Tag Archive: Pam Anderson


“Worse than being misquoted is not being quoted at all,” – Former White House communications director, political pundit, and 1992 GOP presidential candidate Pat Buchanan.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie saved a group of young school children visiting his Trenton office last week from a creepy, crawly spider.

He smacked it good, scraped up its remains and tucked the corpse in his suit pocket.

It didn’t take long for PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) to publicly scold the governor for his insensitivity to one of the smallest of all of Darwin’s creatures.

“He probably did it without thinking,” PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk said.  “Some people put the spider outside, but spiders are often scary to people, and that can prevent them from pondering their worth.”

Soon after late-night-television comedian Jimmy Kimmel had a field day at the expense of the collective worth of both Christie and PETA.

PETA was thrilled. One would suspect that Christie and his gubernatorial handlers were not so thrilled.

To PETA, “All Press is Good Press”…even negative coverage.

Just get the name spelled right.

What does animal rights group PETA and “Worse-than-being-misquoted” Pat Buchanan have in common?

Not much.

Having acknowledged the obvious, both historically have demonstrated the ability to draw gobs of media interest, and both harbor the concept that attention…any attention…is far better than being ignored.

And when it comes to employing attractive female public nudity to draw photographers and videographers, it is no contest between PETA and Pat. Sorry Pat. Keep your shirt on.

PETA’s naked philosophy is simple: Exposure = Discussion = Awareness.

And you just thought Pam Anderson was wearing that lettuce bikini because she likes…lettuce bikinis. There is a method to her undress.

Marci Hansen, who spent five years as a guerilla marketer for PETA, assessed the NGO (non-governmental organization) that has at times been accused of crossing the line between being infamous and being notorious. PETA does not seem to mind being compared to the antics of Greenpeace as long as it succeeds in stimulating a conversation on protecting animal rights.

The goal of social marketers…not to be confused with social media…is to participate and even to lead a conversation online or through conventional media. The PETA strategy is to be at least a part of the conversation, if not the conversation itself, with the goal of safeguarding animals. Does every tactic work? No. Does PETA learn from its tactics? That seems to be modus operandi behind the equation: Success + Failures = Refinement.

Hansen extolled that just having the facts are not enough to win the argument. PETA needs to be good at playing the game…and prolific at drawing attention. Pam Anderson works. Pink works. Sir Paul McCartney works. Good Charlotte works…even labeling Burger King as Murder King works.

Has all of this helped or hindered Marci’s career? It seems the answer is yes and no.

Should aspiring public relations pros work for a notorious NGO even though this kind of association may spell curtains for those seeking employment for firms with a fiduciary eye on expanding the top line and maintaining a solid bottom line? In our segmentation society, where everybody and everything is sliced and diced, labeled and categorized, does the PETA imprimatur potentially spell doom for one’s chances in conventional public relations?

In answering this question, consider that  Marci is the co-founder for SheerID, a Eugene, Oregon-based software technology startup instantaneously verifying student or military status for those offering online discounts to these large…there’s that word again…segments of society.

Marci was gracious enough to lecture a small gathering of students, and reflected that she experienced some difficulty as a result of her PETA past, but also said that many are looking for someone who understands guerilla marketing and other means to draw media attention.

In a world in which the flack-to-media ratio is 3.6-to-1.0, securing attention from the dwindling number of reporters, editors, analysts etc. is getting ever tougher.

The answer to all of these questions boils down to talent and perseverance. Marci has a combination of both in spades. Does this mean that someone should rush off to tell the PETA, Greenpeace, Amnesty International stories and not have a second thought about it, even though she or he may be a true believer?

As the Wizard of Westwood John Wooden once said: “Be quick, but don’t hurry.”

One thing is certain, working for an infamous, bordering on notorious, NGO is far better than shilling for the absolute nadir of public relations advocacy, Big Tobacco.

Ain’t that right Nick Naylor?





From a personal public relations, marketing and branding standpoint, would I advise somebody’s daughter to pose au naturel for Playboy?

My answer is the ultimate of cop-outs: It all depends.

The most important public relations are personal public relations. Once a reputation and brand is tarnished, there will never be total redemption (e.g., Tiger Woods). This is not to suggest that posing for Playboy is necessarily unwise or potentially career limiting; some may conclude that is the case and others may have an all-together different opinion.

