David Letterman struck exactly the right note last night in his sort of apology/explanation for the jokes he made the previous night about Sarah Palin’s daughter.

The jokes implied that during the Palin family’s New York visit, daughter Bristol (the one who had a baby with Levi) had had sex with Elliot Spitzer and Alex Rodriguez. The Palin’s—both Todd and Sarah—responded angrily, suggesting that Letterman was talking about their younger, 14-year-old daughter and blasting him for contributing to the sexual exploitation of minors.

I have to say I thought the jokes were funny. On the other hand, if I were the Palins, I’d probably be upset as well.

I think Letterman hit just the right note in his explanation—self-deprecating, somewhat remorseful, and almost, but not quite, apologetic. He invited Sarah to come on his show.

That’s exactly what she should do. It’s the old “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” idea. Trying to win a war of words in the media with someone who has his own TV show and millions of loyal followers is pointless.

Next to “We never let facts get in the way of a good story,” my favorite saying about the news business is “Never get into an argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel.” It’s been attributed to Mark Twain, though I can’t confirm it.

No matter who said it first, we know the adage has been around for a long time and has been proven true time and again. So why did a hospital in northern New Jersey think it could escape the fate of so many others?

The Hackensack University Medical Center was upset that a newspaper called The Record was going to write an unflattering story about some of the hospital’s board members. So — you guessed it — an administrator called and threatened to cancel all advertising on the newspaper’s website and in print.

The story ran anyway.

Then the hospital went a step further and said the newspaper couldn’t be sold in its gift shops or anywhere on campus. And, you guessed it again, The Record wrote a story about the hospital’s reaction.

The incident ended as you might expect. The hospital apologized.

And to make the Hackensack University Medical Center look even worse, the story was written up in the New York Times. This is what’s called learning a lesson the hard way.

The Obama administration wants to communicate to the American people (and the rest of the world) with clarity and transparency. Apparently the message hasn’t yet reached the Department of Defense.

According to the Christian Science Monitor, the DOD issued this statement in response to the ridiculous Air Force One flyover in New York City:

“In coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Presidential Airlift Group conducted a aerial photo mission in the New York City area on 27 Apr 2009. This mission, involving the VC-25 and an F-16, was conducted in conjunction with normally scheduled continuation training for assigned aircrew members. This mission was coordinated for the Upper New York Bay, south of the Holland Tunnel and in the Newark Bay north of the Staten Island Expressway between the hours of 1000L and 1030L.

Plain English gobbledygook.

A spokesperson for the Basel Zoo in Switzerland is trying to take back what she told the Swiss media and what eventually was printed in the March 13th edition of the Wall Street Journal. If only she could.

The story involves Farsi, a baby hippo at the zoo who has become so popular he was named “Swiss of the Year” for 2008, beating out tennis star Roger Federer. Because a zoo cannot have two male hippos, even father and son, because of territorial issues, Farsi will  have to go.

Zoo spokeswoman, Tanja Dietrich, said he will be put up for adoption. And if he can’t be adopted, zoo policy is to “put down excess animals and feed them to carnivores.”

That unnecessarily blunt statement has inflamed the passions of animal lovers across Switzerland, and now the US.

In reality, the zoo doesn’t have to worry about getting rid of Farsi for one to four years. So why was Dietrich bringing this up now? And why in such inflammatory words?

Now she’s backtracking. Dietrich says Farsi will stay in the zoo until they can find somewhere else for him to go. “We’re confident we’ll find a place for him.”

That’s what she should have said in the first place.

It’s one thing for CEOs in the ivory tower to make PR blunders (for example, the big three automakers taking private jets to beg for money from Congress), but a CEO who is a former PR exec? What’s his excuse?

In January, 2008, Brian Tierney, CEO of The Philadelphia Inquirer demanded a 10% pay cut from employees. Meanwhile, four months later, his own salary went up 3% to $618,000. Then, around Christmas time, he got an even bigger boost — a 38% increase to $850,000.

Tierney spent 22 years in public relations and advertising before putting together the investment group that bought The Inquirer in 2006. For much of that time he ran his own firm. He represented high profile clients such as the Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia. He was active in Republican politics, working on George Bush’s 2000 Presidential campaign and Sam Katz’s 2003 run for Philadelphia mayor. He even spoke at PRSAs International Conference in 2007.

Word got out about Tierney taking away money from his employees while lining his own pockets. How? His company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy over the weekend.

