It’s Friday. I struggled through my run early this morning in the heat and humidity. Now I’m going to write about public relations. I mention this because I know few read this blog on Fridays or over the weekend. Fewer still read anything I have to say about public relations — except when I’m writing about ethics and professionalism. I consider that a compliment, by the way. Still, give me another minute here before you head for a bike ride or something else that normal people do on a great summer day.

I wanted to mention what I believe is an important and insightful discussion that is taking place now on Bill Sledzik’s blog ToughSledding. As a really general overview on my part, Bill is defining public relations and examining the similarities and differences between PR and marketing. Bill’s a friend. And he is also one of the few who can tackle this subject and provide any real substance and understanding. He also has the credibility, as a professional with excellent background and an educator who has really given some serious thought to these things.

I’m not going to comment on the substance of the posts or the comments. What’s interesting to me is that this is an example, IMO, of how one person (Bill) can add to the understanding of an issue. And how a blog — when it attracts thoughtful people who are willing to share views and insights — can really be valuable. Take a look at Bill’s posts now and in subsequent days (weeks) — along with the comments. My guess is that you will have a better understanding of public relations — and integrated marketing communications? — then you would by working your way through most PR texts.

I don’t know where Bill’s posts — and the resulting comments — are going or will end up. But the subject of how public relations is viewed — and how people view it relative to marketing and marketing communications — is something I’m interested in. And I’m back in the “real world” now, working in an environment where almost no one makes the distinction. Does that matter?

I’m not sure. Before joining the PR faculty at Kent State, I worked for nearly 30 years in corporate communications at BFGoodrich. There was a pretty distinct separation at BFGoodrich between marketing (aimed at customers) — and other communication (aimed at employees, investors, government officials, the public). At the time, that made sense to me. And I would like to believe that it worked well overall. We were all working toward common corporate goals — but through different approaches with different audiences.

From my vantage point now — working for and with small nonprofits — there certainly isn’t that distinction. And maybe there never was. So here are a few questions/thoughts I have — as someone who has reentered the communication world.

Why is it that communications people have to fight so hard to convince clients/their management that they are right about matters relating to communication? I have opinions on a lot of things. During the last 15 years, for an example, I’ve enjoyed having a colonoscopy on three occasions. So I have some experience. Still, I’ve never tried to advise the doctor on how to best do the procedure.

I’ve been hearing now for at least 25 years that the news release is dead. (Since our government, or what’s left of it, still mandates timely disclosure of material items by publicly traded companies, the death of the news release is overstated. I digress.) OK. If that’s true, why are there so many news releases out there every day? And why are many of them so poorly written? Almost everyone opines that when they are hiring people for public relations positions that excellent writing skills are at the top of the list of requirements. Really?

And would it help those working in public relations to have some actual experience as a reporter or editor? Even in college? Or at least to read a newspaper (dead tree or online) once in a while? When I’m working with communication people at other organizations now I’ll occasionally opine: “No reporter will ever print that.” Really? Duh — don’t they print the news releases word for word. The most ignored words uttered by a PR person: “No one will print it.”

So it goes. I don’t have answers. So I’ll keep reading Bill’s blog.

I don’t really believe I’m a whiner. A pathetically self-absorbed complainer. Indeed. And I’m not sure Phil Gramm, the former Republican senator form Texas and now key McCain campaign adviser, knows the difference. So as a public service I’ll opine about the two.

You’re a whiner when you say, “Oh, boohoo. World’s going to hell in a handbasket. I’m screwed.”

You’re a complainer when you say, “WTF. World’s going to hell in a handbasket. Let’s see if we can’t do something about it.”

As a complainer, I’ll suggest that one thing we can do to stop our current journey to hell is to get people like Phil Gramm out of office and away from public service. Here’s the story.

Gramm appears to be lobbying for a senior position in a John McCain White House. And Gramm looked like he was doing OK until he decided to tell Americans to quit their whining. Gramm (read Roger Simon on Politico) said we’re not in a recession — but just facing a “mental recession.”

