The New Yorker's Ken Auletta has a masterful piece ("Non-Stop News") on the Obama Administration's communications efforts and the changing nature of media in this week's issue.   Under guidance from Obama's precocious Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, we are given a picture of a Presidency that is ultra-aware, deliberate and 'on message', sensitive, reactive and oftentimes political, in a media environment that has been put into hyperdrive by technology - which has at once increased competition for content and challenged previous revenue structure - as well as everchanging consumption habits.

There are many lessons for both firms as well as journalists that we may take away from the results Obama and his press team's initiatives have seen in this new epoch:

- Transparency may give you the benefit of the doubt, but certainly won't let you fully control the story

 - New media is essential to engage, but thinking it will replace the press and their "preoccupation with conflict" is naive,   as well as intimating ambitions of something much more severe

- Reactivity sets a mold that is hard to break.

- PR strategy is paramount in an era where 'the story' can shift at any moment

- "We're all wire-service reporters now" - NBC’s chief White House correspondent, Chuck Todd.

- Being proactive and picking your battles still matters, no matter how short the attention span and story cylce seems to favor variety - be it legislation or a company's product offerings.  

With recent landmark setbacks to his party, it'll be interesting to see where history attributes blame for poor democratic performance in the polls, the oft-cited unemployment rate or the hyper-paced news cycle, increasingly incapable of digestion, only constant conflict.  Additionally, the power balance in the Senate will no doubt create many more challenges for Obama's PR program, ones that won't be so easily solved with a beer in the garden. 

We at Cognito constantly assess the developing media landscape in the financial services space and counsel clients on how to best articulate, further industry discussions and manage reputation under these evolving parameters.   The capital markets naturally have a longer running relationship with an audience known for instantaneous reaction to events and data, though even that is increasing with yet-to-be-seen consequences due to technology and structural shifts in the market.  And while on the topic of the capital markets (the one piece of legislation Auletta avoids is Financial Regulatory Reform actually), it is interesting to note other prominent figures who have found themselves victimto today's rapid fire news cycle with varying degrees of success and reactivity vs proactivity in approach.  

In what is already making waves in both new and traditional media - President Obama's supposedly "off-the-record" comment about hip-hop artist Kanye West broke on Twitter thanks to ABC News. 

Read the story here. Following public backlash against West's outburst at the MTV Video Music Awards, CNBC and Obama chit-chat prior to a broadcast interview in what is typically off-the-record conversation. Obama refers to West as a "jackass" and ABC News, not realizing that this part of the conversation was off-the-record, quickly tweeted the news.

As you can imagine, the story has become viral and Pres. Obama, I'm sure, is regretting having ever said anything at all. Interestingly, as soon as Pres. Obama makes the comment, he quickly backpedals as he realizes how his comment may come across as the people in the room burst out into stunned laughter. But it was too late - as soon as the tweet was out, it became headline news.

To be fair, the conversation was supposed to be off-the-record. However, in an era where social media empowers reporters and citizens to instantly publish unedited and unverified news and even overheard comments can break stories - communicators and spokespeople need to be unduly cautious about what they say, how they say it, and in particular, who's listening.

I'm eager to see if this will instigate another Beer Summit as the President tries to band-aid this PR boo-boo. Or, given it's Kanye we're talking about, a Hennessey Summit. We'll just have to wait and see...

When, in the middle the of last year's presidential campaign, Barack Obama's pastor, Jeremiah Wright, publicly railed against white hegemony, candidate Obama used his formidable powers of persuasion to turn a potential crisis in to an opportunity. This past week he has taken an opportunity and turned it in to a crisis.

The Rev.Wright snafu would have sunk most election bids, but with a pitch-perfect speech the President not only dodged a political bullet, he used the incident to cement a visionary post- racial platform. It was a pivotal moment for his campaign and, some argue, the future of US race relations.

From a communications standpoint, his handling of the crisis showcased one Obama's greatest strengths; his ability to transcend - or at least appear to transcend - the issues. That is what makes his recent involvement in the Henry Louis Gates affair so troubling. By wading in to a debate on race without full possession of the facts (and in so doing, calling a decorated expert on racial profiling 'stupid') the President has not only escalated a local issue to a national embarrassment, he has also seriously dented his image as objective peacemaker. Obama's highly cultivated impartiality has so far enabled him to rise above partisan positions and skillfully avoid attacks from any side. Conversely, with his trademark detachment in question, Obama has opened himself up to attacks from absolutely everyone.

What the President describes as his efforts to "dial down" the debate is in fact his fervent attempt to regain his position as the world's referee. But is anyone buying it any more? His scheduled beer with Gates and Crowley smacks of cheap photo op by comparison with his More Perfect Union speech, and his assertion that "the reason it has garnered so much attention is a testimony to the fact that these issues are still very sensitive in America" sounds unlikely coming from the man with the country's biggest megaphone.

The Obama administration’s recent show of force to Chrysler’s creditors has swept the market’s and the media’s attention. Critics of Obama’s tactics are quick to note the waves of uncertainty these actions – calling secured creditors “speculators” and breaching holy grails of capitalism and our market system; due process, capital structure, etc – are sending to private investors, precisely the group the administration has been courting for participation in TALF and PPIP and whose buy-in is necessary to turning the markets.

The fund community, initially taking refuge in anonymity, is becoming more vocal. Managers have become more outspoken on the ramifications of such interference and the MFA and Coalition of Private Investment Companies (CPIC) have met with Geithner.

What will AIG do next with its bailout allowance? AIG is coming under fire from the House of Reps for doling out payments to PR agencies, for what appears to be a covert side operation to attack bailout critics.

 Financial Times - AIG faces House probe into role of PR companies

 I'm torn on this one: 1) kudos to AIG for choosing to leverage PR as a method to address increasingly negative perception around former CEO Greenberg but 2) paying for what is probably very expensive reputation management PR while under a sizzling magnifying glass around what you're spending your bailout dollars on - probably not the best idea.

Lesson learned? Those bailout dollars are attached by a very short string to a very  big stick.