Did you see The Office last night? I laugh out loud every week at the show, but last night was by far my favorite. In it, the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin sent out something like 500 cases of paper embossed with an obscene water mark. Ok – it was a duck and a mouse in a compromising position.

So the office manager, Michael Scott (played by Steve Carell), decided to get out front of the issue by calling a press conference. According to him, when you bring a story to the media, you control it. There’s some truth there.

But a point to consider – would the media otherwise have caught on to the paper company’s little mistake? You could make a pretty good argument that they would have, and for two reasons – first, the crisis is visually compelling. There is something to show to the TV cameras and to reprint in the paper. Second – it turned out the local high school had printed their prom invitations on the paper. So you add the element of kids. The media loves kids and covers them whenever they get the chance – especially when a crisis is involved. (unwritten rule #1: kids + crisis = coverage).

It would seem Michael Scott may have actually been right in wanting to get out front of the story. There are other situations where you should think about getting to the media first in crisis. They are:

- When public health is in danger
- When a death has occurred
- When children are involved
- When a larger crisis is looming

There’s a lot of power in apologies these days. Just look at Jim McGreevy, Bill Clinton, Mel Gibson or any one of the many, many celebrities in rehab. America loves a good apology and if you can get out ahead of a crisis, making a public one may actually save your reputation in the long run.

Of course, that’s not what happens on The Office. Michael meets with one of his biggest clients with a reporter from the Scranton Times in the room. He gives her a big novelty check for free paper (unwritten rule #2: the media does love a big check), but he somehow sticks his foot in his mouth and she asks him to resign. His ensuing “apology” video is one for the record books. Download it from NBC.com or iTunes when you get a chance. And remember, while Micheal’s bumbling is always funny, ignorance is not bliss when it comes to crisis communications.

Bobby Day and James Joyce would be proud. I’m not sure anyone has ever said that before. But thanks to Twitter, now I can. Twitter has been getting a lot of press lately, but for those of you too busy enjoying the beautiful spring weather on the East Coast, here’s what the Wall Street Journal had to say about it:

“For anyone unfamiliar with the latest trends in technology, “Twitterers” send and receive short messages, called “tweets,” on Twitter’s Web site, with instant messaging software, or with mobile phones. Unlike most text messages, tweets — usually in answer to Twitter’s prompt, “What are you doing?” — are routed among networks of friends. Strangers, called “followers,” can also choose to receive the tweets of people they find interesting.”

Short messages delivered in real time. Maybe that’s what Bobby Day meant when he sang “All the little birds on J-Bird St. / Love to hear the robin goin’ tweet tweet tweet.” Maybe not.

More likely, it’s James Joyce who inspired Twitter and its Twitterers. A truly virtual stream of consciousness that is constantly updated has been unleashed. Maybe it’s time to reread “Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man.” Maybe not.

So what are we as marketers to do with this new medium? Well, the WSJ has given us some insight into who is getting the attention of the Twitters:

“At least one politician has tuned into the service. John Edwards, who has 2,001 followers and 2,082 friends, recently twittered that his presidential campaign would be “carbon neutral.”

After Robert Scoble, who writes a popular technology blog called Scobleizer and who himself has 2,985 followers and 3,045 friends, challenged this ambitious vow on Twitter, Mr. Edwards twittered back that he would, as president, offset his campaign’s carbon emissions by financing alternative energy research.”

Politicians are already in the game. But wouldn’t you also like to read “tweets” from celebrity spokespeople like Michael Jordan for Hanes? Or George Hamilton for Ritz Toasted Chips? Ok – maybe that last one was a stretch.

My guess is that Twitter is going to become word-of-mouth marketing on steroids, so I’m sure the big marketers are on the way. The same principals of good marketing will apply, though just like everything else it will happen faster and with less structure. It might even be safe to say, “Oh rockin’ robin well you really gonna rock tonight…”

I’ve been meaning to get to this for the last couple weeks, but there’s been a lot going on – Imus, etc. – that demanded more immediate attention. That said, I didn’t want to let this slide on by.

Here in Philadelphia what once was considered sacred ground is now for sale. A couple weeks ago, the Inquirer announced that it would soon begin selling ads on the front page. This news came fast on the heels of all-news powerhouse KYW Newsradio suddenly selling time. No, not just airtime… but rather the top and bottom of the hour timecheck (KYW newstime, 8:30… time for a cup of Dunkin’ Donuts coffee!)

Navel gazers in white towers everywhere are surely appalled. This would never happen in Cronkite’s day! However, it is most definitely a growing trend today

I can assure you that purists in the PNI newsroom reeled at the news. Journalists tend to consider theirs a higher calling. They are seekers of truth and not to be besmirched by commercial considerations.

Is this good or bad? Well, it depends; the key consideration is whether readers/listeners can differentiate between the news and the paid advertisement. It is imperative that both organizations make the distinction clear. If they confuse their audience, they will ultimately lose their audience. And as the two most credible news organizations in the region, that’s a dangerous line to walk.

One imagines Sergey and Larry sitting on the gold-clad couches in the Google Jet watching old re-runs of “Pinky and the Brain” as they ponder their next move. “What do you want to do tonight, Brain?” asks Pinky. “Same thing we do every night, Pinky – try to take over the world!”

And so on Friday afternoon, Google announced they had purchased keyword advertising tracking company Double Click for $3.1 billion. Yes, that is more than the $1.76 billion Google paid for YouTube last year. True, YouTube is more entertaining, but Double Click will likely spend less time in the courts.

According to the companies, this deal “will offer media buyers and sellers more powerful tools for targeting and analyzing online advertisements and ‘serving,’ or placing them, on an even larger network of Web sites.”

In the $19.5 billion playground that is the U.S. online ad market, Google is set to make $6.3 billion in 2007 – that’s before it begins pushing Double Click on the swings.

Oh – and it’s also before Clear Channel agreed to let Google sell ads on its radio stations.

All this leads me to the one question BusinessWeek asked on its April 9th cover, “Is Google Too Powerful?”

I was talking with a member of our team this morning about Google and how it is or isn’t dominating the keyword advertising game. She attended the Search Engine Strategies conference in NYC last week. While Google is the biggest and most respected player right now, she said that the Double Click deal is less about Google and more about Microsoft. Apparently, Gates & Co. are the step-child of search marketing, and the news that they met Google’s bid for Double Click but were denied proves it.

So in a market changing every minute of every day, with Microsoft way behind and Yahoo! barely holding on, the next big challenger to Google could very well be Pinky and the Brain. One thing is for sure though – Google is going to keep plotting to take over the world.

This week, the New York Times, BBC and San Francisco Chronicle were all talking about a new “Blogger’s Code of Conduct” posted by well-known author and blogger, Tim O’Reilly. His code was in response to a fellow blogger’s posts about getting a number of violent and disturbing anonymous comments on her blog. Apparently, this is not at all unusual.

A separate but related thought – the week before, I read something on CNN about a blogger being released from jail. He had spent more than 226 days there after refusing to give up footage of a CA street riot to police. 226 days. That’s more than any journalist who has refused to give up sources to the police.

These two events got me thinking – should bloggers have the rights and protections of journalists? They seem to be getting the rough part of it – from jail to anonymous threats. And we know they’re getting the good part of it – exclusives and huge readership. But still, a recent report from Edelman shows that bloggers are the least trusted source of information. (Not surprising to those in the PR world, articles in business magazines are the most credible.)

So how do PR professionals balance the dedication of bloggers as journalists with the lack of perceived credibility from the public? I would argue that in the coming years, the influence of bloggers will become more prominent and reliable. So for now, start to develop relationships with bloggers in your clients’ space – but don’t take your eye off the prize. Everyone still loves BusinessWeek.