Well, even McCain was quick to figure out that Gramm’s view of the world wasn’t going to play in Peoria. Or anywhere else.

Gasoline is north of $4 a gallon.

Thousands are losing or have lost their jobs — and homes.

We’re in the early stages of a 100-year war in Iraq.

The Cleveland Indians are in last place.

You get the picture.

Of course Phil Gramm and others like him have no reason to whine — or complain. He left public office a wealthy man; now he has a new gig as an executive with UBS, the giant Swiss bank. How’s that going? Apparently not very well — at least according to Daniel Gross, writing in Slate, “Phil Gramm’s UBS Problem.”

Former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm has emerged as the key behind-the-scenes economics/Wall Street guy for John McCain and is being touted as the treasury secretary in waiting. Since 2002, Gramm has been an executive with the U.S. operations of UBS, the giant Swiss Bank. An unintentionally hilarious interview with Gramm on the Wall Street Journal editorial page last week asserted that Gramm has “been a key instigator of some of the biggest money-making UBS deals of recent years.” The interview was noteworthy not just for first-class butt-kissing, but for deliberately gliding over the avalanche of disasters in the past year that has turned UBS from a respected Swiss titan of discretion and risk management into a laughing stock. As this one-year chart shows, UBS’s stock lost nearly 70 percent of its value and now stands at levels not seen since 2002, when Gramm signed up.

Wonder if the UBS investors are whining or complaining?

There is also a part of the Gramm story that I haven’t seen much written about. His wife, Wendy, served as a member of Enron’s Board of Directors during that firm’s implosion. In that role, apparently, she, like other members of the board, saw no evil, heard no evil and didn’t ask any questions that might have uncovered the evil. Still, Bob Herbert says in a New York Times article that according to a report by Public Citizen, a watchdog group in Washington, “Enron paid her [Wendy Gramm] between $915,000 and $1.85 million in salary, attendance fees, stock options and dividends from 1993 to 2001.”

Sweet. And good work if you can get it. Herbert writes:

As a board member, Ms. Gramm has served on Enron’s audit committee, but her eyesight wasn’t any better than that of the folks at Arthur Andersen. The one thing Enron did not pay big bucks for was vigilance.

Of course a lot of people did pay for that lack of vigilance — including Enron employees and retirees who watched their retirement accounts evaporate, along with their jobs.

Wonder if they are still whining — or complaining?

Man, I was carrying that title around with me for five miles this morning. Good to be rid of it. And actually I was thinking about economic Darwinism all weekend. Sad but true. I wrote a thoughtful (at least for me) post on Saturday about Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the housing crisis. The point — in my opinion — was that the government was going to have to step in and make sure Fannie and Freddie didn’t go face down (or is it belly up?) this morning.

I knew few would read that post on a Saturday. And that was part of the point. PR people — and others — love to run flags up the flagpoles on Fridays to see how, or even if, anyone salutes over the weekend. That used to be a pretty good strategy when the only game in town was the Saturday newspaper. Now I’m not sure. I was at Blossom enjoying the Cleveland Orchestra last night when I received a tweet telling me that the Bush administration had decided to step up to the plate and do whatever is necessary to make sure Fannie and Freddie are still standing when the opening bell rings on Wall Street this morning.

Here’s from The New York Times – “Treasury Acts to Save Mortgage Giants”:

Alarmed by the sharply eroding confidence in the nation’s two largest mortgage finance companies, the Bush administration on Sunday asked Congress to approve a sweeping rescue package that would give officials the power to inject billions of federal dollars into the beleaguered companies through investments and loans.

OK. Nobody wants to turn on CNBC this morning to see Fannie and Freddie floating belly up (or is it face down?) in the deep end of the debt pool. And a disclaimer: I own Fannie (or is it Freddie?) bonds in my IRA. My esteemed financial adviser, Mr. Pat, Senior Vice President for Wealth Creation Destruction, won’t buy U.S. Treasury bonds. If they are good enough for the government of China, how come I can’t own any? I digress.

