Your 15-year-old (daughter, granddaughter, client) is doing a shoot for Vanity Fair, known for some pretty racy magazine covers. She’s being shot by Annie Leibovitz, the photographer famous for her edgy photos (a nude John Lennon with Yoko Ono, a pregnant Demi Moore, etc.). First of all, why did you agree to let her do it? Second of all, why are you surprised with how it turned out?

Miley Cyrus, the Disney Channel star with the squeaky clean image made the mistake of thinking that the magazine and the photographer were on her side, doing what was best for her, a natural feeling for a naive, young woman. So, as she was quoted in the magazine, “That’s what she (Annie) wanted to do, and you can’t say no to Annie.”

Maybe Miley couldn’t say no, but how about her parents, or her handlers, or her agent, or her PR people, or one of the other dozens of hangers-on that collect around celebrities? Not just say “no” to the photo of Miley suggestively wrapped in bed sheet, but “no” to the idea of posing for Vanity Fair and Annie Leibovitz in the first place.

Of course, as a Disney representative suggested, the magazine and the photographer exploited Miley. And they got exactly what they wanted: An uproar about the cover photo, millions of dollars of free publicity, and increased magazine sales. But the so-called adults in her life allowed it to happen.

The recent flap over Jack Welch’s supposed blast against his successor at GE, CEO Jeff Immelt, is a perfect example of life in the “soundbite world.”

After appearing on CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” Welch said Immelt had a credibility problem after missing earnings projections. “Here’s the screw-up. You made a promise that you deliver this. And you miss three weeks later. Jeff has a credibility issue. He’s getting his ass kicked.”

The media jumped on the criticism — why not, it makes great headlines, “Welch slams his handpicked successor.” But in reality, it exemplifies the old joke we had in the newsroom: “Let’s not let facts get in the way of a good story!”

The facts are that Welch’s entire comments about GE were really praising the company and its CEO. He was chastising people for their overreaction to the company missing its numbers.

“But, let’s put GE in perspective… The model isn’t broken,” Welch went on to say. “At 50,000 feet stare at a company who made four plus billion dollars, down six percent over a glitch in financial services, going to make $20 billion dollars this year.”

Yes, maybe he wasn’t as clear as he could have or should have been. Inflammatory words like “screw up” and “getting his ass kicked” are asking for negative attention. But almost anyone who listened to the whole thing would have understood Welch’s point. In fact, he walked out of the studio thinking he’d stood up for his old company.

To his credit, when he realized how his statements were being interpreted, he didn’t blame the media for overreacting (which they did). He took full responsibility and apologized. “Nothing is worse than having a predecessor perceived as commenting negatively on a successor, particularly when the successor is doing a terrific job in a difficult environment.”

Welch said he “stepped in it,” and that he would “endeavor in retirement not to step in it again.” Actually, I think the media have the dirty shoes.

The “Company Rocks” blog cited my blog post about the fig leaf position, and added an interesting observation. In a photo taken the night of their most recent debate, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama do not project confidence and authority. They don’t appear “Presidential.” Because their hands are clasped in front of them (protecting their privates?), they come across as weak and vulnerable.

If one of them is elected, they’ll learn how important it is to stand tall, with hands at their sides. In every picture I see of US presidents or world leaders, I never spot a fig leaf. They know that to be in charge, they have to look in charge.

Sweet revenge. Who hasn’t dreamed of it at least once in their life? Well, Flagler Productions in Lenexa, Kansas, is living that dream. Owners of the small business have the largest company in the world by the short hairs. All because Wal-Mart made and is making stupid mistakes.

For 30 years, Flagler videotaped Wal-Mart events: annual meetings, shareholder meetings, sales meetings, store openings, etc. There was never a written contract between the two companies, just a handshake agreement.

In 2006, Wal-Mart dumped Flagler (nine days after Mike Flagler sold the company to two of his employees) and hired another firm to do its productions. As you might expect, the decision devastated the tiny company, which counted on Wal-Mart for 90% of its business.

After laying off most of its employees and moving into a smaller office, Flagler decided those thousands of videos could help keep the company afloat. They offered to sell them to Wal-Mart for several million dollars, but the retailer offered just $500,000, claiming no one else would be interested in the footage.

Yeah, right. Historians, the media, union representatives, and especially plaintiffs’ lawyers are lapping them up. One lawsuit against Wal-Mart claims widespread sex discrimination against women employees. Attorney Joe Sellers says at least two of the videos help bolster his case. In one, founder Sam Walton says, “We know we haven’t gotten as far as we’d like to be advancing women in our company. But we’re very conscious of it.”

For a company that’s known for its hard-nosed negotiations with suppliers, how could they be so negligent to let Flagler work without a contract, and most of all, allow the production company to keep ownership of the videotapes?

Then Wal-Mart compounded that original ludicrous behavior with its most recent decision to not immediately buy the tapes from Flagler. A couple million dollars will seem like a small price to pay if the company ends up losing even one of the lawsuits that are presently in court. And what about the hits to the company’s reputation? What is that worth?

It’s difficult to figure out: Is Wal-Mart so breathtakingly stupid, or just arrogant?

Now we’re in real trouble — we’ve lost our sense of humor. Yes, the state of Arizona has some real problems, but when controversy over a clever, funny April Fools joke overshadows the serious issues the state faces, we’ve lost perspective.

I’ve been known to be gullible. I can be taken in by the simplest of jokes. But how could anyone be fooled and not be amused by the prank KTAR-FM and the Arizona Department of Transportation pulled on April 1st?

KTAR with the help of the Arizona Department of Transportation’s spokesperson, Doug Nintzel, announced that, overnight, Phoenix’s major freeways had become toll roads. Now drivers would have to pay $1.01 to drive on Loop 101, $2.02 to drive on route 202 and just $.51 (what a bargain) to drive on Arizona 51.

And people actually believed it! They complained to the station. Even the Governor’s office got involved.

The legislature can’t even pass the state budget during a months long session, and yet they were able to push through a major statute turning highways into toll roads overnight? How could anyone believe this absurdity, and how could the Governor’s office even consider it important enough to take disciplinary actions?

This was not a joke about race, religion, politics, gender, sexual preferences or any other “sensitive” subject. It was not spiteful or in bad taste. It was simply fun, a way to make a mundane day more interesting.

And yet, we’re not even allowed to appreciate a station’s sense humor.

I’m frowning.

We all know the best policy with customers is to under promise and over deliver. Unfortunately, British Airways got it backwards and the result has been a public relations disaster.

For two decades the airline has been hyping its new Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport, highlighting its cutting edge design, high quality materials and upscale shopping and dining. Officials claimed the high tech systems would able to handle dozens of planes at the same time and process 12,000 bags an hour, marking a new era for the British Airways, and ending what many called the “Heathrow Hassle.”

Instead, on opening day of T5, travelers faced more chaos than ever, with flight delays, cancellations, lost luggage, long lines and poorly trained staff. Even four days later, the airline still hasn’t recovered from the fiasco. Flights are still being canceled or delayed, baggage hasn’t been delivered, and passengers are stranded.

Terminal operations wasn’t the only problem. The PR department also dropped the ball. At first, British Airways called the situation “teething troubles.” Spokespersons broke one of the basic laws of PR by blaming BAA, the airport operator, for the problems.

Eventually, an obviously uncomfortable director of operations read a statement to reporters, but refused to take questions. Finally, the CEO, Willie Walsh, stepped up and apologized for the chaos.

Many commentators claim this is not only a black eye for British Airways, but also for Great Britain and the UK, which are trying to position themselves as global players. Also of concern is whether this bodes poorly on how Britain will manage the Olympics in 2012.