And more

Googling my new reader’s username + name, I came up with an interview with her, including this gem:

“My career is public relations – very much putting me squarely in a perception is reality world. What a thing appears to be is often more important than what it is in many PR circles. We do a lot of “messaging” to put the best face on every situation.”

I had, of course, noticed the disconnect between reality and the case argued by Knox’s defenders.
But it is nice to see the philosophical underpinnings so clearly stated.
And the PR connection as well.

It is all a rather peculiarly intense effort to shape US opinion.
I mean, here is a PR flack trying to move in on my pitiful little blog, with my dozen or so readers, just because I used it to air a few facts in the case two years ago.
Seriously, folks, doesn’t that seem to be a little like overkill?

Anyway, yet another long screed in the pending-forever file.
A lot of lies.
One interesting claim, that “besides the families guest appearances had NOTHING (I repeat NOTHING) to do with any type of PR Firm/Effort/Anything you wanna call it.”
I guess Oprah just turned up randomly on their doorstep, and the news folks coughed up travel money out of sheer goodwill….
And the overall explanation that it was all this was done to protect their daughter’s fair name.
When, frankly, no one would have heard or cared about a murder in Italy, or remembered their girl’s name in connection with it, but for the family’s PR push.

And, “I’m sorry if this offendes you, but the fact that someone says something that you don’t agree with and it riles you up this much makes YOU look like the one with issues, not me.”
Except, Crazy Lady, I didn’t go searching the interwebs to find posts from you to go pontificate on.
I hadn’t even posted on the subject for two years
Not until you tried to put your lying PR crap on my old blog post.
Just because someone, somewhere, was saying a discouraging word.
I think somebody has issues on the subject, but it isn’t me.
There is a whole cottage industry based on Amanda Knox: The Pure Innocent American Abroad.
Books to be written, opinions to opine,.
But no explanations on how she randomly happened to get her dna mixed up in the blood of her murdered roommate, beyond that DNA is all sciencey, and couldn’t it also be, crap.
Oprah also failed to ask how, after only about a month or so in Perugia, Amanda already had the number of a local coke dealer in the contacts on her cell.

Which is to say, yes, I do know more about this case than probably I should.
Some of it was just the temporal coincidence with my own kid being overseas.
And there is the sense of real loss: this is the victim, the girl on the staircase:

A lot of it, though, was just watching the horrific US PR campaign unroll in real time.
I do have issues.
They have to do with injustice, racism, and American chauvinism, all of which the Amanda PR defense depends heavily upon.
I don’t know what Crazy Lady’s issues are, whether she is just a nut, or whether this is a professional matter, and frankly I don’t really much care.
But she isn’t using my blog as a forum.


11 responses to this post.

  1. Geez. This is just a microcosm of the way the entire US lives it’s life. Media blitzes, blatant disregard for facts. For the truth.
    Just PR your way through live and forget that there is Reality.
    It makes me frustrated and sad.


  2. I mean, look at the number of people who have convinced themselves and each other that Sandy Hook never really happened. That it was all made up so that someone can take their guns away.
    Twenty-seven good people blasted to oblivion and people just decided to pretend it wasn’t real.


  3. The whole commenting on something from TWO YEARS ago on an (pardon me) insignificant blog just gets me. I mean, it’s not like it appeared on the Op-Ed page of the New York Times …


    • This person is completely round the bend, for sure. And what an awful PR person, to waste so much time and effort on something so insignificant. I prefer my PR people to prioritize their work where it would be most effective. But if she actually does work in PR (I have my doubts), it’s probably only for other crazy people in her tiny circle.


  4. I’ve been known to comment on a 2 yr old post, but its usually because someone’s posted a race report and I want to run the race… You seem to be the victim of a internet fool…


  5. Public relations and marketing go hand in hand, except that PR is the selling or commodification of ideas—sending a message, if you will, except that it could be a packet of lies with not a shard of evidence to base it in reality.

    Whenever a reporter we knew left journalism to become a PR rep for a corporation or consultancy, we referred to him or her as a flak. I think part of it comes from the word :hack.” It also comes from the role of a PR rep, which is to catch flak for your employer. A news organization calls with some hard questions; you’re supposed to say, “I’ll get back to you,” and don’t. Or you stand behind a wall of mikes and get battered by questions from the press about your company’s latest fuck-up, and you answer with platitudes and generalities. It’s an Orwellian job, meant to control the public image of an institution or person. Surprisingly, in Amanda Cox’s case, it worked. The internet didn’t subvert the lie, as Anonymous does regularly to counter propaganda and lies in the “news.”


  6. I didn’t watch the vid, but I have run across defenders of Amanda Knox, and I just… well.

    I’ll stop there, because you already know how I feel about it.


  7. I have not much followed the case, but I remember at the time how much was made of Italy’s legal system being inadequate. O rly? It is for Americans to judge how Italy’s legal system operates? Because ours is so perfect? As for Oprah not asking the hard questions, well … she’s an entertainer, not a journalist.


    • Italy’s system actually looks really quite good to me.
      The case is tried before a panel of a professional judge + citizens (who have to be at least high school graduates).
      The verdict is automatically reviewed by a second court.
      The whole thing, original verdict + review court then has to pass examination by a higher court.
      (Which is what just failed to happen: the extremely screwy second level finding was thrown out, so the original verdict now is to be examined again by a new second-level court.)


  8. Maybe she’s OCD and your little insignificant blog is the last one she’s found on the intarwebs she hasn’t ranted on.


  9. Posted by SingingTuna on April 14, 2013 at 10:00 am


    Maybe she’s been banned from the BIG bloggers’ sites and is “messaging” where she can.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: