Right now the LA Unified Schools are in the cross hairs of a very high profile abusive teacher sex scandal where a number of children were allegedly methodically victimized at two schools and maybe more.

Some parents cry they can no longer trust the school administration to protect their children. Some parents cry even more loudly that they don’t want innocent teachers separated from their profession or the needy children they teach.

Teachers are running the gamut of emotions and opinions. Teacher associations feel they have a mandate to protect the profession and the innocent. And, there are many more sides to this heartbreaking story which have played and replayed for decades in America where there is no federal abusive teacher data base and recidivist abusers have often been kicked from one school system to another with a, “we won’t tell if you don’t tell” wink by those in positions of power.

So what is the right thing to do? How will the courts play Solomon and not actually cut the baby in half both metaphorically and maybe literally?

One decision is an easy one to make when trying to save the reputation of teacher’s associations, school systems, legal factions, parent and children rights advocates — always err on the side of the student … politics and liability be damned. Get the kids away from a potentially dangerous person or situation immediately until you are as sure as you can be that the situation or location is as safe as you can make it.

Be decisive. The gesture of protecting kids at all costs may cause short term legal and political heartburn but eventually the strengthening of a safe system will save credibility, legal bills and, oh yes, lives. Think of history, think of precedent, think of the message you are sending to deter the future perpetrator and encourage the whistleblower (history shows a whistleblowing culture eventually cuts back on crisis situations and the following litigation along with the horrible public relations that comes with the cases in question). Think of the strengthening of bonds with all the stakeholders and, in the case of teacher’s associations, the buy-in of the vast majority of your teacher membership.

Our sources tell us most teachers have no idea of the back room deals that may be made to hide abusive teachers by administrations or unions. When making reputation decisions, those administrators or association board members and managers should always act in a way that will please their eventual “consumer” – in this case that consumer would be elected officials, regulators, voters, parents, students, other teachers. So, first protect the children … that is a position you can build upon. Prudent transparency is the best policy as trust and credibility will eventually mean approval of better new wage contracts, approval for bills or laws you want passed, better results concerning fair benefits packages, etc. How will those kinds of public approvals or contract negotiations go if you cover up misdeeds or are not proactively transparent when you can be? You know the answer and it is not a good one.

Think of your priorities and action plan progression as any good manager would think of solving a business problem. If your intended result is to ultimately protect the student, then work backward from that outcome and find ways to get there. Cover-ups and indecision will not get you there. Do the right thing morally, ethically and for all your objectives … protect the children, and build on that strong message.

The National Education Association (NEA) experienced such a situation this week. The Huffington Post reported that Sasha Grey, a former porn star, wanted to donate to NEA’s Read Across America program. The trouble is the NEA did not want an important educational initiative associated with such controversy. The NEA shrewdly declined, removing any connection to controversy. Previously, Grey had come to the attention of the NEA after she read to children at a public school, which led to an outrage from parents and the community. The NEA managed their reputation effectively here by avoiding any potential criticism from its members and the public. If the NEA had accepted Grey’s donation, more attention could have come to Grey than to the importance of the Read Across America campaign.

An association’s reputation is its brand. How the association manages that reputation can determine how successful the association can be as a resource for its members or how quickly it can fold. The NEA averted a potential blemish to its brand by declining Grey’s donation.

We tend to categorize issues into “what can hurt me and what can help me?” We are usually naturally skeptical of overt sales pitches because we figure the pitcher is trying to get something from us that might take away from what we have or even be dangerous to us.

We are more susceptible to covert sales pitches which have us subtly buying concepts which may lead to us buying services or goods.

There are many exceptions here and sometimes an overt sales pitch is warranted to blunt attacks to credibility, as in politicians wanting to get out in front of accusations that are hurtful.

So with that context, consumers should always be thoughtful about what they see or hear and understand if it is in the media, the proposition is there to sell you something. You have to follow logical lines of reasoning and intuition to figure out what is being covertly sold and decide if you NEED or WANT it.

Hence the old saw, if it seems to be too good to be true, it probably is – caveat emptor, consumer beware.

“The boutique PR firm is more appealing than ever to clients because our structure and senior expertise yields results,” said PRBI president Bill Cowen, CEO of Metrospective Communications of Philadelphia, in a news release. “Today companies need insightful and accurate advice, superb execution, and flexibility to adapt to constantly changing conditions, which is exactly the value proposition that our members provide.”

“As a founding member of PRBI, Media & Communications Strategies in Washington, DC is also experiencing a kind of client epiphany regarding choosing senior counsel and the best collaborative teams coming from our PRBI concept as opposed to hiring a ‘one-size-fits-all’ traditional agency model,” agreed Scott Sobel, president of Media & Communications Strategies.

How social media helped to incite the revolutions in the Middle East was tapped by respondents as the biggest milestone in 2011 that proves the power of PR, followed by the heightened public hype and awareness around the technology world (including the death of Steve Jobs) and the use of social media to help turn Occupy Wall Street into a global phenomenon tied for second. All member agencies responding to the survey reported that their confidence level about the business environment was either medium (72 percent) or high (28 percent), while 78 percent predicted moderate growth in 2012. Two out of three reported that the perceived value of the PR boutique has increased during the economic recession, because companies see that they get more value for their investment (38 percent) and clients value the hands-on role of senior, experienced practitioners (38 percent).

The power of social media was cited by 44 percent of respondents as the major trend impacting communications in 2012, followed by the economic recession and its impact on spending (33 percent). The difficulty of telling a company story in a crowed marketplace was voted the biggest communication challenge that clients face in the coming year. Conversely the most significant opportunity facing companies today lies in telling that story through engaging, compelling media and channels, including the strategic use of social media.

