“In the fall of 1982, Pam Edstrom [of Waggener Edstrom], a diminutive woman with piercing blue eyes, was recruited by Microsoft. [...] In modern-day business, flacks were responsible not only for avoiding bad press, but for spinning the good. [...] Hanson and Edstrom would spin a whole new image for Gates himself. They would tap the best and worst of Chairman Bill, changing his clothes, his voice, and his allegiances, driving him to become not just the boss, but, essentially, the company mascot—a sort of high-technology Colonel Sanders.” –Pam Edstrom’s daughter
Summary: Edelman and Waggener Edstrom named among participants/candidates of the Gates Foundation spin team; Microsoft is causing people to lose their jobs, contrary to PR messages
MANY people are still working on Bill Gates’ public image well behind the scenes. It’s not something that the press ever talks about; instead, the press serves as the ‘front end’ which only shows the outcome of the work behind the scenes. The same goes for Microsoft most of the time. Here is a new example:
Here is an informercial on smart global health. The public relations people at the Gates Foundation are working overtime these days.
As we noted in last week's post on philanthrocapitalism, PR is important to the Gates Foundation because it needs people to support its causes and not see the negative side effects or hidden motives (which we did cover before). Luckily, not everyone is buying the nonsense. It’s all PR. Had there been nothing credible to criticise, PR would not be required, but the foundation is spending so much money and effort on PR. We wrote about this subject before and provided a lot of hard evidence.
Based on items which did not appear anywhere in the news, the Gates Foundation is looking to employ outside agencies to manage press for it (the Gates Foundation also does this internally). The same unethical PR fronts that Microsoft uses (Edelman for example) are being involved or considered and Microsoft’s very own PR department, Waggener Edstrom, is there too. These are very unethical Microsoft PR agencies and those who do not understand why should look a the gathered evidence (we aim to keep this post concise).
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has shortlisted three agencies to pitch for its extensive global PR activity.
Weber Shandwick, Waggener Edstrom and Hill & Knowlton are all taking part in the final round of the review, according to the organisation’s deputy director of media relations, Melissa Milburn.
It is further understood that Edelman took part in the initial phase of the review. Milburn confirmed that the search for a new agency of record is underway.
Here we see a man who used to work for Bill Gates glorifying his masters at Politico.com:
“Even if you’re Bill Gates, your money can only go so far to change a global issue,” Neilson said in an interview with POLITICO. “You’re dependent on the government to implement your initiatives and help your cause.”
As we shall show in a moment, some of those “global issues” involve promotion of GMO, patents, and privatised schools. It’s a dangerous thing and to blindly assume good faith from Bill Gates is to assume that a convicted monopolist deserves a second chance.
To quote further criticism:
The Gates Foundation public relations division appears to have teamed up with Cartier to bring you the following blog post. It is amazing what information technology, spurred by the ‘innovation’ of Microsoft, has brought us. It can even blog and advertise at the same time.
Here is the cited item which also says:
Microsoft offered tens of thousands of jobs, promoted the high-tech industry prosperity and stimulated the American economy.
That’s despicably shameless PR. Microsoft has destroyed many jobs by destroying companies that competed against it. To say that Microsoft is creating jobs is like saying that banks alone create “wealth”.
To refute this point from another angle, here is an article from last week. It shows very directly how Microsoft is costing people their jobs, even people who are doing research, unlike Microsoft whose executives hoard money.
Microsoft costs cut CSIRO IT jobs
Increasing CSIRO costs could result in 40 to 50 of its IT staff losing their jobs, according to Dr Michael Borgas, CSIRO staff association president for the Community and Public Sector Union.
According to the union, CSIRO’s corporate support area had a frozen budget and $9 million in extra costs, $3 million of which were for Microsoft licences. The CSIRO is no longer considered as an academic organisation for software purposes, which has led to the additional charge, Borgas said.
This is just one example of Microsoft destroying jobs, contrary to the PR claiming that Microsoft is helping the economy by creating jobs and improving research (while in this case actually harming it). Last night we found out that many teachers too may lose their jobs because of Microsoft. █
“Gates is trying to make sure that he has a proprietary position in controlling the tools that allow you and me to access information. And that’s profitable by definition. How would you like to own the printing press?”
–PaineWebber Media Analyst Christopher Dixon