Comments for myPRfeed

Comment on David Letterman drops bombshell announcement about sex scandal by mrlocario

mrlocario — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 02:21:21 +0000

1. Letterman is smart. He knows that he can confess to his fans and they will understand him. He probably figured if I tell everyone then no can hold anything over him.

2. Letterman has been around for a very long time. He has built a rapport that allows him to look vulnerable in public and it will add to his over character in the public eye. If he had covered it up it the everyone who has followed him for so long would feel betrayed.

3. It will blow over. I mean come on it’s Letterman. Look how many thing he has said an done that didn’t sit well with everyone. But his true fan tune in to the show the following night anyway. He will be fine.

Comment on David Letterman drops bombshell announcement about sex scandal by Paul

Paul — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 00:34:22 +0000

Letterman is fine; he never was the “Family Values” type. Yes, he probably cheated on his girlfriend now wife. But at least he does go around claiming he is Mr. “Family Values” like some of our politicians (can you just see the grin on all “Fake News” reporters/commentators). This has been a tough summer, for Dave, for our economy but at least he did not end up on the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC).

Comment on Serena Williams explodes, forced to apologize for US Open tirade by Greg

Greg — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 19:02:56 +0000

1. You shouldn’t have to ask why being threatened with having something shoved down your throat is offensive. 2. Her initial remarks were ineffective because she made excuses instead of apologizing. 3. What Williams has lost is whatever little integrity she had before the incident. 4. What do you mean “second apology?” Her first initial public statements contained no apology whatsoever. Her later “apology” was probably done only to appease critics and further further fines or punishments; if she was really sorry she would have made that clear much earlier. Her comments contained more rationalizations and arrogance than contrition. Her self-praising comment that she leads by example is ironic; because her example from the start, and afterward, was atrocious.

Comment on Lesson Learned: MA Thesis comes back to haunt Virginia Republican candidate for governor by Ben Hoffman

Ben Hoffman — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:14:48 +0000

Ha! Republicans get a taste of their own medicine!

Comment on Can Rep. Joe Wilson recover after embarrassing himself and his party? by Philospher

Philospher — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 02:51:36 +0000

He says there’s no death panels, but death by bureaucrat care denial is there.

He says there’s no additional spending, but its there according to non-partisan CBO.

He says there’s no one will lose their current health care because of his public option but they will when it drains the private market with unfairly priced government competition.

And he says no illegal immigrants will be covered, but there’s no verification to stop that from happening. Your own Politifact citation says exactly that as well.

Is there specific language saying any of these are allowed? No.

But only an irrational person will say you are telling the truth when you can see the practical outcome is exactly the opposite.

That is why Obama was called a Liar.

Comment on Best Buy’s $9.99 52-inch Samsung HDTV becomes a PR headache by Curt

Curt — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:59:09 +0000

1. Does Best Buy really stand to benefit from its error? If so, how?

No, they would have benefited if they would have admitted to the error and then honor the sale.

2. Should Best Buy have honored the purchases?

Yes, without a question.

3. Did Best Buy do a good job in dealing with the crisis? Should the company have given customers some sort of huge discount, or were they right in terminating the sales immediately?

They did not think past the day’s ending sales total. If they had expanded their view on things, they would have turned a minor blip into gold. These are things that will go down in business history, like the Tylenol scare of the late 1970’s. That potential PR nightmare is still being talked about today.

4. If you were consulting Best Buy on this PR crisis, what might you have recommended that they do differently?

FreeLanceMBA would have advised them to relax, and honor the sales. Failure to do so; would result in public back lash that would linger for months. Eventually, costing them more money than honoring the sales.

Now, if they would honor the sales and the corporation publicly stating so as soon a stores open. It would have went over big time in the media market. Just think, the error and the unprecedented challenges to honor such a error costing the company millions in sales. It would have been the talk of the of every major morning news channel, along with mid-day and even news. Lets not forget the day and week in review.

The amount of positive free advertisement outweighs the loss in sales revenue for that product. Now, I would also tell them to move the cost of the inventory from the advertising budget. Trust me the amount of media coverage that this creates is worth a week of 30-second spots on television.

Comment on Should NASA respond more directly to the moon landing conspiracy? by linzeebinzee

linzeebinzee — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:49:11 +0000

1. I suppose NASA loses the support of those people who believe it was a conspiracy, but I think it’s those people who lose out in the end. They’re being ignorant of one of humanity’s greatest achievements, and if they think they’re being duped about this, for which we have an endless supply of evidence, then what can they believe?

2. I don’t think they should address the conspiracy nuts. By doing so the conspiracy theorists would take this as validating their ideas, and it would also strengthen their position. They believe NASA is lying about the moon landings, so they wouldn’t believe NASA anyways, and it would give them a chance to say “see? NASA is so scared that we’re going to expose their lies that now they’re refuting us in public!”

3. Like I said in #2, I don’t think they should respond. But I like what they’re doing now with releasing new photos of the landing sites and new footage. They aren’t trying to refute the conspiracy theorists, they’s just putting out the information to inspire a whole new generation to repeat the amazing achievement.

Comment on Is Danny Boyle and company doing enough to help Slumdog kids? by Stacey

Stacey — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:01:23 +0000

1. No, I don’t think this story is being told in enough places. Because I just got news of this story today. Also, I just saw a blog where a poster said she saw the movie and loved it. She probably hasn’t read about any of this either.
2. I’m not certain.
3. In my opinion, no. They should pay their families the equivalent of what the child stars would have been paid had they been American children (plus the trust, if you ask me). Whatever the families do with the money is their business. But it would wash his hands of the situation and seem much more honorable. Right now he looks like he exploited them himself.

Comment on Does Mars cross line with FLING campaign? by Local Marketing

Local Marketing — Sun, 24 May 2009 01:38:58 +0000

I think that a lot depends on when it will be shown. I don’t necessarily think its appropriate for all ages but after 10 o’clock why not show it.

Comment on Last Minute Efforts: Swiftboating in the 2008 election by rsaling

rsaling — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 07:26:25 +0000

How is going after a person’s associations, judgment and character somehow negative or off limits? I think it is vitally important to know the type of associations our leaders associate with. The old saying “birds of a feather…” comes to mind. Our leaders need to be held to a higher standard because they are in charge of our country, not the corner McDonalds. Their judgment and character matter. Now if family members were attacked or, unsubstantiated lies… that would be a different matter.