Before baring my opinions on this topic that once again came to the public’s attention as a result of Lindsay Lohan doing her best sans clothes impersonation of Marilyn Monroe complete with the red velvet background, one needs to be reminded that just a fraction of those that have the temerity to pose nude before millions of eyeballs are ever afforded the “opportunity.”

Besides having the requisite ornamental value, there usually must be a compelling business reason for the editors of Playboy to want devote a half-dozen or more glossy pages to a certain damsel. There is a literal media industry obsessed with fame (e.g., TMZ) and if the world has the desire to see what a particular, intriguing celebrity looks naked that draws lots attention, which translates into increasingly hard-to-attract advertising dollars. Reportedly, Lohan was paid $1 million under the condition that she pose 100 percent nude. There are 7.8 million Google results related to Lohan’s Playboy shoot and counting. The January/February issue (at least in major locales) with Lohan on the cover is a total sellout, which should bring a smile to Hugh Hefner’s 85-year old mug.


So in the wake of her entertainment stardom, not to mention the DUIs, rehabs, shop-lifting and ankle bracelets, Lohan’s decision to pose even drew the interest of the Gray Lady, the New York Times. “You could argue that Playboy is actually a step in the right direction — toward what passes for class and decorum these days — and that she will now join the likes of Drew Barrymore, Kim Basinger, Joan Collins, Margaux Hemingway, Margot Kidder, Amanda Beard and Katarina Witt, all of whom posed for Playboy without any damage to their reputations whatsoever,” wrote Charles McGrath.

In assessing this question, one should consider the permanency of the pose/no pose decision. There is no debate that we live in a digital-is-eternal world in an attention society. A celebrity’s (or wanna-be celebrity’s) published nudity (both analog with staples and digital through key strokes) will follow her to the grave and in fact beyond the grave (e.g. Farrah Fawcett).

In some cases, the decision to pose nude is made with an eye toward launching a career (i.e., Jenny McCarthy, Pam Anderson) and in other cases the decision is made to resurrect interest or at least a memory (i.e. Witt, Fawcett). And in these cases, the decision from a personal PR, marketing and branding consideration was the right decision … but it doesn’t appear to work for everyone.

Nancy Sinatra’s decision to pose at 54 came too late in her career; her best days were clearly behind her. Fawcett was 48 and 50 for the two times she took off her clothes for Playboy’s photographers, putting her on the cusp of being too … mature for this decision.

Model Cindy Crawford recounted how advisors were aghast by her consideration of posing nude for famous photographer Herb Ritts’ camera a second time at 32-years-old in 1998. Reflecting on the stated opposition of her camp, Crawford said: “That provoked me and made me want to push their buttons a little. People have to compartmentalize me. They can’t deal with a woman who has a serious career taking off her clothes and being sexy.”

For race car driver/Go Daddy spokeswoman Danica Patrick the pose nude/not pose nude question has not been settled in her mind, and whatever she ultimately decides it must help build and enhance her personal “brand.”

“Artistically, I think it would be really fun,” the 31-year-old Patrick said according to the Sporting News. “But it’s not things that I need to do to push the issue with my brand. There’s already enough stuff that I do that pushes that, so I’d rather stay in my full comfort zone than go that far.

“I’m not saying there never will be a day. When I speak to them and they ask me each time, I say, ‘Don’t stop asking. I don’t know. I might change my mind one year and it might be something that parallels something else I’m doing or where I’m at.’”

Lohan’s pictorial in Playboy may or may not have totally sold out. There is no doubt that the Playboy appearances of two women resulted in their respective editions becoming collector’s items: Monroe and Olympic figure skating champion Witt.


Like Crawford before her, Witt had a similar pose/no pose decision to make. “I’m sure that some of my skating audience, when they hear I’ve taken off my clothes for Playboy, will be shocked. They may be uncomfortable with it, or they might ask, ‘Why?’ I don’t know what to say, except that I was ready to do this.” She was also 33 in 1998, possibly prompting her to ask herself, if not now, when … and is later possibly too late?

Olympic swimmer Beard was always being asked if she would pose for Playboy. “I talked to my agent, to my dad, I talked to my boyfriend, and finally it was like, You know what? It’s flattering that they want me to be in such an iconic magazine. It’s a huge honor, and I’m not going to have this body much longer. I’m going to go for it.”

And still there were nervous moments for Beard: “I’m used to being in not much clothing (yep, she is a swimmer), but I’m always in some clothing.” She had fun posing in the nude, and used the experience to try to get into the heads of her competition.