Rather than predicting that social media will be the PR “magic bullet” for all clients, PRBI members instead view it as a tool that must be powered by engaging content and strategically integrated into the enterprise’s communication program.

“The cost effectiveness of PR, and the ability of senior practitioners like PRBI members to devise the best way to tell a compelling story in a crowded marketplace, is a key differentiator going forward and the reason why we are optimistic about 2012,” concluded Cowen.

PRBI, a worldwide collaborative network of firms, includes 32 agencies operating in 13 countries, spanning the globe from Argentina to South Korea. Members of PRBI represent companies ranging from international conglomerates to Fortune 500, trade associations, and fast growing firms in industries such as technology, energy, financial services, government, tourism, education, lifestyle and healthcare.

The Internet companies have lobbyists and trade association representatives working the halls of Capitol Hill to persuade lawmakers to bury SOPA. They also have trade groups and political action committees that can advertise their displeasure with SOPA. Why take the Internet out entirely in a blackout and leave Internet users- their customers – in the lurch?

The public relations risks for the big Internet companies involve their customer’s trust and loyalty. The Internet companies make a fortune off advertising and the access to information their customers provide. Many of these customers run small businesses that depend on those web sites to be functional. A blackout could cost them needed income in this tough economy. Given the threat of a blackout, some customers might run to competitors who have reliable service without the political risk.

Internet companies would do well to ensure the trust and loyalty of their customers through a clear message on SOPA. They can affirm they do or do not intend to protest SOPA with a blackout via blog, video blog on their websites as well as contacting top online and traditional media. The swirling news reports out about the blackout could catch customers unaware and add to an unexpected public backlash. Just like the Bank of America and Netflix PR issues last year, Internet companies would be wise to inform their customers about what they are about to do and why they are taking actions before dropping any bombs.

Twentieth Century American Humorist Will Rogers was right when he said, “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging,” and that advice is good for France retailer  La Redoute at this time. The company has done well to apologize, they should also make sure they are not doing anything else wrong and shouldn’t be caught making such foolish mistakes again and certainly shouldn’t encourage continuous online dialogue about the matter. French sensibilities will allow this kind of faux pas where it probably would have played out worse in the US or UK.

Nonetheless, the definition of crisis is a “tipping point” and the company will be judged on how well it handles the scandal more than the mistake itself. Remember how the mishandling of the Toyota crisis and the BP boss asking for his “life back” added fuel to the fire.  La Redoute should ask itself who has really been hurt here, and make decisions based on audiences and cultures, and then move on.

This week, Boeing stated it will no longer operate a plant that employs 2,100 in Wichita, Kansas. Boeing expressed the difficulty of the decision and intends to provide employees affected options to relocate. The work to have been completed in Wichita will now move to Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington. The transparent and sympathetic approach Boeing used to convey the closing is effective in engaging the public to maintain trust in its brand and connection to Wichita and Kansas.

Despite grumblings from lawmakers and other critics, Boeing emphasized its commitments and intentions. By avoiding opaque language and indecisiveness, Boeing appears to have taken into account all audiences involved and directed an overall message that considers each one.

Companies and organizations facing tough decisions like Boeing can conduct best public relations practices with a sensitivity for timing and messaging. The plant closing could’ve been announced before Christmas, but that would have made Boeing appear The Grinch or Scrooge. The public blow back could have sagged their stock price. The gradual shutdown into 2013 gives Boeing, its employees and their families time to adjust as changes may arise.

We believe Lowe’s has the right to advertise wherever the company sees fit. And while we don’t presume to know all the inside information in a hypersensitive situation such as this one, Lowe’s was indeed caught between a rock and hard place because the negative publicity the anti-Muslim group had generated around the show’s advertising was already beginning to compromise its image. The anti-Muslim group was essentially waiting to pounce on Lowe’s and other advertisers knowing that in the post-September 11 America we live in it could galvanize support for its views.

However, criticism against Lowe’s actions continues to grow, so much so that the company is now deleting negative comments from its Facebook page. The key take-away from this situation is that companies need to be very clear about the pros and cons of the mediums they spend their public relations and advertising monies. This comes in handy when they need to defend their decisions or have a change of heart.  Lastly, remember that choosing a thoughtful communications approach and sticking with it supersedes experimenting with social media without alternative plans in place should a campaign backfire. We are hoping Lowe’s will roll out an effective plan to help remedy this controversy.

Crystal L. Cox blogs from her home in Eureka, Montana. Kevin Padrick, a subject of many of Cox’s blog posts, sued for defamation after Cox called him a thug and a thief because of how he managed bankruptcy proceedings with Obsidian Finance Group LLC.

This case shows the lack of case law protecting nontraditional media such as blogs. Cox was vulnerable due to lacking affiliation with a legitimate news outlet, having no journalism degree, and that shield law does not cover civil actions for defamation. Cox provided no adherence to journalist ethics or fact checking but said she was a journalist having written over 400 blogs the last 5 years.

This example raises a red flag for PR pros who post a news release without verifying information for accuracy. PR pros are not covered under shield law, which is why PR pros generally ask clients to indemnify them. PR pros affiliated with the Public Relations Society of America strive to follow its code of ethics. However, PR pros can still endanger their credibility with an incorrect news release and face legal damages like those that Cox has with a $2.5 million jury awarded to Padrick.

The issue could also be that this ruling creates precedence and puts everyone on notice that courts are becoming less tolerant of protecting public communications. If you write or say it, regardless of what you call yourself, you are vulnerable for litigation. We caution our clients, be it law firms, corporations, authors or celebrities that having communications professionals (like experienced pr counselors) is vital to getting your message out in the most effective manner and in a way that limits legal or repetitive liability.