Anyway, there are a lot of points here, not the least of which is that this nation is in a serious economic mess. But beyond that consider this. If the government is going to step in and eliminate all risk — then why should managers, investors, home buyers, etc. make thoughtful decisions? That idea of economic Darwinism isn’t really mine. People who really understand these things have been opining about it for some months now.

Here’s from “There’s No Reason To Panic” by Peter J. Wallison on the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal online this morning:

Although they are owned by shareholders, Fannie and Freddie are government sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, chartered by Congress to perform a government mission: providing a national market for mortgages and enhancing the availability of affordable housing. This, together with a brace of special statutory exemptions and the fact that the U.S. government has always bailed out its GSEs, has led the capital markets to believe, correctly, that the U.S. government will never allow Fannie and Freddie to fail.

The result has been a complete loss of market discipline, uncontrolled growth, and the development of two giant companies whose deteriorated financial condition now threatens the stability of both the U.S. and the world economy. The story of Fannie and Freddie is a cautionary tale about the moral hazard created by government support for private institutions — a tale we saw played out in the S&L debacle less than 20 years ago, and one we may be about to inflict on ourselves again.

More bailouts ahead? We’ll see.

In the meantime, I guess Budweiser shows that economic Darwinism is still alive. Anheuser-Busch has agreed to be acquired by Belgian-based brewer InBev for $52 billion. Bud could wrap itself in the American flag all it wanted, but after years of pathetic financial performance and shareholder returns, the company’s shareholders looked at the all-cash $70-a-share offer and apparently said: “Let’s drink up.” Or something. You get the point.

So now — according to anonymous sources — the company is going to be called Anheuser-Busch-InBev. (Next month I guess we’ll add GM.) The Associated Press reported that Anheuser-Busch didn’t return messages asking for confirmation of that Sunday night. Guess the PR team wasn’t working over the weekend. Or maybe they were taking the flags off the flagpoles.

So now what. Is it going to be Stella Artois Stadium in St. Louis? Hey, remembered what happened to the Jake.

And I probably could have helped save Budweiser last night. I was in line to get a brew during intermission. The sign said: Bud Light — $8.

Nah. Here’s to you Stella. This one’s for you.

This is a story that isn’t as sexy as the one earlier this week about Jesse Jackson’s plans to begin a new career as a surgeon. But it’s a story that is much more important to most Americans. Particularly those who have a home mortgage or are thinking about ever buying a home.

And regardless of what former U.S. senator Phil Gramm says (“McCain Advisor Refers to Nation of Whiners”) — this country has some big economic problems. Let’s look at jobs. What’s the saying? When your neighbor loses her job it’s a recession. When you lose your job it’s a depression. Well, here’s from an AP/New York Times story printed Friday:

Cautious employers have cut jobs for six consecutive months, bringing total losses to 438,000 so far this year, the government reported last week. The economy needs to generate more than 100,000 new jobs a month for employment to remain stable.

Good luck. Yesterday we saw again just how tough things really are — and how matters may get a lot worse. And of course the oldest trick in the PR play book is to release bad news on Friday. The later the better. Over a holiday weekend best of all. So yesterday, here are two things that happened that all of us should be keeping an eye on. (But won’t be. Because it’s the weekend. Get it!)

First, federal regulators had to step in yesterday and take control of IndyMac Bank, described in the Washington Post as a “struggling mortgage lender.” Aren’t they all struggling?

And folks — this is the second-largest failure ever of a U.S. financial institution. Here’s from the story by Dina ElBoghdady and Renae Merle, “Struggling Mortgage Lender Taken Over by Regulators”:

IndyMac, which staggered this week under a run on deposits, will reopen on Monday under federal control as IndyMac Federal Bank FSB. Insured deposits there are safe. Regulators estimated that the IndyMac failure will cost the federal bank insurance fund between $4 billion and $8 billion.

IndyMac, one of the nation’s largest lenders, got caught in the mortgage meltdown that has led to a global credit crisis. Over the past nine months as borrowers defaulted, it has suffered significant losses and initiated a series of layoffs, including one this week that shrunk its workforce to 3,400 from 7,200.