“What was most interesting is the reaction in the swimming community and the people I swim against,” Beard said. “The more I can distract them from my swimming, the better. Or maybe they won’t see me as much of a threat, and then bam out of nowhere … Another little mind game to play with them.”

Fawcett also reflected upon her fans and their impressions as part of her decision-making process. “Fans hand me posters, pictures, T-shirts to sign, and they talk about having fantasies about me. I decided, if they’re going to have fantasies, I’ll give them what I think they should have. As much as I wanted this, it wasn’t easy.”

In some cases, the decision to pose may revolve around money, (e.g. ,Lohan), notoriety (e.g., Kim Kardashian), break out the shadow of famous relatives (e.g., Lizzy Jagger) or to send a message to an ex-husband (e.g., Jeannie Buss).

From a personal brand-building/enhancing standpoint, the decision to pose worked well for the likes of Jenny McCarthy, Pam Anderson, Cindy Crawford, Katarina Witt and certainly Marilyn Monroe. For others including Nancy Sinatra and quite possibly, Farrah Fawcett and Patti Davis, it was a mistake. And for even others, such as Tea Party fave Sarah Palin or sideline reporter Erin Andrews in the wake of the despicable stalker video of her, the decision to pose would most likely be curtains or at least eye-opening setbacks to lucrative careers.

Relatively new Yahoo! President and CEO Marissa Mayer raised more than a few eyebrows with her horizontal spread for Vogue. A horizontal pose for Playboy by telegenic Mayer would more than stir up Yahoo!’s NASDAQ ticker symbol.

Of course, times and mores change. Monroe was reportedly questioned by authorities what was on when she posed for Playboy. She replied: “The radio.” These days no one would care what music was playing when Lohan stepped out of her bathrobe.

Did they airbrush her ankle bracelets along with her tattoos?











Did I get your attention?

Actually the purpose behind posing this question is much more than the yearning for the ultimate in Search Engine Optimization (SEO) victories by using the S-word as a verbal pheromone to stimulate the Google algorithms to draw even more eyeballs to my Almost DailyBrett blog.

Instead, my intentions are noble (yes, I know that the road to hell is paved with good intentions). As a result of being a widower for more than five years, I have been cast into an unenviable position as a mature, single follicly challenged male after more than two decades of blissful marriage. The padre really meant it, when he stated: “To death do you part.” And I thought the vows were just an administrative act that stood between us, the champagne reception, the delicious wedding night and the honeymoon in Hawaii.

And when you actually do part because of death (my spouse succumbed to dreaded stomach cancer), you are suddenly single wondering if you will ever recover from this ultimate curve ball of life and whether you will ever find another very special someone. So far my search has not born ultimate fruit, but it has been instructive and I have learned a lot about me and the opposite gender.


As a communications choreographer, I have come to appreciate love, sex and romance as a core marketing and public relations skill. Today, we do not have to rely on the company dock, the Safeway produce aisle or the local tavern to scout out would-be partners. We can now use 21st Century digital tools to identify our target audiences, develop our strategic messages, execute our communications program and market our product (that would be me…in my case or you in your case).

Certainly I am not an expert in the affairs of the heart, but I have learned from my own experiences and mistakes and the errors of others on what works and doesn’t work when it comes to online dating. So what are some techniques that you should consider regardless of your membership in terms of the great gender divide and your orientation? Here are a few to weigh.

● First do not expect perfection when it comes to online dating websites. Some are better than others. Personally, I prefer Match.com and have been an on-and-off member for about three years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match.com For some reason I cannot get past Neil Clark Warren the Ph.D founder of eHarmony and his embarrassing ads. Match.com gives you the tools that you need, but just be mindful that when you are done, cancel the service…otherwise they will gladly renew your subscription and renew it again and again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Clark_Warren

● Go into this process with the clear understanding that everybody is not for you, and you are not for everybody. Even though there are more than 3 billion card-carrying members of the opposite gender on this planet (or your own gender, if you are so inclined), your target audience in reality is relatively small. Plan on investing some time into this process, including responding to e-mails, participating in screening calls, and then meeting at a busy public, neutral site, such as a Starbucks or a wine bar. You can usually identify an ongoing awkward Match.com first-time meeting at Starbucks or any other upscale coffee joint. It really is a joint job interview where two people are alternating between interviewer and interviewee.

