Chattering classes have come close to consensus: Barack Obama better get used to hearing the Marine Band play “Hail to the Chief” as he goes about his day (how cool?). The man is as good as inaugurated. Polls have him ahead in ways that make us all go. Every historical analysis gives him the edge. Does anyone even remember the guy he’s running against?

Now comes the truth.

Things change, things change, things change. Polls change, moods change, inertia will likely change, and next thing you know the story — and chattering classes reporting or analyzing — will be amended beyond belief. Headlines You Can Expect: “Holy Lazarus! McCain Rises Again!”, “McCain: Pol with Nine Lives”, “Obama’d Out”, or “Obama? Oh Brother!” Which will no doubt be followed by a round of stories saying the exact opposite soon after, I promise.

If the Dem primaries taught us one thing, it’s that elections are cyclical. You remember, you were there… we all were. Oy were we. And statistics and polls prove that many of us were flip-flopping (a term sadly referring to one of John Kerry’s biggest downfalls in the 2004 election) our way through the Dem-on-Dem crime. We were Hill-raisers, we were Barockin’ the vote, and don’t forget we were flighty.

Media angles and strategic PR fuel our indecision. In 2004 Team Bush slammed John Kerry for chucking his medals of honor from his army days. Bush went AWOL, Kerry misplaced a few pieces of silver. In end Bush PR squad won the battle. They put the story first and spun it so meticulously it made enough people question Kerry’s patriotism (whatever).

It’s starting all over! Are you ready, troops? The media already came down on Obama over his refusal to don an American pride pin. Obama explained that the pin “became a substitute for true patriotism” and that he is “going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.” Media translation: Obama hates America.

Oh, and John McCain, the poor geezer, is the easiest target… heart attack factor runs through his veins. Everyone’s zinging away with the old man-senior citizen punch line. Come on you know it’s hurtful! There are sites out there dedicated to predicting his heart attack. Can you say “Eeek”?

These are non-issue distractions that work, though. (I work in PR and I love distractions.) Examples are endless and the consequences disastrous. Let’s not forget Al Gore passionately tipping Tipper for a smooch to prove he’s not square. I’m still uncomfortable when I see her.

In the months to come, Desperate Housewives will not supply the same level of drama as CNN. Remember, this is our process… You asked for it. You earned it. You will live through it. Look the other way or sit back and enjoy.

Don’t forget to vote, man! [rockthevote.org]

Our long in the tooth President, George Dubya Bush, recently said “So long as I’m the President, my measure of success is victory — and success.” While the statement clearly does not make any sense, it sure explains a lot. If success is measured in success, and he’s the one measuring it, I’m just lost. We are all lost. And according to former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, that’s really the point.

The entire Bush Admin is going gaga over McClellan’s 341-page collection of anecdotes making money off Bush and Friends’ love of spin. This timely (okay maybe a bit late) memoir accuses Bush and the cronies of going easy on the truth and hiding behind propaganda. Who can blame them? The truth, she ain’t so pretty.

McClellan believes we were lied to and claims that he once fell for the propaganda rather than face the issues they pulled out their PR guns. He thinks “[Bush] and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war.” Instead of carefully determining whether or not a war was necessary, they thought of ways to spin it to the American people. (BTW – how’s that working for you guys?)

McClellan blames the permanent campaign culture – terrific new buzz term – for the spin and untruthyness. I am constantly stressing the fundamental need for corporations and brands to employ smart PR. However, smart PR is not lying, it’s communicating. Welcome to an outstanding example of the tactic, let’s not use PR to communicate! Let’s use it to obfuscate!

Dubya is proud of the campaign culture. He recently explained “that in 2000 I said, ‘Vote for me. I’m an agent of change.’ In 2004, I said, ‘I’m not interested in change –I want to continue as president.’ Every candidate has got to say ‘change.’ That’s what the American people expect.”

