The poll on this site went with guilty. In any case, internet polls tell you at least as much about the people who happen to be interested in the issue the poll is about rather than the topic itself. Perhaps most of the people on the internet do believe she's innocent. What does it matter?
That's exactly true. I've always been amazed at how many people think that some sort of "battle for hearts and minds" is so crucially important and relevant in this case - particularly anywhere outside Italy, but frankly even within Italy.
Politicians and corporations know how vitally important it is to influence public opinion. For politicians the reason is stunningly clear - you need people to like you and/or your politics if they're going to turn out and vote for you or your party. Simple - and worth millions of dollars/pounds/euros in PR and media management fees. For corporations, the relationship is more subtle - but it's easy to see how a company such as BP might be willing to spend millions of dollars in the US trying to persuade politicians, regulators and the general public that it's actually a safe, caring, conscientious operator of oil drilling platforms, and that we the public might want to have nice warm feelings about BP when we next need to fill our car up with petrol (gas).
In contrast, what possible benefit would the Knox/Mellas families gain from spending these alleged (and dreadfully-incorrect) millions of dollars on PR and media management?
Let's look at the desired outcome:
1) Knox (and Sollecito) gets acquitted on appeal, and returns back a free woman to the US
2) Knox's reputation is restored, and she is no longer regarded as a murderer
3) (probably) Knox's family can make enough money from film, TV and book rights to recoup the money they have spent on legal fees and expenses.
Now, no PR campaign is going to influence point (1) - and both the Knox family and their advisers must be very well aware of that.
One might argue that a PR effort could assist with point (2), but there are two points to note in that respect: a) achieving point (2) is to all intents impossible without achieving point (1); b) if point (1) is achieved, then point (2) will be relatively easy to achieve without the need for expensive PR anyhow. So no need to spend money at all.
And for point (3), spending large sums of money on a widescale PR campaign right now would only serve to further swell the Knox/Mellas families' already enormous bills. It makes no sense. Lawyers clearly need to be retained, and good lawyers cost money but can deliver results where it matters - the courts.
I think that the whole thing about huge PR campaigns is no more that a massive smokescreen. The one thing that might make sense is that the US TV networks might be giving Knox favourable coverage in the hope of securing a lucrative exclusive interview with her if she's acquitted. That makes sense. But in this instance it would be the media who are falling over themselves to get good Knox coverage on their channels - clearly no PR effort would be necessary from the Knox/Mellas side to "persuade" the networks to run pro-Knox stories.
But if it suits some people to think that there's some huge, well-oiled and expensively-funded PR effort constantly badgering media organisations (and even using paid bloggers!) to paint Knox in a positive light, then let them carry on thinking that I suppose. I hope I've just shown how deeply illogical it would be for the Knox/Mellas families to be shelling out these alleged huge sums - it simply won't serve to achieve their goals, whilst racking up yet further expenses at the same time.
