When David Cameron became Conservative Party leader a few years ago, his polished delivery and rhetoric was a breath of fresh air.

John Major, William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith were grey and unconvincing by comparison and Cameron has successfully dealt with the two major challenges that faced him when he took over as leader of the opposition.

As an Old Etonian, Cameron had to convince the voters, especially the New Labour middle classes, that he was a man of the people and capable of understanding the interests and issues that face voters on a daily basis.

His second challenge was to show himself as someone of substance, not just a wit with great soundbites that a former PR guru would be expected to dish out whenever the opportunity arose. Did Cameron have policies to match his charm?

The financial downturn has given Cameron an opportunity to prove himself a viable alternative to Gordon Brown in terms of personality and policy, taking advantage of the financial meltdown and expenses scandal to score points.

I’ve not seen the odds, but I suspect Cameron is almost certain to be the next Prime Minister when Labour call an election next year.

But it is fascinating to see how easily it is for even an accomplished communicator like Cameron to let his façade slip and remind the voters how easy it is to make mistakes, however practiced you are.

Absolute Radio is a friendly station, for sure, and Cameron probably thought he was fitting in with the listeners when he relaxed and talked more colloquially during an interview yesterday.

He said people were "pissed off – sorry, I can't say that in the morning – angry with politicians", prompting some uproar that keeps the political commentators with something to discuss.

Is the word “pissed” really offensive? It’s probably the mildest of swear words, even if it is language not becoming of a potential national leader in public, and few voters would be particularly outraged.

But the Tory leader blotted his copybook when he said: "The trouble with Twitter, the instantness of it – too many twits might make a twat."

Notwithstanding the use of the word “twat”, the biggest surprise in my mind, is Cameron’s dismissal of Twitter.

The social networking tool Twitter may not be to everyone’s taste, but even so, millions of people use it, including, dare it be said, US President Barack Obama.

If Cameron wants to convince the public that he is in touch with popular culture and therefore is someone they can really trust, he has to at least keep his criticisms about such matters to himself.

Twitter has enough fans that it is foolhardy to upset them, especially when such accessible forms of communication could provide a vital tool when the next election comes around – or indeed provide an opportunity to snipe at Cameron by those who champion its service.

Image matters so much in modern politics and having done so much to prove that he is not just an upper class Twit, Cameron has undone some of his good work by such a careless use of words on the airwaves.
 
 

When I undertake media training or suggest that it would be a useful exercise for my clients, I often encounter the same one or two responses:

“I’m so used to doing media interviews, I don’t need any more training”

OR

“I watch media interviews on television all the time – it’s not hard so I don’t need any advice thanks”

As a former journalist, I know how hard it is and I often think I’m glad I’m the one in control and not the one answering the questions.

And that, of course, is the trick. Control the interview, control the situation, remain calm and do not say anything you have not prepared or are not confident about saying ‘on message’.

So I was fascinated yesterday to hear the press conference undertaken by golfer Sandy Lyle in relation to some comments he made last week and ahead of the Open golf championship, which starts today.

For those of you who don’t know, Lyle was asked if he missed out on the coveted Ryder Cup captaincy after walking off after 10 holes of last year's Open.

Ill-advisedly, he compared that incident to Colin Montgomerie accidentally dropping his ball in the wrong place after storms at the 2005 Indonesian Open.

“What he did was far worse,” said Lyle last week. “Monty dropped the ball badly and that is a form of cheating.”

Lyle realised, especially in the world of golf, with its gentleman’s rules and high regard for respect, that his comments were both damaging and inappropriate, especially since Montgomerie was cleared of any misdemeanour at the time, issued an apology for his mistake and donated his £24,000 prize money to charity.

Whether he was advised or not, Lyle absolutely did the correct thing in calling a press conference to apologise for his comments.

When a media storm breaks, especially ahead of a major event, facing the media and apologising for an error is the best way of dealing with it and hopefully softening its impact.

If Lyle had not spoken, it would perhaps have prolonged the “feud” as the media would phrase it, and detract from the important matter of the golf.

He admitted that bringing up the Montomerie incident, purely as a comparison to his own error, was a mistake. His wording was crisp and measured, his delivery sincere.

And that should have been that.

But where Lyle made a huge error was to answer questions from the media rather than finish his press conference there and then.

