My fellow panelistsJoe Annotti, senior vice president of public affairs for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, and Joel Wood, senior vice president of government affairs for the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokershad some excellent suggestions.

One was improved internal communications to inform and energize the industrys own employees so they can speak out in defense of their firms and profession.

Another was to be more proactive in showing the press first-hand how the industry operatesfor example, by inviting reporters to travel with adjusters after a catastrophe, to see what theyre up against and the good work the vast majority do.

A marketing expert speaking at the conference urged insurers to set up corporate blogs to speed up response time to misinformation in the mainstream and alternative media, as well as do battle on their critics own turf. All it takes is one disgruntled claimant or rogue agent to muddy a companys image with online attacks that spread across the Web like a virus.

Many of those participating in two subsequent workshops on the topic said they would love to adopt all of our suggestions, but doubted they would be given the necessary support or funding from senior managers obsessed with quantifying a return on every dollar spent. How do you calculate the value of good will in the market, we wondered?

However, in the end, theres only so much IMCA members can do. Ultimately, the industrys biggest problem isnt a poor imageit is poor performance. The most effective way for insurers and brokers to improve their reputation is to clean up their act. Consider just a few of the challenges facing image-makers:

Bid-rigging exposed by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer might not have been widespread, but now that major brokerages have given up the contingency fees that drove under-the-table deals, risk managers are wondering where all that money went? It certainly doesnt seem to have ended up in buyers pockets.

Why did major carriers drag their feet for so long about paying World Trade Center claims five years after 9/11, basically over technicalities? (It wasn't as if they were invoking the War Risk Exclusion or anything!)

Why are so many Hurricane Katrina claims being denied, and why were policyholders confused or unaware of their flood exposure?

Speaking as a journalist (a profession with perhaps an even worse reputation than insurance), I say the problem is not the perception of the industryits the reality of insurer and broker conduct thats making it impossible for PR and marketing experts to do their jobs.

Sure, communications officials could be more proactive in getting the industrys message out, but whether in insurance or journalism, honesty remains the best policy.

Do you have any suggestions on how the industry can boost its image with a very cynical public? Feel free to comment below.