Were These Messages Intended?

In this post, a variety of (unintended?) messages.

It reads: “3 Accused of Gang Rape in Monroeville.”
The billboard above is promoting a local Alabama TV station’s anchor team. It is from the blog Mashable, The Social Media Guide. While Mashable reports it could not vouch for the authenticity of the billboard it does say it did receive corroboration: “The photo has been confirmed as real and WPMI-TV’s general manager and news director were suspended over the incident, reports Rob Holbert.”

Next, reaction to a news report the Federal Reserve will set down new regulations governing multimillion-dollar pay and exotic incentive packages for the banking industry. While community banks might not be affected by all of the new rules, they do expect more bureaucracy, as a result. Hence, this comment from Steve Bridges, Executive Director of Legislative & Regulatory Affairs with the Community Bankers Association of Georgia: “I don’t think it’s unreasonable,” he said of the proposed rules, but “this is just one more thing that [banks] have got to add to the stack. The stack’s pretty large already.”

His message is almost contradictory. My interpretation: “It makes sense, but we resent it.” His title would suggest that Bridges lobbies on behalf of Georgia’s community bankers. Certainly, they can’t be happy about the increased paperwork and additional costs it will require. Seems to me they would want their representative arguing against yet more bureaucracy.

Rewinding the calendar to the mid 1980s, a time when terrorists were targeting American travelers visiting the Mediterranean region. The result: US vacationers were avoiding that part of the globe. Greece was feeling the economic hit; after all, tourism is their primary industry. So the Greek tourism board went on the offensive with advertising and interviews to coax Americans to reconsider and come back to the cradle of Western Civilization.

Unfortunately, their New York-based spokesman failed to consider who might be watching when he appeared on ABC’s Good Morning America. About 70% of the viewers to these morning shows are women. They often are the ones who make family travel plans. Considering the reason for avoiding Greece was a fear of terrorism, women wanted to know that they will be safe and secure. Instead, as you’ll hear in the video below, their concerns were ignored.

Could he have used a more offensive word for his argument than “attack”? And he said it twice. Plus, his claim that you’re safer in Greece than you are at home is an obscene leap of logic. Then, he admits that the tourism board’s promotional campaign deliberately ignored safety and security issues.

By the way, I’ve been told by two people I’ve trained that he’s a lawyer by day…indeed, a litigator. Did you get the sense he was arguing his case as if he was in court? He completely misjudged the jury in this case.

And finally, a man who probably never should’ve considered being interviewed anywhere, least of all on TV. This guy was selling alibis. That’s right, alibis. Having an affair and you need a cover story to give your spouse? His company comes to your aid, for a price, of course. And if you think that sounds smarmy, wait until you see and hear him in this video.

Is he someone you’d do business with?

Leave a Reply