The Pasadena, Calif., company, which had $32 billion in assets as of March 31, ranks as the largest thrift ever to fail and the second-largest U.S. financial institution ever to collapse, after Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Co. in 1984.

That should be enough bad news for Friday. Well, not quite.

It appears that the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are also caught in the mortgage crisis — with some opining that the government may have to rush in to the rescue. (Note: That sure helped Bear Stearns. Remember?) Although that is being denied right now by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and by Fannie and Freddie.

Why does this matter? As reported by Reuters, Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee $5 trillion of debt, close to half of all U.S. mortgages.

Here’s from the Wall Street Journal Online (by subscription) story “Rescue Debate: Paulson Insists Fannie, Freddie Holders Lose“:

As the crisis worsens for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is insisting that any potential government rescue plan not benefit the companies’ shareholders, according to people familiar with the matter.

The two stockholder-owned, government-sponsored companies, whose operations are vital to the functioning of the U.S. housing market, faced a severe crisis of confidence after a week in which their stocks each lost nearly half their value. On Friday, Freddie Mac finished the day at $7.75 a share, and Fannie Mae at $10.25.

The discussions at Treasury highlight the dilemma created by the financial crisis gripping the U.S: Some institutions are considered too big to fail, but propping them up could erode the market’s incentive to properly judge risk by offering investors a false sense of security.

After a week of near panic among shareholders of the two companies — and a stomach-churning day on Wall Street Friday — the next big test will come Monday when Freddie Mac is due to sell $3 billion of short-term debt. An unsuccessful sale could be a major blow to investor confidence. If the administration were to intervene, it could do so before markets opened that day, according to a person familiar with the deliberations.

Check out the ending. “The next big test will come Monday…” OK.

Friday both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac said (again, according to Reuters) that their “finances were sufficiently sound to withstand the housing crisis as government officials scrambled to restore confidence in the country’s two largest mortgage finance companies.”

Let’s hope that wasn’t one of those dump-it-over-the-side-on-Friday PR statements.

“Monday, Monday,” as The Mamas and The Papas might say.

Well, I guess Barack Obama and Jesse Jackson will kiss and make up. But I’ll bet Obama won’t invite Reverend Jackson to dinner any time soon — if there are sharp knives involved. And there are some important issues here — political as well as relating to communications. I won’t try to address any of those. I’m heading out the door for a bike ride. Gotta set your priorities.

But I was thinking this morning as I was running that the story really does show that the traditional news media  have been pretty much neutered. The TV Titans of Television certainly didn’t want to take a chance on offending Jesse Jackson — or I guess anyone else. So it was pretty much up to bloggers. And I’m actually proud to say that it is one of the few times that I have written about something before it has made its way far and wide via the blogosphere.

So one last thing — without trying to slice and dice this story too closely. (Ouch.) It’s from Noel Sheppard on NewsBusters.

Here’s from the article. It includes a video as well.

George Carlin, the comedian who died a few weeks ago, became famous practically overnight due to his controversial routine about the seven words you can’t say on television.

Apparently, Carlin was wrong, because there’s another word you can’t say: NUTS.

Can’t say balls either. National news media have none.

Oh Sweet Maria. Can things get any worse? The Cleveland Indians are in last place. Houses in Cleveland are selling for less than used Yugos. And GM is teetering on bankruptcy. While A-list (ha,ha) blogger Bob Lutz of FlastLane fame is on summer hiatus.

Well, yes. The Pittsburgh Steelers are on the block. Here’s the story from the Wall Street Journal online (don’t even try without a subscription):

Steelers Shopped to Potential Buyers

By JOHN R. WILKE
July 7, 2008 7:07 p.m.

The storied Pittsburgh Steelers football franchise has been secretly shopped to potential buyers amid continuing divisions among the five sons of the team’s founder, Art Rooney Sr.