Now the not-so-savvy former PR exec has decided to give back his $232,000 pay raise. A spokesman said Tierney didn’t want the issue of his raise to become a “sideshow” to the filing.

Maybe that’s the kind of thing a so-called PR strategist should have thought about ahead of time.

Dan Abrams has garnered lots of publicity lately. The former MSNBC anchor and top exec is launching a new PR/Media Training company. He will use actual working journalists to help his clients learn to deal with the media.

There’s been mild criticism about the idea of participating journalists having a conflict of interest by playing both sides of the fence. Five years ago, there would have been a major outcry. Maybe the low level of concern means that today the traditional rules of media ethics are obsolete.

But one thing that isn’t obsolete is the importance of spokespeople not volunteering or repeating negatives. The media is so drawn to negativity that you could say 99 positive things, but the one negative will end up in the title or the pull quote.

Add Dan Abrams to those who’ve been burned. No, don’t say, “I’m not training business people on how to deceive the media.” Try instead, “I’m training business people how to be clearer and more focused when doing interviews with the media.

The reaction to Arizona Cardinals star player Anquan Boldin’s temper tantrum during the NFC championship game was predictable. And it all happened because he didn’t want to stick around and talk to the media.

Once again, someone learns the heard way, you can’t run and you can’t hide from the media, (especially when you’re playing in a down-to-the-wire football game and arguing with your coach in front of the world).

Like many before him, Boldin thought if he didn’t make himself available after the game, the story would go away. And like many, he found out that his actions only magnified the incident. He admitted after practice on Thursday that his abrupt departure “made it worse.”

“The attention has grown,” he said. “Do you have to be careful? I guess so, but at the same time you can’t alter who your are.”

So during a week when Arizona was giddy about being in the Super Bowl for the first time ever, and when the national media should have been talking and writing about the Cardinals’ amazing season, their coaches and players, they instead focused on the one negative. Would Anguan Boldin be a distraction? Would he play for the Cardinals next year?

Yes the media are sensationalizing the incident, blowing it up out of proportion. But that’s what they do. It’s up to us not to add fuel for the fire.

No industry understands and prepares for crises more than the airlines. They know it’s not whether an accident will happen, it’s when.

They conduct practice drills. They develop messages and statements ahead of time. They have emergency teams ready to go the moment anything happens.

So why was US Airways CEO Doug Parker so wooden and passionless in his news conference in Tempe, AZ, after one of his planes landed in the Hudson River Thursday?

Not only did he look uncaring, but he also never verbally expressed one bit of empathy about the forced landing. And if a plane accident can be “good,” this was one of them. Not one of the 155 people aboard was killed! Boats immediately came to the rescue. The pilot was already being called a hero for his expert water landing.

Yet, amidst all this emotion, there was Parker reading his dull statement in a constant monotone. In contrast, a short time later, New York governor David Paterson summed up what everyone was feeling in one powerful soundbite.

“There was a heroic pilot who saved himself and approximately 154 other passengers this afternoon. We had the miracle on 34th Street. I believe we now have the miracle on the Hudson.”

Also in his statement, Parker asked the media not to speculate on the cause of the accident, which is like asking a dog not to eat steak that falls on the floor. Besides, it was already being reported that birds likely caused both engines to fail.

If this is how Parker handles a relatively “good” crash, imagine how he’d handle a real catastrophe.

The word is out everywhere from blogs and message boards to Computer World and the Wall Street Journal. Oracle has had a major layoff, but the company refuses to comment. Because of the lack of communication, rumors are filling the vacuum.

Some reports claim the layoffs amount to 8000 people, or about 10% of the workforce. Others say the figure is in the hundreds or low thousands

But why the “no comment,” allowing unbridled speculation to continue. It’s not like Oracle is alone in facing the economic downswing. They aren’t the first to lay off staff and they won’t be the last.

To me the company’s decision to keep quiet is a major mistake, and likely to make employee morale even lower than it already is.

Why pretend you’re concerned about laying off workers? After all, it’s all about profits. We don’t want to let a couple thousand jobs and families get in the way.

Phillips plans to cut five percent of its 32,000 member workforce in its medical division worldwide. That means 1600 people are out of work.

So what does the company spokesperson say about it?

“We want to take all possible measures despite the sluggish economic scenario at present to maintain our profit levels and even improve them if possible,” said Arent Jan Hesselink.

And what did CEO Gerard Kleisterlee say earlier this month?

“Given the limited scope of the present economic scenario we have taken certain measures to maintain our profits.”

My, how heartfelt!