Why are PR people so lazy?
A few days ago I had lunch with a producer at the Fox Business Network. He asked me, “Why are PR people so lazy?”
When I asked what he meant, he said, “They send these pitches no one cares about, in part because they have no news angle.”
When I asked him why he attributed that to laziness as opposed to incompetence or another form of failure, he was poised to strike.
“There are all kinds of news stories on the Web - on the top sites- that producers like myself monitor. And we go in search of experts who can comment on these stories. And we find them. But not from the PR people. We have to do it ourselves.
“That we don’t need and opportunity they lose.”
But to this producer-and I have heard this from other producers and his peers in the print media- the real manifestation of laziness comes in the fact that:
“So many of the PR people contact me to say, whoopie, that their client will be in town and available for interviews.
“But not a word about why I would feel compelled to book them. Not a word about the hot stories on the web. Not a word on an angle that will make news on my shows.
“Just that the client will be in town.”
Lazy is being generous, he says. Is he right? Do you monitor the web?
Do you really do your homework? Do you make the connections between the news and your client?
We can’t be angry. We can’t brush off the criticism. We must, as with all in business and life, ask ourselves if we don’t send out paper thin pitches and then point fingers at the journalists when they hit the delete key.
This requires that we admit the fact that today, for the first time, the Web drives the news.
The failure to leverage that is, well, lazy!
Mark Stevens
CEO
on July 14th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Mark- You are so correct in saying that the web drives the news. Today, we have so many choices in where to get our news from; the web has become the most prevalent. We all need to remember that we can write (what we feel are) great stories, showcasing our clients new product or service, but what really matters is whether the story means anything. Is the story newsworthy? Does it pass the ‘who cares’, and ’so what’ test? Could your story actually fit into news source without the editor having to change it so much that it no longer is your piece? These are the questions we in PR must ask ourselves when sending out a new piece of news. We have to grasp the webs power of information and find out as much as we can, as you said Mark ‘do your homework’, for if we don’t then ‘lazy’ is the key term here.
-Greg Davis
Xpresso PR, (New Haven, CT)
on July 14th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Hi Mark,
I ‘m skeptical about the Fox producer’s claim that PR practitioners are never sources for story ideas or experts and I think the network’s coverage (online and broadcast) would support this assertion. Your essay rehashes the enduring denial of the inextricable interdependence of the journalism and public relations professions for both breaking news and feature content. Yet for some media content decision makers it remains unpalatable to admit that a PR contact might be helpful in generating new/timely story ideas or accessing a cadre of sources (not just a singular client/corporate contact) for their development of a rich interview sequence. Often it is the PR/communications management function that moves organizations to do well by a greater society and those game changing actions are what make for worthy attention by news media.
I would argue that a reporter/editor’s disinterest is not always a direct correlation to the pitch quality or news relevance (homework). A good journalist, and we’ve all known them, will do more than briskly rebuke a pitch—they will create the opportunity for instructive learning by explaining why the pitch falls short. Sometimes it’s just a good idea at the wrong time. Sometimes there is a personal bias or ego that comes into play, especially when the PR practitioner has done the homework you’ve described and still can’t rouse the journalist into an acknowledgment, much less an informative response, and has the temerity to seek clarification.
It’s a leap to characterize the PR profession as a whole down the river as a lazy or underprepared, just as it would be to say the same of the journalism profession. That is not to say that PR pitches which are weak or miss an editor’s personal response trigger don’t occur, but the successful practitioner works to avoid these outcomes. To the extent journalists want to advise about how they want the PR profession to provide more value toward newsworthy content, they have the transparency of their media pulpits to impart such guidance which would be a welcome and respectful change from the myriad of “pay to play” PR association webinars that often fall short on delivering this information.
Loring Barnes, APR
Managing Principal, Clarity
http://www.claritygroup.com
on July 14th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Mark,
I have to agree that some PR people who have no idea about what PR is supposed to be, and I have to agree that some areas of news is not just news, it is the culture of the news organization.
How many pr college programs are there today?
on July 14th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
While most PR people that I’ve dealt with are extremely professional and will stand on their head to fulfill requests from editors and journalists, I’ve run into some that are so lazy that I wonder how they got their jobs and/or how they keep same. I’ve had PR people get around to answering my requests well over a week late; have had people simply only answer half of the information that I needed; have wanted me to interview their client when I didn’t want or need same but simply needed the PR person to get answers to one or two specific questions; and many other annoying problems that I put down to laziness. If they have a problem getting the needed information, they could at least let the journalist know, A major problem is that PR people often try to avoid mentioning the other companies that may be involved in the same news story, essentially giving out a half-story. But I guess the worst problem that I deal with is that, when a release is sent out, the people whose names are at the bottom to ‘contact for further information’ are usually out of the office for the day or the week. Why don’t PR people ensure that these people listed are available when they send the release out? I’ve had several PR jobs myself, as well as taking courses in same as part of my university studies, and PR to me includes doing anything and everything that journalists/editors need to get the story out. And, for heaven’s sake, make sure that there’s a news peg on that release! Just because something exists doesn’t make it newsworthy.
on July 14th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
As a non-lazy pr person, here’s an aspect not covered.
1. Media is controlled in part by lobbyists; which includes from the bench. Therefore they seem reluctant to cover fabulous news stories because some of their needed sources might suddenly dry up.
