“Words that Changed America”
By Alex Barnett
The Lyons, Press, 2003
“…LET us strive to finish the work we are in, to bind up the wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle … to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”
Is this paragraph part of the inaugural speech of a President who was proclaimed only a few days ago – issuing a call for healing, forgiveness and unity? No, this is the second inaugural address on March 4, 1865 by Abraham Lincoln.
“There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free ... if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained – we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!
Is this a call from the opposition leaders, despite a defeat in the polls, to continue a vigorous campaign against the proclaimed winner? No, this was a call to arms by Patrick Henry on October 2, 1765 against the English Empire.
“Thus I consent, sir, to this Constitution, because I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors I sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syllable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and here they shall die.”
Is this a Senator expressing his reservations over our Constitution? No, this was Benjamin Franklin, aged 81, endorsing the American Constitution, at the heart of which was a compromise where the smaller states retained their single vote power in the upper house of Congress, while the more populous states had proportionately more power in a lower house.
The three quotable paragraphs are lifted from the speeches of American leaders whose words have already been immortalized in the history of the United States and in the chronicles of speeches around the world.
A handy book, titled “Words that Changed America,” contains 79 speeches, official proclamations and declarations, prefaces to the Constitution and other laws, core paragraphs in debates, statements before Congress, memoirs, damaging papers, radio messages in times of war, and testimonies before the Legislature.
So, this is not only about formal, pre-written speeches. These are “words” that, according to the book, “inspired, challenged, healed and enlightened” a nation. They have changed America.
Only recently, the Philippines had less inspired words – but words anyway that challenged, exasperated and infuriated people.
“Shut up!” is one phrase in a note written by a feisty lady, expressing impatience over the habit of one Congressman whose peroration was delaying the canvassing of votes in the Philippine Congress. It was the same phrase that was echoed and reechoed by a visibly irate legislator, momentarily forgetting parliamentary decorum.
The other word is “noted,” a word attributed to the co-chairman of the Canvassing Committee – which came to mean: “You have been heard, your argument has been recorded – but we will proceed with the business at hand. It is polite – but effective – antidote to filibustering, to long-winded statements and to a legislator’s perverse desire to listen to his own voice.
Calls have been made to elevate the quality of speeches in public forums – including Congress. This book comes forward to show a collection of rhetorical pieces that capture the noble, lofty and well-reasoned thoughts of heroes, anti-heroes and ordinary people who somehow graduated into statesmen.
When leaders need to heal the wounds of a divided nation, Lincoln’s heart and mind could prove to be useful. When leaders want to preserve our adherence to democratic principles, especially with a spreading sentiment in favor of “an iron hand,” Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s concluding part in a speech, “The Four Freedoms,” would set them on the right pitch and mood:
“This nation has placed its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights or keep them, our strength is our unity of purpose.”
After the elections – business groups, investment analysts, foreign chambers of commerce, foreign diplomats, academicians and, yes politicians/statesmen are calling for the rebirth of hope in the Philippines.
Economists are asking our government even to challenge the fundamental premises of our economic policies. Talks of amending the constitution and reorganizing the bureaucracy abound.
And yet there us one things that must be done by our President and her officials, our economic and business leaders, and even the opposition: They must find new words for new uses to reflect a new reality. But these words must emanate from minds that have gone through transformation and hearts that have gone through a necessary renewal.
Reading this book – as well as noting a era where these epoch-making speeches or statements were delivered – would be a good beginning. Readers would be transported to a time and place where patriotism was at its best and eloquence at its finest. We need words that can inspire our people, uplift – or even ignite – the national soul.
If our leaders have nary a desire for a measure of eloquence – and there are many of them – the written advice from the feisty lady would once again acquire urgency and importance: “Shut up.”
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Sunday, June 13, 2004
PR builds a brand, advertising nurtures it
“The Fall of Advertising
& the Rise of PR”
By Al Ries and Laura Ries
Harper Business, 2003
The debate is endless. Which has the pre-eminent role: public relations or advertising?
But, this debate is fairly recent. In the not so distant past, the advertising function – here and worldwide – has had pre-eminence over public relations. The budget for advertising was usually much bigger, while public relations would settle for the crumbs.
In the organizational chart, the advertising manager draws a higher salary, rides a company car with a larger engine displacement, and is blessed with a bigger manpower complement. The subordinate role of public relations is even more pronounced in a marketing communications company itself (translated: advertising agency), where the public relations director runs a small department doing “product publicity support”.
In presenting an advertising plan, publicity (not even public relations) means putting little captions on photos, courtesy of the advertising (or hired) photographer, or writing stories that are a rehash of “great advertising copy”. The budgets say it all: PR is in the league of another item: “below-the-line advertising.”
Advertising is supposed to be well-entrenched as the undisputed king of communications that builds brands (whether products or institutions). But here comes this book with a shocking title: “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR.”
You ask: Is this one of those outrageous, unfounded claims of a clearly biased PR man or a disillusioned advertising executive? No. It is written by Al Ries, co-author of the bestselling “Positioning” book, generously illustrated by great advertising visuals and copy. Authors do change their minds. In the same way, author Tom Peters changed his mind about companies whom he earlier identified as “models of excellence” only to collapse from their own bureaucratic weight.
Now, Al Ries dishes out something subversive: “Advertising is not brand building. That’s the role and function of PR.” So, what’s left for Advertising? “Advertising is brand maintenance,” he adds. Ever in the mood to argue his case, Ries asks: “Supposed you were offered a choice: You can run an advertisement in our newspaper or magazine or we’ll run your story as an article. How many companies would prefer an ad to an article?”
