RepMan

MICK MOUNTS MILLION DOG MARCH AGAINST MITT

Also Wails About 'Wimpification' of Canines 

LINCROFT, NJ - February 17, 2012 - Outspoken former U.S. Congressdog Mick Cody today announced he'd be leading a million dog march to undermine Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's chances in the upcoming Michigan primary.

The controversial canine says it's high time canines shine the spotlight on what he called Romney's '...heinous treatment...' of the family dog, Seamus, in 1983.

'We'll begin the march (or trot, walk, run, or canter. Take your pick.) from every corner of this great country of ours,' said the peeved pit bull, who was forced to resign from office last year after being caught texting a topless photograph of himself to a cat.

'Voters need to know that Mitt Romney deliberately strapped his dog, Seamus, to the top of his car during a long drive to Canada. I think it's the Beltway equivalent of Michael Vick's training pit bulls to fight to the death.'

Cody said the one million dogs plan to converge on Detroit in early March. Once there, he promised the dogs will run in packs along the highways, and up and down every street tearing down Romney campaign posters, defecating on them, or both. 'We'll also be lifting our legs outside every Romney campaign office in the state,' he sniffed.

The outspoken pooch says he believes dogs can, and will, cost Romney the Republican candidacy. 'People love dogs, and once more of them know what happened to poor Seamus, they'll shift their votes to a more animal-friendly candidate. Not that Newt, Rick or Ron look very friendly, mind you,' panted Mick, as he returned from a brisk four-mile walk of his own.

WIMPIFICATION OF DOGS

Cody also railed at what he called the liberal Hollywood establishment's 'wimpification of dogs.' Standing on his hind legs and activating the remote control of the Cody Family DVD, the dog showed a gathering of reporters a popular Youtube video he called, 'demeaning and degrading to all canines, no matter their breed.' 

'My master is sick and tired of Hollywood's portrayal of all men as stupid. I'm equally upset at their marginalizing all dogs by showing one weakling who happens to be scared silly of cats. The liberal elite are ruining this country,' he howled.

Readers will recall that Mick Cody first rose to prominence when he organized a march of some 100,000 dogs in protest of Michael Vick's abuse of pit bulls. Buoyed by massive national publicity, Cody then became the first dog ever elected to Congress. He later resigned in disgrace because of the sexting scandal, an incident Mick still insists was nothing more than entrapment.

# # # 

Shout out and thanks to Syd Steinhardt who sparked the idea for this post.

So Much for Forecasting

"Candidates Out of Tune in Social Media Use," shouted the May 27, 2007, headline of a PRWeek article I'd happened to come across. Intrigued, I read on.

Brian Reich, director of new media at Cone and the former briefing director for Al Gore, was analyzing the use of the Internet by the lead presidential candidates of the day. "The Internet staffs of these campaigns haven't proven anything yet," opined Reich, who went on to predict that "...it will be a couple more election cycles before politicians get the hang of it (the Blogosphere)."

Ouch. Talk about being dead wrong.

Of course, at the time, the leading candidates were Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and John McCain. A certain Illinois senator wasn't even mentioned in the PRWeek text.

It's easy for me to do a Monday morning quarterback assessment of Mr. Reich's prediction but, man, oh man, did Barack Obama prove him wrong, or what? Obama's absolute digital mastery was a key ingredient in his successful campaign and continues to be a hallmark of his administration (can you believe we have a president who is not only addicted to his Blackberry, but also Twitters at will?).

I'm sure someone can dig up some predictions of mine that stood the test of time about as well as Reich's, but this one has to be right up there with the movie and radio moguls of the 1930s who predicted that television was nothing more than a passing fancy.

Train Yourself to Think Outside the Box

We all know who won the election, but what corporation leveraged the seismic event with a surprisingly street-smart guerrilla marketing effort?  Jackie Kolek reports from the wilds of Connecticut.

Following Barack Obama's historic win Tuesday night, counties across the nation were still counting the returns on Wednesday.  Yet many of us will now be looking to another set of returns: ones delivered by the stock market.  In a very savvy marketing move, a local Merrill Lynch representative was handing out a great research paper at the train station in Westport, CT on Wednesday.  The paper, "Elections and Sectors," provides an interesting overview of historic performance of the market following presidential elections.

According to the report, equity markets tend to do much better in the 12 months following a Democrat being elected.  Longer term performance favors Republicans.  Regardless of what party gets elected, market performance is significantly better when the President and Congress share the same party.  Since 1921, Republicans have held the office 47 years, compared to Democrats' 40 years.  The 12-month average return for the S&P 500 under the Democrats in office is 20.9%, while Republicans saw an average return of 5.3% (adjusted to exclude FDR's first year.  If you factor that in, the return is -6.4%).  The impact of an election on various sectors is mixed.  In the year following an inauguration, technology, industrials and utilities have been the top performing sectors when a Democrat takes offices.  Staples, telecom and discretionary sectors are the winners under Republicans.

The report was very interesting and a smart move by Wei Chen, a local Merrill salesman.  It also serves as a great example of leveraging breaking news and events to offer thought leadership.  At Peppercom, we look to do this on behalf of our clients through the ACT Program (Available to Comment Today).  We monitor breaking news and look for opportunities to offer our clients for expert commentary or a contrarian point of view on a specific issue.  It's a very successful way to get clients in front of the right media and showcase their expertise.

Tuesday night Americans sent a loud message about the need for positive change.  Let's hope the Markets agree.

The Close Relationship Between the UK and the US also Applies to the Media

How did the British view our election?  Today's blog by Sarah Wallace and Chris Cody provides a purely Brit view intertwined with that of an American in London.

So after months and months of anticipation, a new America is finally here!

The British public and the press have followed the race to the White House almost as intently as the Americans, and with good cause, as one British political commentator (I forget which one) remarked, “even though we don’t have a vote, it affects us all.”

Obama is heading for the White House. And it would appear the majority of the World, including the UK, is happy about this prospect.

It was of great interest to see, after the intense coverage this election has received over the past few months, what percentage of the media’s reporting would be dedicated to the result and it didn’t disappoint. 

On election day the newspapers and television were full of headlines, most of them referencing key words such as "historic" and "change" and of course the ever important by-line "America’s first black President".  Stories covered every possible angle from the initial reporting of the polls – African Americans and young people are finally getting out there and voting - to the challenges Barack will face when he is finally sworn in.  One article even covered what type of rug he will pick in the Oval office (apparently Bush’s rug cost $61,000!).

It seems that the UK public cannot get enough of this landmark election and our media is feeding this appetite. The British public have always had a good grasp of American politics, granted, the American President is the leader of the "free world" and America is the last remaining global superpower, so it benefits everyone to be up to date on his or her American politics, but there has always been a “special” relationship between these two countries, and this has been reinforced by the importance of this election and its ongoing coverage.

Most newspapers and websites have provided in-depth state-by-state breakdowns and analysis highlighting the early results right through to the final outcome.  Unsurprising, given that the UK has more than two million Americans currently residing here, most of whom are ardent proponents of British news coverage and would admit, often disdainfully, to changing the channel from ABC’s purported “world news” to the BBC’s legitimate world news, which provides astute political commentary and unbiased representations of both Republican and Democratic platforms.

The British press is well known across the World for its impartial and well researched reporting and just to reassert its credentials, The Times even went so far as to take out a full page advertisement, just to make sure that the British public are aware that since 1849 it has had a correspondent based in America.

It is clear that for months to come the British media will continue with this coverage and it will be of great interest to see whether this President-elect can really bring America back to what it once was: a country worthy of its status as a world leader.