The talks affect not only one of America’s iconic sports franchises, but one of its most fabled sports families. Steelers Chairman Dan Rooney, who helped build the National Football League and is the oldest of the five sons, wants to consolidate his control by acquiring most of his brothers’ shares in the Steelers over 10 years, those briefed on the talks said.

Reuters

Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger leaps into the endzone to score against the Cleveland Browns last November.

In a statement Monday afternoon, Dan Rooney confirmed these efforts and said, “I have spent my entire life devoted to the Pittsburgh Steelers and the National Football League. I will do everything possible to work out a solution to ensure my father’s legacy of keeping the Steelers in the Rooney family and in Pittsburgh for at least another 75 years.”

The statement said the company is restructuring its ownership to ensure compliance with NFL rules. Dan Rooney “wants to stay in the football business while some of his four brothers plan to get out of the NFL and focus their business efforts on their racetracks and other interests.” The statement said that Dan Rooney and his son, Steelers President Art Rooney II, are arranging a financing plan to buy Dan’s brothers’ shares in the team in order to continue substantial ownership of the franchise by the Rooneys.

But some of the brothers and younger third-generation family members are asking whether a better deal can be put together, if there is to be an ownership change.

However its fate is decided, the Steelers franchise is a rich prize. The team has won five Super Bowl titles and been among the most dominant in the league for 30 years. They play in a new riverfront stadium that routinely sells out its 65,000 seats. And their fan base is famously loyal, reaching far beyond western Pennsylvania.

The Steeler Nation stands on guard tonight. For me, I’m heading to the closet and pulling out the Terrible Towel, the original circa 1972. And all this following the death of Myron Cope.

Conspiracy theories, anyone?

Who gave the “brothers and third-generation family members” a vote? This is important. It’s Pittsburgh Steelers football. It’s not a democracy. WTF.

To my KSU college roommate, still Pittsburgh resident and former co-owner with me of Steelers’ season tickets Tom Kollar: c’mon man. Get off the retirement bench and get back in the game. This is important stuff. Hi diddle diddle. Rogel up the middle. (You had to have been there. Trust me.)

I’m cranky this morning. Got up at 4 a.m. to run. And it’s raining. So now what? Might as well go ahead and write about GM, Starbucks and nation-building. There’s a link here. Trust me.

“As GM goes, so goes the nation.” I’ve heard this saying for years — and if it’s true, look out below. Unless we as a nation do something — and quickly. Despite the best efforts of Bob Lutz and his FastLane blog, the price of GM common stock closed yesterday below $10 a share. That’s the lowest it’s been in more than 50 years, back to the days when Ike was in the White House and I was a toddler barely out of baby diapers. Let’s see what FastLane has to say.

June 27, 2008

Taking a Little Break

Greetings, everyone. Well, it’s starting to get a little quiet around here as GM gears up (or is it down?) for the annual summer shutdown period observed by U.S. automakers every year. As such, we won’t be posting much to the blogs for the next two weeks, but not to worry, we’ll be back in full swing following shutdown. I think you’ll like what you see. More to come on that later.

For our U.S. readers, have a great 4th of July weekend. - Adam Denison, GM Social Media Coordinator

Gone fishin’. OK. I know. FastLane is not designed to opine on corporate financial issues. And all the A-list social media and PR bloggers froth over it. I know I’m missing something. So let’s hope it returns after the summer shutdown. In fact, let’s hope GM returns as a company that isn’t in bankruptcy protection. New York Times: “Merrill Says GM Bankruptcy Possible.”

Oh well. Maybe I can walk to Starbucks. That’s if the Starbucks close to my house is not on the company’s soon-to-be-closed list. Looks like people won’t be waiting in line anymore at as many as 600 stores — and this follows a previous announcement that 100 stores were being shuttered. Uh, I’ll take my grande (is that large?) nonfat soy lattee with double sugar and cinnamon to go. According to the article in The Times:

A cavalcade of economic troubles, from imploding housing markets to rising gas prices, has pinched consumers, hurting not just Starbucks but nearly all retailers. The chain is struggling to attract customers for the afternoon frappuccinos they once bought eagerly, said Sharon Zackfia, an analyst at William Blair & Company.

