The daily routine of a working PR man, Hubbard wrote, consisted of
[b]ribing newspapermen and "free lance writers" to write horrible lies about a competitor, bribing or lying to Congressmen or ministers or members of Parliament to get a law passed to enable a fast buck to be made and countering the ploys of the other firm's PR ...
PR could properly be described as a partially workable technique that was capable of changing "states of mind in different types of audiences or publics." In this regard, it could sometime be misused. To prevent this sort of misuse, Hubbard wrote that he had done further study on the subject in order to "find out what was wrong with it."
His findings were that PR was dangerous, was prone to failure and could be turned against one by the competition.
Thanks for that!