The 295-page book is a well-reasoned point that public relations (Ries interchanges it with publicity) “is the argument, while advertising is the reminder.” The Ries book is made up of five parts – but the tension is in the first two parts: “The Fall of Advertising” where he traced the decline of the ad function as a credibility vehicle, and “The Rise of PR,” where he underscores the “power of the third party” endorsement.
The book provides, not only contrast but perspective about the functions of PR and advertising – which should be complementary, not mutually exclusive. Using a fable by Aesop, he points out: “Advertising is the wind, PR is the sun.” Part of the fable runs thus:
The sun and the wind wanted to find out who was stronger of the two. Seeing a traveler down the road, they decided to settle the issue – Who can make the traveler take off his coat. The wind blew, and the traveler wrapped his coat around him. The harder the wind blew, the tighter the traveler held on to his coat. It was the sun’s turn. It began to shine. Soon the traveler felt the sun’s warmth – and took off his coat.
Ries’s object lesson: “You can’t force your way into the prospect’s mind … the harder the sell, the harder the wind blows, the harder the prospect resists.”
In this book, Ries recounts several sad stories of multi-million dollar advertising campaigns that did not result in increased sales for companies—in the United States mostly. He also has a list of success stories on account of good public relations – Microsoft, Starbucks, Viagra, Amazon.com, etc. It is interesting to find out some local stories in the Philippines.
Near the book’s concluding part, Ries argues a new role for advertising – maintaining the brand, keeping on course, and firing on all cylinders. There are engaging stories on products that had gone off course – including Coke’s abandonment of a winning slogan: “The Real Thing.” For these accounts alone, this book is a treasure.
Meanwhile, back to a question asked earlier: If you are given a choice between free advertisement or a full length story in a broadsheet or magazine, what’s your choice? If you go for that story, you have just affirmed the big role of PR. Does that end all debates? No. The passionate debate has just begun.
& the Rise of PR”
By Al Ries and Laura Ries
Harper Business, 2003
The debate is endless. Which has the pre-eminent role: public relations or advertising?
But, this debate is fairly recent. In the not so distant past, the advertising function – here and worldwide – has had pre-eminence over public relations. The budget for advertising was usually much bigger, while public relations would settle for the crumbs.
In the organizational chart, the advertising manager draws a higher salary, rides a company car with a larger engine displacement, and is blessed with a bigger manpower complement. The subordinate role of public relations is even more pronounced in a marketing communications company itself (translated: advertising agency), where the public relations director runs a small department doing “product publicity support”.
In presenting an advertising plan, publicity (not even public relations) means putting little captions on photos, courtesy of the advertising (or hired) photographer, or writing stories that are a rehash of “great advertising copy”. The budgets say it all: PR is in the league of another item: “below-the-line advertising.”
Advertising is supposed to be well-entrenched as the undisputed king of communications that builds brands (whether products or institutions). But here comes this book with a shocking title: “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR.”
You ask: Is this one of those outrageous, unfounded claims of a clearly biased PR man or a disillusioned advertising executive? No. It is written by Al Ries, co-author of the bestselling “Positioning” book, generously illustrated by great advertising visuals and copy. Authors do change their minds. In the same way, author Tom Peters changed his mind about companies whom he earlier identified as “models of excellence” only to collapse from their own bureaucratic weight.
Now, Al Ries dishes out something subversive: “Advertising is not brand building. That’s the role and function of PR.” So, what’s left for Advertising? “Advertising is brand maintenance,” he adds. Ever in the mood to argue his case, Ries asks: “Supposed you were offered a choice: You can run an advertisement in our newspaper or magazine or we’ll run your story as an article. How many companies would prefer an ad to an article?”
The 295-page book is a well-reasoned point that public relations (Ries interchanges it with publicity) “is the argument, while advertising is the reminder.” The Ries book is made up of five parts – but the tension is in the first two parts: “The Fall of Advertising” where he traced the decline of the ad function as a credibility vehicle, and “The Rise of PR,” where he underscores the “power of the third party” endorsement.
The book provides, not only contrast but perspective about the functions of PR and advertising – which should be complementary, not mutually exclusive. Using a fable by Aesop, he points out: “Advertising is the wind, PR is the sun.” Part of the fable runs thus:
The sun and the wind wanted to find out who was stronger of the two. Seeing a traveler down the road, they decided to settle the issue – Who can make the traveler take off his coat. The wind blew, and the traveler wrapped his coat around him. The harder the wind blew, the tighter the traveler held on to his coat. It was the sun’s turn. It began to shine. Soon the traveler felt the sun’s warmth – and took off his coat.
Ries’s object lesson: “You can’t force your way into the prospect’s mind … the harder the sell, the harder the wind blows, the harder the prospect resists.”
In this book, Ries recounts several sad stories of multi-million dollar advertising campaigns that did not result in increased sales for companies—in the United States mostly. He also has a list of success stories on account of good public relations – Microsoft, Starbucks, Viagra, Amazon.com, etc. It is interesting to find out some local stories in the Philippines.
Near the book’s concluding part, Ries argues a new role for advertising – maintaining the brand, keeping on course, and firing on all cylinders. There are engaging stories on products that had gone off course – including Coke’s abandonment of a winning slogan: “The Real Thing.” For these accounts alone, this book is a treasure.
Meanwhile, back to a question asked earlier: If you are given a choice between free advertisement or a full length story in a broadsheet or magazine, what’s your choice? If you go for that story, you have just affirmed the big role of PR. Does that end all debates? No. The passionate debate has just begun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)