to think the super-injunction couple and David Cameron could take a PR lesson from Justin Welby?(80 Posts)
I think the dignity and humility with which Justin Welby has handled the disclosure about his biological father, the circumatances of the conception etc makes a fascinating contrast with the super-injunction couple and David Cameron.
Justin Welby's position is much more sensitive in terms of public scrutiny of morality, values etc, yet he has behaved with humility, openness and emerged from it all probably with new-won respect from many.
Contrast the super-injunction couple who have mishandled their seedy behaviour being exposed trying to cover it up and prolonged the agony and speculation and press interest.
Contrast also Cameron and his shenanighans this week over his family wealth and tax matters.
Welby has followed the three rules of PR in this sort of situation: Tell it all at once, tell it yourself and don't try to hide stuff. The other two have made a bigger mess by not doing, have encouraged further scrutiny and hypothesising and have emerged poorer in the perceptions of many because of their choices.
Yes I agree. Trying to avoid talking about a story makes the whole thing worse as it becomes an even bigger story.
I like those 3 PR rules. Good for us mere mortals too.
Absolutely. I was writing about this just today actually.
The world and its wife know who the injunction couple are and the story, IMO, is only this big now because they were too stupid to realise hiding it was not possible. Ryan Giggs/Streisand effect anyone?
Can't believe Cameron is so arrogant he thought he could hide that stuff. Oh wait....
I have just agreed with you on the other Justin Welby thread. He comes across as a genuinely nice guy with a real concern for the well being of those around him.
To be fair I think people are more predisposed to empathise with A of C's position. Not disagreeing with you at all mind.
Welby and Cameron are both dealing with the fallout of what their parents did. And even though it would have been better had Cameron said 'I simply do not know all the ian and outs of my deceased father's financial affairs, I am reasonably certain there was nothing illegal in them', what happened actually happened to his parents.
The superinjunction couple are however dealing with the consequences of their own choices. That's somewhat different. But it's still press intrusion into their (consenting) bedroom, and a great shame that the story was ever considered worth publication.
I thought he's story quite amusing and It sounds like he's surprised and amused by it too and the nice thing is about him and doesn't seem to affect him at all. he's quite open, nothing to hide and seems peaceful which of course he should be.
I agree, he has come across as very dignified through the whole thing
I'm not sure I agree. Why should the celebrity couple feel the need to tell all just to satisfy some nosy people? What adults get up to in their sex lives is their business alone.
Cameron is a different matter obviously.
Not really, Welby is controlling the story from the outset, he's the only person wanting the story out there, he thinks it's good PR for him and his institution. Without him there'd be no story at all (there shouldn't be anyway).
The other's are negative stories that the individuals don't want out there, and as they are PM and "a celebrity couple" they have also shown themselves as very effective at getting the stories they want in the press to be in the press, it's a completely different scenario.
YABVU to compare the couple having their completely private life discussed in public against their will versus the self promotion of the church man. Indeed you wonder if the celebrity couple would have as much attention if it wasn't for the moralising of the bishop against married couples.
The super-injnction couple should not feel the need to tell all. However, if they had good PR, they should have been told it was out there, everyone knew and the best way to handle it now with least long term impact is to follow the 3 steps.
The choice they made instead has made matters worse for them in every way- everyone knows the detail- it is all over the internet, they just look foolish and hypocritical and like they are trying to cover their behaviour up, the Press are having a field day under the pretence it is about the issue of draconian British freedom of the press laws, and the couple are sitting waiting for the next challenge on the super-injunction or for someone to break it and see what happens. They have emerged with no dignity. The idea that it would be unfair for their children to know about it raises the question of the choices parents make - if you chose to have 3somes, unsafe sex, roll round in pools of olive oil with strangers you meet on the internet when you have a very high public profile and a very famous partner you take the risk that the people you do that with might not be discreet forever- in which case you accept your children and family may well find out about it.
Justin Welby's mother has made some poor choices too in the past and they could seriously have embarrassed her son's public persona had he chosen to try to cover them up, silence the Press, tell half-stories. He didn't. He must have had great PR advice and has emerged in a position where words like respect, humility, dignity, composure, humanity are being used to describe him- if anything his profile is enhanced.
Cameron could have handled the story in exactly the way Welby has- he chose not to and it has dragged on and on and the Press will kerp digging. He actually has the best record of any PM on trying to address tax issues- it got lost this week and the story became about his lack of transparency and a trust issue.
But FredFred, didn't the Guardian contact Justin Welby with the research it had done into his family and its conclusion that Sir Anthony was his father? So presumably they were planning to write a story on it? If so then I wouldn't have thought he had much choice but to put out a statement about it - it doesn't come across as self-promotion to me.
With the exception of David Cameron, I have absolutely no clue. But I'm going to go and Google "super injunction couple" because I'm so nosy.
Welby is controlling the story from the outset, he's the only person wanting the story out there, he thinks it's good PR for him and his institution.
No, he isn't. The Daily Telegraph investigated his mother and confronted him with the possibility he wasn't Giles (?) Welby's son. Justin Welby said he'd do a DNA test then, but a story was coming out regardless.
I read it today and was really impressed with how he spoke about it and his mother.
I don't think these are comparable things. Nobody could possibly 'blame' someone for not knowing who their father is.
Also not 'everyone' knows who the injunction people are. I've no idea and I'm not about to look for it. If they are that desperate to hide the story, presumably I might feel differently about them if I knew it (assuming I know who they are). So they've got a reason to make the case that their sex lives are private. Since the injunction was ?granted, obviously they did have a case.
I personally don't really think David Cameron should feel that bad for the tax arrangements of his father either, but I also don't think he should have to trot out the minutiae of his financial affairs at the drop of a hat. Everyone knows he is a rich man and no-one has ever seriously suggested that he is a corrupt or criminal man.
It's not the same Justin Welby has done nothing wrong and has nothing to hide and the intrusion by the press into his parentage is horrific.
Celebrity couple have done nothing "wrong" but it is what it is and their choices are at least their choices the injunction quite unnecessary and pointless but so is the press interest
Cameron is a fucking hypocrite who dares to lecture others whilst doing the same. He is PM of the country.
All 3 scenarios are quite different.
The scenarios are different but they have all influenced the outcomes in terms of public perception of them and Press reaction by how they have handled them. So the couple and Cameron could have learned a PR lesson from Welby- who could have gone for an injunction claiming the sensitivity of public position would be damaged by unecessary publication of intimated details of his mother's past. He didn't and has played a blinder really. The other two lots have damaged themselves further.
Cameron has confirmed the view of many that he has things to hide, that he is rich-git, kick the working classes in the teeth and protect my rich cronies Dave.
The couple have confirmed the view of many that they are spoilt, tantrum throwing, narcissistic, drama queens- Kings New Clothes- no style or substance, just empty celebrity flummery.
I think the SI couple are being silly. It would have been a bit of a non-story if they'd just let it be reported and either maintained a dignified silence or just said 'Yes, this is how we live our lives and we are happy with it'.
Welby strikes me as a very good, decent and well grounded man. Quite frankly, that is all I should need to say...
I tried to google the super injunction threesome folk, but found nothing.
Is it on facebook?
Well done to Justin Welby though. Handled really well.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.