That’s easy for him to say: Perhaps it’s my day to beat up “branding experts,” but this AP essay by Anne D’Innocenzio (basically a rehash of the WSJ piece mentioned earlier) contains the following classic fragment of ill-conceived punditry by someone I won’t embarass by naming:
(The unnamed pundit noted) that while the lighter-than-expected sentence “removes the worst of the stigma from Martha, it is by no means closure” because Stewart intends to exhaust her appeal. The best scenario for the brand would be for Stewart to complete her prison term immediately, he said.
Give me a break. Screw the brand. And screw the jackass-logic that leads some guy sitting in an air-conditioned office somewhere to suggest a 63-year-old woman spend even one night in a federal penitentiary for the sake of the brand when there’s a shot the conviction can be overturned on appeal or that new flexibility in sentencing guidelines will allow her punishment to better serve society’s interest.