It’s been a controversial spring for Edelman Public Relations Worldwide.
First, the agency’s national leadership is accused in press reports of trying to orchestrate a sort of dirty tricks campaign on behalf of Microsoft Corp. Then, apparently through no fault of its own, its Los Angeles office becomes the center of what is turning into a firestorm over the expansion of the Los Angeles International Airport.
The latter controversy turned into a full-blown headache last week for Mayor Richard Riordan and airport officials, who are going to have to give some public answers about a matter they’d rather just quietly sweep away ? the decision to fire Edelman from a public relations contract on the airport master plan.
The city’s Airport Commission is studying a plan to nearly double LAX’s passenger capacity and add millions of square feet to its cargo capacity, at a cost of between $8 billion and $12 billion. The plan is attracting predictable resistance from people who live near LAX and don’t want the noise, traffic and pollution associated with a bigger airport.
The mayor remained on the sidelines of this debate until he returned from a recent visit to Asia (apparently reminded of the vital importance of Pacific Rim trade to the local economy). He began publicly complaining about the poor job being done to promote the airport expansion, a job Edelman has been doing since 1995.
In late April Edelman was abruptly fired, even though its $1.7 million contract had been extended through March 1999 by the City Council less than two months earlier. In the wake of the firing, reports surfaced that the mayor was behind the move because he wants a more aggressive promotional effort than Edelman was running.
Since then, everybody involved has been backpedaling ? seemingly because the kind of campaign desired by the mayor isn’t exactly legal.
Edelman’s contract called for the agency to mount a public education campaign about the master plan process ? not to be an advocate for airport expansion. That’s a critical point, because it would be illegal for the airport to run an advocacy campaign at this point since the City Council has not yet approved the master plan.
Riordan spokeswoman Noelia Rodriguez said the mayor did not order Edelman’s firing. He simply expressed his dissatisfaction with the job being done; LAX General Manager Jack Driscoll decided to drop Edelman of his own accord, Rodriguez said.
Airport officials say Edelman was dropped because it wasn’t doing a good enough job of educating the public.
“The word wasn’t getting out,” said airport spokeswoman Nancy Castles. “There have been some developments from our ongoing analytical studies that could have been publicized more, to let people know what has been going on.”
But that doesn’t jibe with a recommendation written just seven weeks ago by the Department of Airports staff. At the time, the department asked the City Council to renew and expand Edelman’s contract for another year. The council OK’d the renewal.
“If the department were not to continue with the existing consultants (including Edelman), their current in-depth knowledge of the project and ability to complete the work in the least time and lowest cost would be lost,” wrote department staff in their recommendation to the council.
Apparently, the entire City Council finds this whole thing a bit fishy. Last week, the Department of Airports asked the council to approve a request for qualifications to be sent out to P.R. agencies ? the first step in the long process of finding a replacement for Edelman. By unanimous vote, the council sent this request to the Commerce, Energy & Natural Resources Committee for further study ? a committee that just happens to be headed by the master plan’s fiercest opponent, City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter.
“What is it that the public relations firm is supposed to be promoting, in view of the fact that they won’t have a plan to promote until at least some time in 1999?” Galanter asked.
She intends to ask the same question of Driscoll. She’ll also be inquiring as to the exact reason Edelman was dropped just a few weeks after the Department of Airports recommended renewing and expanding its contract.
At the center of all of this is John Stodder, senior vice president and director of California public affairs with Edelman, who is in the ackward position of trying to avoid burning bridges with airport officials while also protecting his agency’s reputation.
When pressed, Stodder admits there was political pressure on the airport to drop his agency from the contract.
“Obviously, some people in the mayor’s office wanted to see a more aggressive campaign and have it begin immediately,” Stodder said.
Stodder bristles at the suggestion that his agency wasn’t doing a good enough job of informing the public about the master plan process. He was restrained from releasing any information from environmental or economic studies until given clearance from airport officials ? and as soon as that clearance was given, Edelman proceeded to publicize the information, he said.
“We fully executed what the airport asked us to do,” Stodder said. “In the end, if the information wasn’t getting out there, it was a collective decision (by airport officials) and not our decision.”
All of this will get a public airing either next week or the week after, when Galanter’s committee will be grilling airport officials.
“Dick Riordan’s problem is that he thinks air safety, ground safety, air pollution and traffic are public relations problems,” Galanter said. “The public has every right to expect those problems will be addressed, not glossed over in a four-color brochure.”
News Editor Dan Turner writes a weekly column on marketing for the Los Angeles Business Journal.