“I don’t think it’s overly surprising,” she said of the announcement. “These stores were in aggregate unprofitable.”

Looks like the days of the afternoon frappuccinos are over. Mom, apple pie, frappuccino and Chevrolet. Something like that. For the one or two of you out there who read this blog regularly, you’ll recall that I advised Starbucks months ago to organize its stores so there would be two lines: one for douche bags like me who just want a cup of coffee and The New York Times and another for those willing and eager to pay $5 or more for a cup of coffee by another name.

Anyway, this gets me back to a theme that I have written about previously and will continue to write about. We need to have an honest, candid discussion during the upcoming election campaigns about the economy and the future direction of this country. When both big industrial corporations like GM and well-managed retailers like Starbucks are in the dumper we clearly face some problems. And we have some hard choices to make about jobs, education, housing, energy and a host of other issues. I hope the news media — what’s left of it — will write and talk about the important issues and hold the candidates to do the same. Another couple days of Wesley Clark campaigning to be vice president on cable TV and I’m going to lose my lunch. And I don’t eat lunch. His point: McCain isn’t necessarily qualified to be president just because he was a war hero and a resident of Hanoi Hilton. OK. Let’s move on.

As Maureen Dowd wrote in her column yesterday in The New York Times:

Maybe instead of refighting the Vietnam War while we’re still fighting the Iraq war, the candidates can figure out how to feed the world, find enough fuel for everyone and oh, yeah, catch that bin Laden fiend who’s running around free.

And it is possible to have a discussion of the big issues important to our nation. Check out last Sunday’s NYT column by Thomas Friedman, “Anxious in America.” He writes:

I do not believe nation-building in Iraq is going to be the issue come November — whether things get better there or worse. If they get better, we’ll ignore Iraq more; if they get worse, the next president will be under pressure to get out quicker. I think nation-building in America is going to be the issue.

Yeah, nation-building in America. Let’s talk about that.

Well, it took me long enough to write this that it is not raining any longer. Might as well hit the pavement.

And tomorrow is Independence Day: Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet.

I’ll admit I’m glad to be back in Northeast Ohio. At least from the standpoint of my morning runs. Big difference between 56 degrees here in Akron and better than 74 degrees and high humidity in Hilton Head. I was thinking this morning that I want to start talking a little more about some of the issues I’m working on now with Corporate Voices for Working Families.

Here’s one of them: paid parental leave. It’s an important issue for working parents and families. It’s also a controversial one with many businesses, nonprofit organizations and government.

First, here comes the disclaimer. What I write — and post — on my blog doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of Corporate Voices for Working Families. The reason I am saying that is I don’t intend to review with anyone what I have to say on issues or anything else for that matter. To do otherwise takes me back to the corporate gulag — and that ain’t going to happen. And I figure if I stray too far into left — or since we’re dealing with politics, right — field, someone at Corporate Voices will let me know about it.

So here goes. Corporate Voices has two interns working in its Washington office this summer: Amy Simon and Allison Keyser. Since I guess I’m still not ready to totally retire from teaching, I’ve been encouraging and helping them write blog postings.  Here’s what Amy and Allison wrote about on the issue of paid parental leave:

The federal government is the country’s largest employer, with over 2.7 million employees.

Many years ago, working for the federal government was seen as a badge of honor. But today with the lack of benefits offered to governmental employees the sheen has begun to tarnish. In the past, the federal government recruited the best and the brightest, but today these high- caliber graduates are finding employment elsewhere.

Today, with 40 percent of federal employees expecting to retire in the next 10 years, the federal government will struggle to find highly educated individuals to take their jobs if the benefits offered to the employees do not improve. In particular, the benefits regarding parental leave.

Currently, federal employees are entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave, guaranteed to them by the Family and Medical Leave Act.  However, for most employees, taking time off without pay is not economically feasible.

The lack of paid parental leave also makes it hard for federal agencies to compete with the benefits packages provided by top-tier U.S. firms.

