China and there is little we can do about it.

My point though is that there will be drastic changes in the employment patterns with new workers needing different skills in order to fit into the high technology opportunities that will abound. This simply means there will be considerable dislocations. Many jobs will be lost but new ones will be available. It may seem heartless, but to "protect" those businesses whose labor may be dislocated by a myriad of reasons is not the answer. In fact it can only worsen the situation.

What is needed is for government to undertake a massive retraining effort so that displaced workers can shift and find other employment. You are right that the consequential loss of jobs is important but the answer is not to put up tariff walls. That would be the wrong solution even as a palliative.

Union Cement just released their results that showed an increase in their profits by over 400%. Their release says why. How can the others complain about a bad market? Why are the others bitching?

The answer may be found in the typical undercapitalization of the local entities and the bloating of costs for reasons you surely understand. We need a paradigm shift among those in government and undertake more creative measures that will tend to give a better fighting chance to some of our workers.

Genetic engineering

Genetic engineering can be troublesome. Dr. Ernie E relates how.

The other day Dave met his good friend who is a genetic engineer. He was happy to tell him of his job. His latest project is the splicing of DNA from different species of birds.

First he combined the DNA from a pheasant and a hen. It worked! He called it a "Phen."

Next he successfully combined a pheasant and a goose. He called it a "Phoose."

Yesterday, he explained, he finally was able to mix a pheasant and a duck. He called it... "Charlie."

(Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is [email protected])