If you want good spin, it’s gonna cost you
Coda
Greg Bean

Sometimes, I think I’m in the wrong end of the publishing business — the wrong end being the end where people aren’t lining up to give me vast amounts of money to say nice things about them.

According to a recent article posted on Adweek.com, the Bush administration and other federal agencies spent $1.6 billion over the last two years on spin, which in public relations lingo means showing things like achievements and policies in the most positive light.

Several times last year, we were treated to revelations that the administration paid various national columnists thousands of your hard-earned tax dollars to say good things about the No Child Left Behind initiative and the Medicare Modernization Act — and with each new revelation we were appropriately appalled.

But I don’t think many realized the incredible size of the iceberg attached to those scattered reports.

According to the article (which quoted a report from the Government Accountability Office), the Department of Defense spent the most on media contracts over the two-year period, around $1.1 billion, for “message development that presents the Army’s strategic perspective in the global war on terror.”

Other agencies had other agendas, other subjects to spin. One, for example, spent its money to provide “expert advice and support in the development of several marriage-related research initiatives.” The Food and Drug Administration handed out one lucrative contract to warn the public about the “consequences and potential dangers of buying prescription drugs from non-U.S. sources.”

One big public relations company got $536 million in contracts from the government during the period, another got $179 million, another $148 million and another $133 million. The poor guys who only got contracts worth $78 million were obviously not as good at convincing us what a good job our government is doing, and the pikers who got a measly $39 million had probably better start looking for a new line of work, maybe cement contracting, because they aren’t as effective at spinning as their competition.

In almost 30 years in the newspaper business, I can honestly say that no one has ever approached me with an offer to pay me a solitary C-note for writing happy news about them or spinning a controversial situation to their advantage.

And because folks haven’t exactly lined up to corrupt my journalistic integrity, it’s been pretty easy for me to feel superior and tell myself that I’d never sell out, even if someone asked really, really nicely.

But this news that the government voluntarily spent $1.6 billion in two years to get their messages out in the form they wanted has caused me to do some serious soul-searching. And that soul-searching has led me to conclude that my old grandpappy was probably right when he said that every man (and woman) has a price.

My price is $536 million, and if the Bush administration will only write me a check in that amount, I promise I’ll devote every waking hour for the next two years to making them sound good in print.

Here are a few samples of my creative genius:

• No Child Left Behind — and none too far out front, either!

• Don’t buy cheap drugs in Canada! Buy American, even if it costs so much you have to eat dog food!

• Support Homeland Security — tap your own phones and save the government some time!

• Support conventional marriage — and keep the divorce lawyers in business!

• Support the Army — without them we’d have to draft politicians!

• The Internal Revenue Service — we’ll never take more than you have (not counting penalties)!

• FEMA — when South Dakota floods, we’re ready!

And finally:

• George Bush — Good press, $1.6 billion. Paying for it with your tax dollars, PRICELESS!

(Cut to visuals of 536 million $1 bills with wings, flying out window. Dick Cheney makes a pistol gesture with thumb and forefinger, shoots. The guy mowing his lawn next door falls over.)

On second thought, maybe I’m not cut out to be a spin doctor after all.

• • •

I got a real kick out of a study released recently that said having an “office spouse,” a platonic husband or wife at work, not only makes you happier, it improves your performance and your chances for success.

According to the study by Vault Inc., office “marriages” between people who like and encourage each other and sort of watch each other’s backs, are growing more and more common.

According to the study, 32 percent of office workers report having an office “spouse,” and lots of folks report having more than one. “They have a big attraction — there are no strings attached, and if it doesn’t work out, you go pick out another office ‘spouse,’ and no divorce is necessary,” Vault co-founder Mark Oldman said.

I certainly fall into the category of people who have several office “spouses” (and yes, my wife, THE WIFE, knows all about them) and have done so for years. In fact, I’m sort of like old-time Mormon polygamist Brigham Young, who figured the more the merrier. At last count, I had at least four definite office “spouses,” and I’m presently courting one more.

You can’t deny the relative simplicity of having an office spouse vs. the real deal. No anniversaries to remember. No contact with the in-laws or weird cousin Wally. None of them has ever asked me to spend the day shopping. I can talk to my real wife on the phone without them getting jealous. None of them asks me to balance the checkbook or pick up a gallon of milk on the way home. I don’t have to worry about whether their kids clean their rooms.

And none of them — not a single one — has ever given me the hairy eyeball when I announced that I intend to spend an entire Sunday in my recliner, watching the playoffs, drinking beer and eating crab rangoons.

As office “marriages” go, that’s as good as it gets.

Gregory Bean is executive editor of Greater Media Newspapers.