● Trust your instincts when it comes to safeguarding personal information. Don’t share your cell phone number (never give out landlines, assuming you still have one) or your personal e-mail address (never a work e-mail address) to someone until you have developed a rapport. If necessary, do a Google search on the lovely Mizz X or the mysterious Mr. Y. They are probably doing the same with you.

● Sweat the details when it comes to your profile. Use your spell checker, but then read your profile out loud (or ask someone to proof it for you). Keep in mind that spell checkers will miss the wrong word spelled right (e.g. “pubic” instead of “public”). Also avoid the dreaded “I” disease as in “I do this…” and “I do that.” Avoid coming across as self-absorbed, particularly if you are a guy, or needy, if you are a female.

● An early 20th Century advertising executive once said that “A good picture is worth a 1,000 words.” In online dating, good, recent pictures that accurately portray you are absolutely vital to success or failure. If necessary, have some professionally produced digital photos taken. They should not be corporate, but not cheesy either. Sydney Biddle Barrows, the infamous Mayflower Madam, said that “a man falls in love with his eyes; a woman with her ears.” http://www.sydneybarrows.com/  Despite the wisdom behind this turn of phrase, women are also very attracted to a portrait of a confident, handsome man. Oh and be sure to smile. Forget the linebacker stare.  Most important of all, be sure to post photos of yourself, if you want to have any hope at being successful in Internet dating. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_picture_is_worth_a_thousand_words

● Many lie like rugs on online dating sites, particularly when it comes to age, height and weight. And once you are caught in a lie, your would-be partner is wondering what other facets of your “background” are not the truth. Keep in mind, she or he is going to meet you and decide for herself or himself. Be honest. Don’t be deceitful about your age in order to beat the search engine (e.g. under 50…when you are clearly over that mark). You are what you are.

● If you are not happy with your appearance, don’t expect miracles. We cannot all be perfectly enhanced and airbrushed Pam Andersons. Having said that, spending a few weeks to really get yourself in the best shape possible will improve not only your physical appearance but your personal confidence as well.

● Be reasonable when it comes to that first meeting over coffee or wine (safer than a long lunch or dinner with someone who is immediately incompatible). If it is not clicking or if you are not attracted, then just have a nice cup of coffee or a good glass of wine with a friendly acquaintance. The most important point of all: If you set up the encounter as your first meeting with Mrs. X or Mr. Y, you will most likely be disappointed, and besides is that really fair? This is an awkward time for her or him as well.

● Be realistic about your expectations. If you are a 55-year-old guy (and you are not Hugh Hefner), do you really think that a self-respecting 22-year-old female is going to be interested in you? Let’s face it; you are old enough to be her father. The same applies to Cougars on the prowl, albeit some young bucks may be interested in a meaningful overnight romance. My humble advice: Pick on people who are in your own age group.


● Don’t subordinate what is really important to you, but at the same time don’t impose standards that are virtually impossible for anyone to live up to. Everyone has some baggage (and so do you). Look for someone with a carry-on bag and be willing to be flexible. If a college education, not smoking, working out, having parental experience, loving animals, harboring reasonable ambition, are important to you then don’t settle. Compromise is good; settling for someone who is not a match is a recipe for a very expensive divorce, particularly in a Community Property State.

● Stay away from tailor-made arguments. Opposites do attract to a point. Personally, I am very wary about “currently separated” (ongoing combat?), “never married” (north of 50), Bible beaters or the opposite, atheists and/or agnostics…these are just fights going somewhere to happen. Personally I relish a good political discussion, but I know when it is best to fold my tent in the face of a militant extremist (Redundant? Maybe) regardless of ideology. Avoid extremism, drama queens (or kings) if you can and seek out people who are even-keeled.

● Don’t send or respond to Internet dating websites on Friday or Saturday nights. Perception is everything, and you don’t want to unintentionally send an unwanted signal. Your pithy messages and responses can wait until the morning.

● If you have eccentric hobbies, habits or fetishes, you might want to hold off on revealing these until you have established a clear relationship. I am not advocating withholding the ultimate truth. I am suggesting like any good PR practitioner to manage the flow of your information.

Finally if you are contemplating taking the plunge into online dating, my advice is to go for it, but do it with your eyes wide open. Is having that very special someone in your life the key to ultimate happiness? Maybe. There is only one way to find out. Digital tools are now at your disposal. Use them. Besides how is she or he going to find out that you are available and all the wonderful things that you have to offer?

%d bloggers like this: