No room for complacency in Bell Pottinger case

Many years ago I went to my first PR industry award ceremony. I was overwhelmed by three things: how much I hated wearing a tux, how much a bottle of crap wine cost in London and how ethically dubious people in my chosen profession were.

At that ceremony one of the agencies shortlisted was a firm which had run a campaign on behalf of the Iraqi government in exile to have Saddam Hussein overthrown by force. In terms of meeting your KPIs, you can’t argue it was a killer campaign.

But it was a literally a killer campaign.

I was gobsmacked that people could work on a PR campaign which resulted in getting fellow humans killed. After a few too many of the cheap wines I went up to their table. I’d like to think I was eloquent in my demolition of their ethics. I probably wasn’t.

But the evening had a lasting impression on me. Longer than the hangover from that night.

I can’t remember the name of the agency, but let’s face it, there are plenty of PR’s out there who work for dodgy regimes, on campaigns with ethically dubious objectives. “Bell Pottinger” has always been a byword in the industry for these kind of agencies. But Bell Pottinger’s welcome expulsion from the Public Relations & Communications Association (PRCA) should not be a sign that the stain of their practices has been cleansed from the PR agency world.

The fact is that even if Bell Pottinger collapse, other firms will line up to take on their clients.

But, maybe there is a sign of light.

As if the front page headlines, wall-to-wall BBC coverage and social media storm isn’t enough, the case has captured the wider public imagination. For example, one Labour Party branch passed a motion condemning the firm and comedians at the Edinburgh Festival, such as Nick Revell, have been taking shots at the profession, using Bell Pottinger as a byword for dubious moral practices.