With that we expected the truth – maybe even a message with a little bit of honesty. But no.

The former First PR Guy claims he was lied to by the Administration that is known for deceit. After being assured from top to bottom that Karl Rove and BFF Scooter were not involved in leaking agent Valerie Plame’s name, McClellan spoke to the press to defend them Of course we all found out that they did leak the name and someone forgot: “The first rule about Fight Club is you don’t talk about Fight Club.” Mr. McClellan was made a liar.

When Scott McClellan went to the White House Press Corps with that statement of “fact,” he was unknowingly fibbing. Some may not get why a PR pro would be so upset but it’s really simple: that lie cost him media street cred. At the end of the day, which is about 7 p.m., the only thing PR peeps have is their credibility. Yes we spin some (sometimes even at the gym) but the core of the message should always be true. When you lose it you’re out.

The White House is angry he wrote this book and much of the public (and the press) seem pissed it took him so long, but a lot of us know how slow the publishing world is. Personally, I think it’s a step in the right direction. As GW himself once said, a bit too cheerily, “All of us in America want there to be fairness when it comes to justice.” Who doesn’t, really?

Really. Who doesn’t?

Like, gee. Emily Gould’s much-maligned cover story in this week’s Times Sunday Magazine may not win the Gray Lady awards but it did garner what any self-respecting newspaper wants in the age of severely diverted eyeballs. Attention. Lots of attention. The article became a sensation and it—

Wait! What do you mean? No, trust me, it WAS a big deal. Hold on, I’ll prove it. Let’s just click over to the Times site..and ….

See, look. Most e-mailed stories of the past week. And that “Exposed” piece is right —-gee. No, it’s here somewhere. Has to be. Where is it?

Well holy smokes. Huh. I guess Times readers really didn’t think Emily Gould was such an important person. Instead they bit on the typical lineup of politics, faux trends, and self-help that pretends it isn’t. That’s what they e-mailed to their unenlightened, Post-reading family, at least.

But, wait, there’s “Exposed” – gosh, yay! I found it! Heading the week’s list of “Most Blogged” articles! See: it is relevant! Told you. A blogger’s bloggy confessional about blogging and its bloggy complications turned out to be catnip for other bloggers who like blogging about blogs! Let’s see here, who blogged about this bloggy article . . . why, Romenesko! And MediaBistro! Jezebel and Jossip! And the granddaddy of ‘em all: Gawker! Which used to employ Gould! Just like MediaBistro does now! And so on. And so forth.

Let me take a look at that Gawker post . . . that’s–eleven thousand views! Wow, like, um, not very many. A lot for Gawker, I am sure. But compare that number to the number who read, for instance, whatever watered-down nonsense was on the cover of the Parade Sunday insert this week.

Hint: it’s not even close. Like, at all.

So what does that say, kids? Maybe that the same few thousand people who read the same incestuous pack of media blogs were inordinately interested in La Gould, even while deriding her piece, and, more tellingly, even as most of The New York Times readership shrugged and went on with the crossword. And these are Times readers! The elite of elites, who love nothing more than to gaze at New York-y media-y fluff with hearts a-flutter. And they kinda didn’t care. Even with “come hither” cover photography and the author’s appetite-whetting persona: equal parts narcissist and train wreck.

The blogosphere is vibrant and vital, despite what the many detractors say out loud. That said, when it is its own subject one notices just how insular a community it is. Emily Gould is a very big name to only very few. And those people debated her article back and forth. And knew about it days before the Times published. And felt impugned and delighted and irritated and important because it was about them as much as it was about Emily. And then . . . what? It exploded like a neutron bomb in its little corner of our culture and, thanks to the electronic version going up early, was yesterday’s news three days before yesterday.

(Literally.)