For instance KPMG, offers 12 weeks of paid parental leave and believes that
“continuing success depends on attracting, retaining and motivating high caliber people. To put it simply, our rewards and benefits have to match or exceed what the professional marketplace is offering.”

The Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act, which has recently been passed in the House, guarantees that “of the 12 weeks of unpaid leave guaranteed by the Family and Medical Leave Act, federal employees be allowed to substitute 4 weeks of paid leave, as well as any accrued annual or sick leave for the birth or adoption of a child” according to a fact sheet provided by Representative Carolyn Maloney’s (D-New York) office.  (A post on blog, Moms Speak Up, has some additional details.)

The federal government does not offer any paid time off specifically to care for an infant or newly adopted child, putting the United States in the extreme minority of industrialized countries.

This bill is long over due and is vital to the continued success of the federal government.

By Amy Simon and Allison Keyser.

Amy is a senior majoring in journalism and minoring in Spanish and international studies at Penn State University.

Allison is a senior majoring in psychology and women’s studies at Dickinson College.

I’m heading back to Ohio tomorrow. And I’m miss the daily runs in Hilton Head, although it took three days to get used to the heat and humidity at 5 a.m. I probably would done better this morning by not reading e-mails and the online newspapers before my run. Here’s why.

The Wall Street Journal (at least the online version) printed a really negative — but unfortunately, truthful and accurate commentary about Ohio by Chester E. Finn Jr: “The Self-Inflicted Economic Death of Ohio.” (By subscription; if you can’t get it, e-mail me for a copy.)

Ouch. Mama, don’t let your babies grow up to live in Ohio. And, well, that’s one of the points in the article. Finn writes:

Once known as the Mother of Presidents, Ohio is now getting poorer, older and dumber – and making all the wrong moves to reverse the situation.

Didn’t someone once opine that it doesn’t matter what they print about you as long as they spell the name right? Bet it wasn’t the economic development folks throughout Ohio. Publicity like this in one of the leading newspapers in the world you could do without. Team NEO — please make sure no one circulates this to member organizations as an example of a national media placement about Ohio.

More from Finn:

But as a formula for economic revival, it is madness. Ohio already has the fifth-heaviest state and local tax burden in the country (up from 30th in 1990) and finds itself stagnating. Its unemployment rate, 6.3%, is above the national rate of 5.5%, even as the state’s work force shrinks as people emigrate. Ohio’s median household income is also falling – in 2006 it was $44,500, down 0.5% from the previous year – while the national figure ($48,500) was up 1.6%. During the closing decades of the 20th century, incomes rose twice as fast across the country as in Ohio.

The state has been deindustrializing for ages – the sprawling General Motors and NCR plants of my Dayton childhood are long gone. Every metropolitan area has seen manufacturing employment plunge. The state lost more than 200,000 nonfarm jobs over the past seven years alone. Of Ohio’s 10 largest corporations (including Procter & Gamble and other well known companies), just two have posted positive returns so far this year. A surefire way to have one’s portfolio underperform the market these days is to invest in Ohio.

OK. Can it get any worse? Ah, yeah.

But the distance to be covered is vast. Ohio ranks 41st in the percentage of adults with bachelor’s degrees. Though it has many fine colleges, their young graduates don’t stick around. They head for the coasts or for “happening places” in between, none of which (with the partial exception of Columbus) happens to be in the Buckeye State.

Bright Ohio kids aren’t even enrolling in nearby colleges. The Cincinnati Enquirer recently reported that almost half the top seniors in local high schools were headed for out-of-state campuses. As jobs and young people exit, the remaining population ages. The Census Bureau projects that Ohioans over 65 will rise to 20% by 2030, up from 13% in 2000.

Gee. Just like Florida — but without the sunshine.