Perhaps he had been suitably media trained. Perhaps he had been rigorously briefed about potential questions and answers, primed for all the inevitable interrogation that would come his way.

My advice to him, on this occasion, would have been to make his statement and leave it at that.

It gave the media enough to feed on and showed that he had been suitably concerned to face them after his mistake.

Whether he had not been briefed or simply forgot his answers, the result was disastrous – a car crash of a press conference which saw Lyle say of Montgomerie's 2005 incident that “It was one of his mistakes....it will probably live with him for the rest of his life. It'll be cropping up.”

After resisting the opportunity to speak, Montgomerie was fully justified in eventually making a calm and measured comment about Lyle’s press conference, simply saying “It's a rather strange apology to be honest.”

That understatement gave Montgomerie the high ground and leaves Lyle looking even more foolish, especially when George O'Grady, chief executive of the European Tour, chipped in with a statement, claiming Lyle’s comments “are considered wholly inappropriate and ill-timed.”

Avoiding the media is never a good idea. Fronting up and showing contrition is the best way to limit damage and rebuild a reputation.

But know what you’re going to say and don’t waver from what you’ve planned to say.

Lyle has lost the respect of a great many people because he simply did not follow those simple rules.

It will take a well-crafted communications campaign to restore his reputation but, to use his own phrase, no doubt, this incident will “keep cropping up” and it was so easily avoided.

 
 

A friend of mine mentioned the other day that she would never buy the News of the World, turning her nose up at the tabloid because of its reputation for seedy stories and salacious gossip.

On the face of it, I would have to agree, especially given the trousers-down nature of many of their front page stories.

But the fact remains that the NotW has some exceptional journalists and is an agenda setting publication whose stories resonate around the world.

The former editor, Andy Coulson, had to resign two years ago, for malpractice undertaken by his journalists and in particular, Clive Goodman, who was hacking the phones of celebrities in a bid to get the stories other journalists couldn’t reach.

As PR guru Max Clifford said last week, anyone would be horrified to know that their calls and messages were being monitored and Goodman rightly went to prison.

That Coulson did not know what precisely was going on is perhaps understandable with a paper the size of the NotW and the number of stories that go through the presses every week, even though Goodman was one of his senior reporters.

Andrew Neill, the former Sunday Times editor, said last week that Coulson was either “incompetent or complicit."  and it’s hard to disagree.

Journalists are under huge pressure, especially at red top newspapers with global reputations such as the NotW, to deliver stories. As long as the hacks can back up their story, the editor knows that in more cases than not, selling more copies is the name of the game, not the manner of the story’s revelation. 

But with significant sums of money being paid to the private investigator, it does raise the question of why no one flagged up to Coulson the expenses payments that Goodman was shelling out and then subsequently why Coulson didn’t question it.

Coulson’s resignation was honourable and inevitable, admitting that since the tapping happened on his watch, he had to take ultimate responsibility.

But it was no wonder Conservative leader David Cameron, well aware of the power of the tabloids, hired Coulson and appointed him as chief of communications. As a PR man himself, Cameron was doubt impressed by Coulson’s pedigree.

Coulson has undoubtedly helped the troubled Tories become a viable alternative to Labour, albeit at a time when the incumbent government has been struggling for support and positive headlines anyway.

There has been talk of Coulson following the path of Phil Hall, another former NotW editor, and set up his own agency, even before his potential crowning glory of leading Cameron to Number 10.

But the latest revelations, that the NotW has settled out of court with Professional Footballers’ Association Chief Executive Gordon Taylor after his phone was allegedly hacked, have brought the scandal back to the news agenda once again and prompted the Press Complaints Commission to re-open their files.

Will Coulson survive or will he suffer twice for the misdemeanours of his former NotW colleagues?

Cameron has been loyal to his aide throughout the latest revelations but as Coulson is well aware, when the PR man becomes the story, it’s tricky to weather the storm.

He has said little, determined not to provide more fuel of his own to the media fire – and yet at the same time he and his party are allowing the critics and opponents dominate the share of voice with a story which could seriously threaten Cameron’s Prime Ministerial ambitions.

However loyal Cameron chooses to be, allowing Coulson to stay will raise questions about accountability, his judgement and, essentially, about the principles he wishes to build his proposed government on.