Case in point? I’m *so* glad you asked! Consider this. Media is not covering, well practically refuses to cover the busiest court in the nation; family court. Why? Because editors think it’s a, smary “he said, she said” and because their bias doesn’t allow them to learn it’s probably the largest unregulated industry since Halliburton. Never mind the lengths some will go to, to keep things quite. See http://www.FamilyLawCourts.com/burton.html
Next, consider how unhappy the legal lobby is to discover people have figured out a way (fabulous during an election year) to make reports on judges which - and this is very important - bypasses those state judicial commissions which operate more to protect bad judges. (Yes, it turns out that judges aren’t any better policing themselves than police departments are.).
Am not talking about those anonymous, screamer sites. Am talking about a database that attorneys and members of the public have contributed to, which has already helped one judge running for his third term, return to private practice, instead. See http://www.USAjudges.com
The site empowers the public to make government transparent. Seen any press on it? And why not? Because of the legal lobby, that’s why.
on July 14th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
What about the fact that clients only want to talk about themselves and refuse to see the value of going beyond anything but their brand, product or company? It’s not that PR people don’t try - it’s just that in many instances the clients are using PR purely as an alternative source to do a sales pitch.
on July 14th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Hi, I am from Singapore. My 2 cents worth:
I have been both side of the fence. I was in the manufacturing, a part time writer and also started my own pr firm. Whilst in the manufacturing industry (Fortune 500), I had the privilege of working with the R&D department where they developed technologies. Some or many of these info is not even released to most internal staffs (even the corporate marketing/pr manager), how would we expect the PR agency to strategise the angle. Next a PR agent is also a business entity and therefore motivated by the dollar and cents. Creative pitching requires alot of research, time, manpower and therfore cost money. For example, I have a client from Switzerland, the CEO came down and we got him a speaking slot in CNN news NOT because of his “product” but because of the extensive research that we have done for one of our own company’s services. You see, it is difficult to tell the customer “OK, CEO coming down, let’s do some research and we have to charge a fee. How much? not sure, Any guarantee? No.” As a customer, you may not wish to fund it, as a company you may not wish to incurr the additional expenses. So what is the best solution? Ideally, both parties should have open communication on their expectations based on the budget and have better trust in each other unless otherwise proven. Anyway, our company’s philosophy is “integration & innovation”. We don’t just do PR, we integrate PR with branding etc and some local customers just couldn’t accept it. The fundamental reason could ‘look” more expensive and also the marketing budget is from “another department”.
on July 21st, 2008 at 2:42 am
Worse than being lazy is guaranteeing media placement. Or offering nearly free public relations services or pay for play? You pay me so much for so many articles. You spend more time counting articles and pennies than pitching producer at Fox or CNN.
I hear it all the time from new clients about promising from competing PR firm senior and junior executives. “Yea, I can guarantee coverage and placement in the media.” Then the PR pro comes up with excuses as to why the editor did not write about the story.
The truth is as Elizabeth Guilder, editor, Hollywood Reporter said, “Never tell your clients you can guarantee media placement, we don’t even own the media. Besides another story could come along and bump your story right off the page,” she told an Entertainment Publicists Professional Society media workshop last year. Our slogan at our PR firm is never lazy.
“We don’t guarantee media, we just get it!”
on August 5th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
I am a bit concerned when I hear that Public Relations professionals are lazy. The internet and various media outlets have allowed for more instantaneous and broad information to be accessed. The ability to reach someone around the globe in two seconds is a privilege not a requirement.
We are in the age of technology, which of course one could argue makes things significantly easier in terms of access, but this doesn’t mean laziness. Instead, it allows people to have no reason not to be able to have all the facts, figures, and information in order to be a productive member of society, let alone Public Relations professionals.
As far as the thought that America is becoming more and more anti-intellectual…that’s just not true. One has to be a seasoned veteran in numerous things in order to seek a job in today’s society. For example, out of college, most students need to have an internship under their belt, many different extra-curricular activities, and excellent computer skills. SAT’s in high school now contain a writing section in which, students must organize and present their thoughts effectively.
America is, and will continue to become more technologically advanced, but as a Public Relations soon-to-be professional, I question whether people are rising to the occasion in order to be an active member of society. “Perhaps among all those international elites who send their children to U.S. universities because they view our academic institutions as the best in the world.”
“Or with those foreign publishers who compete each year to grab rights to American books, knowing their own readers prefer work produced here to anything besides that of native writers. A third stop might be to members of Nobel Prize committees, who award more big checks to Americans than to any other nationality.” -Susan Jacoby, The Age of American Unreason
As one might assume, America has become more technologically educated, which adds to the well-rounded character of each person in the world. There isn’t anything wrong with Public Relations professionals jumping in to the media mix in order to be a more productive executive
In addition, with blackberry’s and PDA’s, computers, and cell phones, one must actively take part in everyday communication. The importance of the know-how of a digital device is key in being a good employee in today’s world.
on August 8th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I was heading corporate communication for a large biotech business. Then I decided to go on a sabbatical to do my Master’s in Communication - after 18 years of solid experience in public relations, journalism, publishing, editing etc. Why? Because I was turning lazy. Yes, lazy.
Public Relations professionals also reach a certain level of information fatigue, just like any other folks who do a lot of information processing. With the Web driving news in many ways, the media clutter and intense competition, it is indeed getting increasingly tough for the conscientious public relations practitioner. What is the way out? I believe it is important to get the management’s expectations right - right from the start - and bite what one can chew. Then and then only would one be able to specialize and accomplish a lot more than what normally does.