This was the year “Gossip Girl” caught fire in New York and among its chattering bloggy/media classes. To read about the show in this sleep-filled city is to think you’ve witnessed the birth of a kind of phenomenon. Except that the two thousand people whispering breathlessly about each episode on blogs are also the only two thousand people watching it on their hi-defs. The show gets absolutely no ratings (it’s “OMFG, not that great,” said EW this week). And yep, no one in Topeka gives a dink. This isn’t “Seinfeld” or “Sex City” or some other quote unquote New York show that appeals to our coastal vanity while generating a huge audience. It’s not even “Mad Men,” for Chrissakes. It’s big-B Buzz doing little-b business. The lesson (this is a blog, so a lesson is forthcoming) is not so different from the Sunday magazine’s. Self absorption, no matter the medium, is only as magnetic as self.

I feel like I have not quite made my point. Wait…for…it…

Damn it, Emily! You loser.

[Check out “2011” now on Amazon via www.yeahwhatever.com. Like for sure…]

As the CEO of a PR agency, I can’t even tell you how many potential clients ask “Do I really need PR?” Usually I just answer with a simple and slightly aggravated “Why Yes!” Today, however, I will answer with an example of what a smart, finely crafted and well-timed PR campaign (with strategy) can do.

The past few months we have seen historically vilified Microsoft attempt to take the current underdog, Yahoo, over with a slow hand. During the war Microsoft was seen as a Goliath, a heartless corporation out to bully Yahoo, a company determined to stand on its own.

Here’s the thing, PR frames reality. When the deal fell apart, Microsoft was smart and engaged the press early. Their PR team reached out and massaged reporters, putting the blame squarely on Yahoo.

The press painted a picture that made Microsoft seem reasonable and open to negotiations. Microsoft’s flexibility was met by an unwillingness on the part of Yahoo to negotiate or cooperate. The reason the deal fell apart had nothing to do with the suddenly valiant Microsoft; it fell apart because Yahoo was unreasonable.

While talking to the press Microsoft might have mentioned –naturally, off the record –that when you’re dealing with the takeover of a publicly traded company there are certain rules that each company must follow.

PR is more than spin. In case I forgot to mention this (wink plus wink), when done right, PR frames reality. The reality here is that the Yahoo board put the best interest of their shareholders aside.

And there are some real legal implications here. Right or wrong, the perception exists that the Yahoo board failed in their responsibility to their shareholders. When shareholders lose faith, stock price goes down. When stock price goes down, Yahoo will not be able to stand against Google. When that happens…well…there won’t be anyone left to go Yahoo! (one place where Yahoo!’s exclamation point works!)

People still may not like Microsoft (here’s a clip of Bill Gates taking a bullet to the dome in the South Park movie), but MS has framed reality to their benefit with some smart PR. Unlike Yahoo, Microsoft was out there–immediately. Yahoo’s CEO did not make statements or address the press until days after Microsoft’s well-timed and brilliant PR-strophe hit. By the time Yahoo hit the streets, people weren’t buying their story – the minds of the public were already made up.

Yes, Yahoo stressed their willingness to negotiate. They also said they were fulfilling their obligations to their shareholders. But alas, it was too late. The reality was already framed and the story already set.

Yahoo’s delay invited enormous share holder Carl Icahn in there panting and aiming to launch a proxy fight to remove the current Yahoo board. His argument? Same as Microsoft’s. There’s a good shot Yahoo will win over Icahn, but the battle to keep him away will cost Yahoo time and money, and time and money, and maybe even a little more time and money.

So you have to ask yourself, even if Yahoo did spurn Microsoft, had they controlled the story would Icahn have this window of opportunity? I don’t THINK so. All he is doing is taking advantage of the perception that Yahoo’s board is irresponsible – the perception Microsoft’s very own PR team put out there.

Lesson is, you need PR and you better be deft. The effect PR has goes way beyond people liking you, your product or your company. Always be the first person/company/whatever talking to the press. If it’s not you it’s your competition. Beat them to the punch; put your brand, your spin and your ideas out there.

And be smart about too, will ya?