I was happy to see the GR Press cover an actual WMPRSA event in last Friday's paper.
It was a good review of why and how Beaners Coffee changed their name to Biggby, to proactively avoid offending Hispanic consumers in other parts of the country, for whom "Beaners" is an insulting term, before the Michigan company expanded across country.
(I refrain from commenting at this juncture on the potential offenses of monikers such as Cracker Barrel and the Hope College Flying Dutchmen).
My only problem with the article was the brief mention that it was a WMPRSA event, and virtually no explicit coverage or comments about why this is a PUBLIC RELATIONS story. It implies that management was enlightened and hired a PR firm merely to get the word out. In reality, the management exhibited good public relations in the sense of identifying an overlooked public and potential issue, and then the company changed its own behavior instead of trying to influence attitudes and behaviors of others. It worked at the essence of PR: mutually beneficial relationships.
That was implied and perhaps obvious to PR people. But to the mass readership of the Press, it would have been nice to make this plain. Instead, public perception will continue to be as follows: when management makes good decisions it is good management; when management makes bad decisions its called a PR problem. Our profession does react to the negative, but quite often we also are proactively positive. Much of the public--and management--does not get this connection to PR.