Some wag once described my creativity as nothing more than fact manipulation. Hurtful and also untrue, but the challenge remains to define voodoo. I believe that the current trend in “creative thinking” in PR is hackneyed. Lashings of innovation must have a solid strategic foundation. The power of the web and the scrutiny of the audience via social platforms holds a magnifying glass to suspicious traces.

We have become enveloped by governance that uses a certain type of narrative – this has created a new, homogenised creativity. True, there is an abundance of ideas, real campaigns can cut through. But the big ideas are scarce. Great communications ideas are now housed in the social platforms where engagement and participation are a necessity. As media fragments and systems of delivery for information multiply, with particular reference to the distinctive characteristics of the internet as a medium of communication, the vast mainstream well of conservatism is living side by side with the younger, disengaged generation.

It’s a toxic mix that might stifle a belief in the age old practices. The status quo is not to future gaze; the future is the denizen of this collaborative species. Those that leave egos at the door and can offer an adaptive innovative process will harvest the rewards of creativity. My challenge is to keep up with the pace of change. Those who enjoy a short platform of power are in danger of being irrelevant; the challenge is to make meaning. My own key principles which underpin this approach are a commitment to using storytelling as the means to transform information into news and features; an understanding of the importance of creating drama and events as mechanics for generating publicity; and an absolute belief in the need to develop coverage outside the expected ghettos.

The future, as we understand it, is in the hands of a collaborative species. Ideas must be adaptive, and must expand or mutate the concept of creativity. Vision that’s informed by risk will always prove powerful if bolted to a strong story or narrative. To our younger, faster generation there is no history and they don’t look to the future; to them, the future is now. Creative thinking must be driven by this new aesthetic.

What I’ve seen suggests that it’s a show packed with clipboard Nazis, fashionistas and other fluffy-brained reprobates representative of the old cliché of what PR is supposed to be about – the sort of people who behave like 9 year olds who’ve found the booze cupboard and whose worldview is shallower than the mirage of a puddle.

The PR industry is undergoing a revolution at the moment – a lot of people are beginning to recognise that it can be a huge force in the world and that the captivating narratives it guides, for people, products and more, can be of enormous use and influence. The traditional world of communications is in state of flux. Sages pontificate on the revolution but few understanding of the cataclysmic changes on the media landscape. In this sort of frantic and fragmented world, PR can only be a pertinent tool; a steady, cost-effective channel of communication.

But The Spin Crowd, pumped on botox and bitching and preening its way into the collective consciousness, pushes the perception of PR back to a worse state than Ab Fab left it in – here are the people that Jennifer Saunders was satirising in reality (or as close to that state as a reality TV show allows) and unforgiving close-up.

The perception of PR as being too fluffy for words needs to be changed. Even if there is an unhealthy percentage of people who want to get into the industry for all the wrong reasons and even if this is how too many PR companies operate, particularly in America, The Spin Crowd mustn’t be allowed to ruin the industry’s progress by miring it permanently in cliché.

Even a serious show like Mad Men misunderstands PR and how it works (click here to see my blog about the guerilla PR stunt in the opening episode of the latest season). If The Spin Crowd is going to continue, let’s hope the US majority view of PR does not condemn the minority on the other side of the pond who are attempting to rewrite the laws of practice.

The way in which Apple practices its PR is fascinating. They are intensely secretive, they often treat journalists with a measure of disdain normally afforded to people who man the local sewage works, they do very little PR in the commonest sense of the term and yet they still remain up there amongst the press’s lists of ‘must have’ products.

“Once you’ve got the ear of Apple, they’re great,” says Gizmodo. “Human, considerate, and helpful. But make a mistake or step on their toes and they shut off your drip. That’s their system–and it works brilliantly. If you want access to Apple, you can’t upset them. And since nothing gets attention like Apple products, it behooves those in the tech enthusiast press to stay in Apple’s good graces.”

Which makes it all the more remarkable that one of their product testers got drunk and lost the test model of the next iPhone iteration in a bar – you’d think they’d keep a better hold on their staff, given the tight rein they keep on everything else.

To read more about it, click here. Everything Gizmodo says about Apple’s PR is absolutely true and I agree with their certainty that the loss of the phone was not a stunt – it just doesn’t feel like an Apple thing to do. Bear in mind this tale I got from Guy Kawasaki: Apple, he says, are so secretive that they keep various part of the business in different buildings. If they could keep bits of it in different universes I’m sure they would.

There is a bigger question lurking in the wings of course, which is how will iAd, the much rumoured personalised mobile advertising platform supposedly due from Apple, change things for the company’s communications game? Don’t expect any news from Apple until they’re good and ready, though – not after the iPhone fiasco…