PR agencies and spokespeople must stop passing the buck

While many people in South Africa and elsewhere retain a vague memory of a PR firm that used to be known as Bell Pottinger, few seem to remember the events that led to its undoing. Sadder is the fact that many relevant questions were not asked of it before its undoing, even in South Africa, where the work it did inflicted much, lasting, damage to the country’s social harmony, specifically where race relations are concerned.

Bell Pottinger had been commissioned by individuals linked to corruption and state capture implicated former South African president – the man from a place known as Nkandla in the province of KwaZulu-Natal - of whom many still regularly ask in song "Wenzeni uZuma" (what has Zuma done?)? The said individuals had commissioned Bell Pottinger to implement a campaign whose core aim would be to deliberately deepen racial fissures and suspicion in the country.

Former president Jacob Zuma’s son, Duduzane, and his business partners, the equally notorious Gupta brothers, were prominently named as the originators and sponsors of the Bell Pottinger-led campaign.

The campaign's aims were clear, to ensure that levels of mistrust were deepened and that South African black people, still largely wounded and suffering from what can be described as undeclared post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following decades of systemic, structural, racial segregation and oppression, would continue looking at white people as the sources of their contemporary existential pains, and not the inept, criminal cabal that has been lording it over their country’s affairs for almost three decades since the end of formal apartheid.

Some of the questions no one seemed to bother asking at the time were:

• What was contained in the Zupta (Zuma + Gupta) final brief to Bell Pottinger?
• Who signed that brief?
• Since it took more than a year, following the activation of the campaign, before it was identified for what it was and that its existence began to unravel, with Bell Pottinger having received regular, monthly fees for the nefarious work it had been doing, what was contained in its monthly progress reports?
• Whom did they report to, every month, to discuss ‘past month’ and ‘next month’ activities and to obtain sign off and monthly retainer fees for them???

I had written at the time that PR agencies do not simply impose themselves on to their clients. They either pitch for advertised projects or get specifically invited – usually based on past work record and brand appeal – to submit proposals following a carefully customised brief with the client who would pay their bills. This process is often fairly iterative until the final brief is agreed upon and signed off by the client.?

But no one in South Africa, including the criminal justice system (part of which was already weakened and compromised, of course), commentators, and the media, seemed to be interested in asking the right questions. Most focus was on the agency that came from the UK and what it did, not on who had brought it to South Africa and the details of their commission.

The whole situation was so laughable that even one Zizi Kodwa, then ANC spokesperson (now comfortably ensconced in the position of deputy intelligence minister even despite implicating findings of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into State Capture), was invited to share his rant on several national TV stations about "this agency that came from the UK to undo the gains of our democracy", or something along those lines.

READ?|?Bell Pottinger was 'just a tool for the dark forces'

In the end, Bell Pottinger went down because of punitive action taken by the authorities in the UK, specifically the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA), not following action taken by any authority in South Africa, including the Public Relations Institute of Southern Africa (PRISA) – of which I must declare to be past president in a period preceding the Bell Pottinger horrors.

READ?|?Solly Moeng | Spokespeople have a lot of power - they should be scrutinised

South African authorities are doing the same thing today in regard to global consultation firms like Bain and Co. No action has been taken about this specific US firm, even after the UK government has officially barred them from doing any government work for three years following intense lobbying by Athol Williams and Lord Peter Hain. All this because of crimes alleged to have been committed to benefit Bain and Co., in South Africa, not in the UK. Athol Williams details the unethical, possibly criminal, actions of Bain & Co., (his former employer), in his book "Deep Collusion"; a must read for anyone interested to learn more about the horrors of this company's work in South Africa.

South Africa is truly a country of no consequences. This comes as no surprise, of course, because were there to be consequences for many of the treasonous crimes committed to weaken and repurpose its fundamental democratic institutions to serve the narrow interests of a political criminal network over the past two decades, the whole political edifice would come down crashing.

Just like Bell Pottinger and other companies that have been implicated in state capture and other forms of corruption, Bain & Co., did not infiltrate South African institution without assistance from greedy individuals in the country, including in this case, reportedly, the hideous man from Nkandla.

Enter toxic Standard Bank PR account

As societies evolve and sentiments around key societal issues - like corruption, the rights of children, women, LGBTQI+ communities, people living with albinism, fauna, flora, microbiological and oceanic creatures - move to the centre of global concerns, company spokespeople and PR agencies employed to devise and spread false, misleading narratives in defence of actions by their principals and clients, must be aware of potential ramifications for themselves, their long-term livelihood, and corporate sustainability. A lot of wrong that happens is often defended by company and organisational spokespeople, often following advice by PR firms that – driven only by greed for short-term financial gains with no regard for public interest - act as if they have no share of responsibility in the often criminal and otherwise unethical activities of the people who pay their salaries and fees.

This must stop - or be stopped.

These are difficult, uncomfortable conversations that must be had by professionals in the broader brand communications field. The recently launched campaign by 'clean creatives' must be encouraged, but it must address the role played by people in the PR and communications sector beyond concerns for the green/climate change agenda.?

Professionals in this field can no longer nonchalantly earn a living by misleading communities – especially in poorer, often less sophisticated parts of the world - for short-term gain at long-term cost to the broader, global, human, floral, faunal, microbiological, and oceanic ecosystem.?

Edelman PR firm’s recent refusal to enable what could end up being 'whitewashing' for Standard Bank’s East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project is a good start, but by no means the end of the road for PR and communications agencies hiding behind the excuse of "just rendering professional services" to mislead the world. Someone else will jump onto the lucrative opportunity, of course, because there are sufficient greedy agencies out there for whom the expression 'public interest' still has no meaning, at least for them. But they too must face consequences in a world that increasingly seems rudderless, where corporate greed continues to endanger us all if it continues unchecked.

There is widespread hunger for increased economic development all over the world, especially in the developed world, but this does not have to come at a long-term existential cost for the ecosystem that supports all living beings, present and future. Smart technological innovation can be employed to balance corporate and environmental degradation, but it cannot happen unchecked.???