Ebr717’s Weblog

In the recent months there have been a number of charitable efforts among celebrities. From the premiere of “Oprah’s Big Give” on ABC to Drew Barrymore’s one million dollar donation to the World Food Program, a U.N. body that delivers food aid to more than 70 million people in 80 countries, celebrities have been donating money to various charities. The recent premiere of “Oprah’s Big Give” features 10 contestants that compete to see who van give money away the most effectively, describes People.com. It is just one example of celebrities in the past few months donating funds.

Drew Barrymore made the announcement of her donation on an episode of “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” describes an MSNBC.com article. With rising food and energy prices, the agency is in need of donations. “I’m able to make this incredible donation — this has changed my life,” Barrymore said on the program. “But I encourage everyone to give.”

Other celebrities that have been linked to donating to foundations include Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. According to People.com, Pitt and Jolie, gave a total of eight million dollars in charitable donations in 2006. The eight million dollars was donated to organizations such as Doctors Without Borders and the Global Aids Alliance. Those figures don’t include 2007 during which Pitt’s Make It Right foundation raised five million dollars.

It is admirable of celebrities to donate their money to charities and foundations in need. From a public relations standpoint, these acts of kindness should be well documented in the media. This type of media attention not only sheds light on the celebrity but also benefits the charity and foundation. In general, any charitable donations of such large magnitude should be recognized by the media, celebrity or not.

The controversy surrounding ABC Grey’s Anatomy actor, Isaiah Washington and costar T.R. Knight began in October of 2006 but the majority of the coverage continued into June and July of 2007.  According to the New York Times article, a physical altercation ensued on set between Washington and co-star Patrick Dempsey after Washington used of a sexually oriented slur directed at T.R. Knight.  Knight publicly confirmed that he is gay to People magazine. Media coverage died down in the following months after Washington issued a formal statement of apology.  However in January of 2007 the controversy continued.  At the Golden Globes, Washington was interviewed on the red carpet and told a reporter “I love gay. I wanted to be gay. Please let me be gay,” cited USA Today.  According to an AP article, following the Grey’s Anatomy Golden Globe win, Washington continued making controversial statements in the press room.  He explained during a response to the media that he had never referred to Knight with a sexually oriented slur.

According to People magazine, the ABC network issued an apologetic statement on behalf of Washington and said that he will seek help.  However, in June of 2007, ABC announced that the network would not be renewing Washington’s contact and he would no longer be apart of the show.  In response to this decision, Washington openly discussed his anger and claimed, “they fired the wrong guy,” according to People magazine.  Later on, Washington released another apology, checked into rehab, met with gay leaders, and released a PSA on the use of hate speech.

In reviewing the mainstream media, the coverage about the Isaiah Washington controversy is very unfavorable.  The focus of the most of the coverage centers on his repeated attempts to apologize for the homophobic slur and following physical altercation.  However, most of the sources described the events in an unfavorable light.  Most of the headlines highlight Washington’s exit from the show and a few quote some of the more controversial quotes.  Photos accompanying the headlines feature Washington in a suit or a still from a Larry King Interview.  The quotes cited are from Washington himself, issued by a publicist.   Other quotes are from T.R. Knight.  The publicist appears to not make any comments regarding the controversy but only serves to release Washington’s statement.  There are not any comments to support Washington; instead friends of T.R. Knight are quoted in outrage and defense of Knight.  Overall, the mainstream media coverage is negative.

In reviewing the Blogs that covered the Washington/Knight controversy, the coverage is also very unfavorable toward Washington. Because of the nature of Blog writing, many of the Blog writers were much more explicit and opinionated in their coverage.  The errors Washington and his public relations team made in resolving the crisis are only emphasized and more critically evaluated. The pictures that accompany the posts are unflattering and some are even graphic.  The headlines poke fun at Washington’s predicament and offer him no slack or support.

In comparison, the mainstream coverage and the Blog coverage are very similar in their unfavorable attitudes toward the homophobic slur and the resulting media onslaught.  There are distinct differences between the coverage however, due to the less restrictive nature of Blog writing. The mainstream media coverage features more neutral pictures and headlines, while the implications of the Blog photos are very unflattering and the headlines could be described as demeaning and critical.  Both types of coverage say the same things but each in a different fashion.  The mainstream media is more factual focused while the Blogs offer facts but are more opinion heavy.

The errors made by Isaiah Washington and his public relations team are abundant.  The situation was for the most part resolved in October of 2006 with Washington’s release of a formal apology.  The controversy should have ended there.  But instead, at the Golden Globes, Washington essentially reopened a debate and a storm of negative media attention.  The behavior was self-destructive.  As his publicist, I would have counseled Mr. Washington to leave his thoughts and comments about the altercation behind in October.  If he decided on his own account to fuel the controversy with his statements at the 2007 Golden Globes, I would have handled the following apologies and statements.  The formal apologies released by the publicist appeared to only add to the negative publicity.  There should have been no question regarding what he said.  There should have been no denial and then later admitting to what he said.  Immediate action needed to be taken and sincere remorse on the part of Washington should have been expressed to the public and the gay community.