Sometimes I wonder whether people in the public eye actually care about the issues that they lend their face and name to, and whether they even have the faintest idea about what it is their publicising. That is of course if you take out of the equation that what they are actually publicising is themselves.
I always wondered if the people concerned made themselves available to organisations promoting something or if it was the organisation that approached the person, or if it was a case of a publicity officer seeking out photo opportunities for their client.
I think I got the answer to this last week. After seeing the publicity pic (below, adapted to protect the charity concerned)
I received this in response: (again redacted)
" Whilst the MP in question, Tim Loughton, expressed his support for us in terms of ***** *****, in no way does he represent the views of The ******** ***** ***********"
Now it makes you wonder why organisations don't vet their public representatives a little better or if they simply believe that certain public figures lend credence to their very worthy cause, or are simply naive to put their trust in public figures on the say of that person or their representing press agency. Obviously I do not hold the organisation concerned responsible in any way for being duped, and support them myself wholeheartedly, in fact I support them even more after the lovely letter they sent to myself and my family in response to this.
I think that someone acquired a red wooly hat under false pretences there, and should give it back until such time as he displays the same compassion as the organisation involved and doesn't simply exploit charities for his own narcissistic gain.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated, so don't bother making any threats or abusive statements, because you simply won't get the attention that you crave and nobody will see your attempts to justify your existence.
Any direct threats will be dealt with as required.