Last month, you might remember, Daily News op-ed columnist Mariel Garza vowed to no longer call Fleishman-Hillard because of the cost to taxpayers when the PR giant bills official clients for answering media questions. Her use of the term flacks got her featured this week in a PR industry newsletter called the Bulldog Reporter. (* Update: As Chuck points out in the comments, Garza responds on her blog.) From the Bulldog Reporter:

Surprised to see such a seemingly juvenile jab in a major daily? Don’t be. Countless journalists — newbies and vets alike — still see PR as a profession packed with shills, gatekeepers and, yes, even “flacks.” “Some of it is deserved,” Garza said when Journalists Speak Out questioned her regarding her use of such a tired phrase. Here’s how our Q&A shaped up — as well how Garza thinks PR pros can avoid having such pejoratives bandied about so freely by peeved journalists:

What does the word “flack” mean to reporters?

Garza: “It’s a commonly used term for PR representatives,” Garza concedes, shrugging it off. “It’s a colloquialism — slang, that’s all. I don’t think it’s to be taken so seriously.”

What does the word mean to you?

Garza: “I think it means basically the same thing to me as it does to everybody else,” she replies. “It’s a ‘person who takes flak’ from someone else — you know, a hired gun or shield? At least, that’s how I use it.”

That sounds almost complimentary, but isn’t “flack” really a derogatory term?

Garza: “It can be used that way,” she concedes. “But I hear a lot of PR people using the term themselves. It’s like other slang that got picked up by [the people] it was originally used [against].”

So your usage of the word in the story wasn’t negative?

Garza: “First, my story was a column — not an article. It was an opinion piece. The point of the story was to focus on the useless expenditures of public funds — not PR people. I don’t really have a lot of experience with PR people, unless they represent public officials,” she clarifies. “But I do know plenty of journalists who have left my offices here and gone to work for Fleishman Hillard — and they’re making a lot of money,” Garza says. “If they don’t like the word flack, I think they’re [being] paid well enough not to let it bother them.”

What do journalists think of being called “hacks” — isn’t it the same thing?

Garza: “The difference is that the word ‘hack’ is actually derogatory,” she believes. “It’s not the same. ‘Hack’ implies that you’re a non-perceptive, bad journalist. It also applies to old-timey journalists who are sensationalists.”

How can PR people avoid being called “flacks” by journalists?

Garza: “They can’t. Again, it’s just the slang for PR. You’d have to revise the American lexicon or make up another word if you didn’t want it used. It’s just a term — it doesn’t define a particular type of PR person, good or bad.”