Too bad, really. I’ve lived in Ohio now for 40 years. And these aren’t new issues. When I was working at BFGoodrich, we spent a lot of time — and a lot of money — working on our own and with organizations to “sell” living in Northeast Ohio. It was very difficult to recruit talented individuals - although the area had and still has plenty going for it: inexpensive housing (relative to other cities/states), generally short commutes, good public and private schools and major league cultural activities and sports teams (discounting the Browns, of course). Shorthand view: good place to raise a family. But it was always an uphill fight.

And the perception is that it is a fight that the state is not winning despite the best efforts of many talented and committed people, including those at Team NEO (now headed by a former Goodrich associate Tom Waltermire) and similar organizations throughout the state.

I was thinking a lot about that as I was running this morning. Mary and I are going to make a decision soon about whether to stay or go. And I expect that will be true of a lot of people — young and old — in the next few years. For the young, probably will come down to jobs and communities that offer a better quality of life beyond raising a family — which most communities offer if you really think about it. For the old (more mature?), there will be a lot of decision points, but here’s two: (1) can’t afford to leave because housing values in Ohio make it virtually impossible to relocate to certain areas where the housing prices are much higher, and (2) relocate to a place where you can enjoy a higher quality of life now that raising a family is no longer an issue.

And actually I’m rooting for Ohio here. This weekend in Columbus some of my friends are attending PodCamp Ohio, an event that I’m sure is bringing together plenty of young, talented and enthusiastic young people — just the kind we need to keep in the Buckeye State.

Maybe they can put together a podcast for Gov. Strickland and others. Here’s the message: Get your economic act together. Make it a priority to keep young people in the state. Set aside the usual politics that are a roadblock to accomplishing anything. And do it now. If young people continue to flee the state today — Ohio is Florida without sunshine tomorrow.

Some thoughts while I was motoring around Hilton Head Island this morning. Most relate to the economy. Some involve communications as well.

We’ve been coming to Hilton Head during the same week in June for about the past 10 years. No where near as many people — or cars — here this week than in past years. Maybe the $4 a gallon price for gasoline is keeping people at home. And I expect it will get worse before it gets better — if it ever gets better. An article in USA Today this morning pretty well sums things up with the statement “fewer expected to drive, fly for 4th of July.” If, in fact, one of the reasons we are in Iraq is become of oil — well, the failure of that strategy should be pretty clear by now.

But if we can’t go anywhere, at least we can stay home an ponder the future of our economy: high food prices, increasing gasoline prices, crashing stock market. Oh, boy. Even if you are inclined to view the glass as half full, Steven Pearlstein’s column in The Washington Post this morning, “This Recession, It’s Just Beginning“, is enough to send you to the gin bottle.

Pearlstein writes:

So much for that second-half rebound.

Truth be told, that was always more of a wish than a serious forecast, happy talk from the Fed and Wall Street desperate to get things back to normal.

It ain’t gonna happen. Not this summer. Not this fall. Not even next winter.

This thing’s going down, fast and hard. Corporate bankruptcies, bond defaults, bank failures, hedge fund meltdowns and 6 percent unemployment. We’re caught in one of those vicious, downward spirals that, once it gets going, is very hard to pull out of.

Oh, mama. I hope that McCain and Obama have a truthful discussion with all of us during the upcoming campaign. Our nation faces some big challenges — and I really believe there are some tough choices ahead. And I don’t worry about this on a personal level. I have an ample pension and I’m close enough to getting Social Security that even Bush and his jolly group of advisers can’t screw that up. But I do worry for many of my friends who read this — many of whom are in their 20s like my son and daughter. Demand more from our candidates and elected officials this time around.

And if things aren’t bad enough nationally, consider what is happening here in Hilton Head. The best beer and rib joint on the island — Smokehouse Bar and BBQ — is on the verge of — oh, my — being leveled for a parking lot. I guess if Budweiser can end up as part of multinational brewery, then anything is possible. Although the sign near the door going into the Smokehouse does kind of, ah, jab you in the ribs.

Oh, well. I guess I agree with country singer Alan Jackson on this one. Next thing you know there will be a Wal-Mart overlooking the ocean, replacing the Piggly Wiggly and the Hemp Store. So it goes.