|
Back in the 80s, when I ran my own PR firm, hapless junior account people who worked for powerful Howard Rubenstein PR shared an office that had a baseball diamond on the wall.
If you placed a story in, say, The New York Post, you got a base hit. Get ink in the Times and you got a home run. Training was on-the-job. You had a batting average you had to keep, and you competed with all the other fledgling flaks. (You can guess what happened to those who didn’t score.)
Alas, it seems not much has changed since then. I’m encountered a young PR person yesterday, who’s charged with getting bloggers and other journos to write stories about a very big client. And he works for a very big PR firm, which is part of a very big ad agency, proving, once again, that bigger is hardly ever better.
He sent me an email addressed to me, but clearly a form letter. It said “I like your site” and "I thought you’d like this."
My site, however, was clearly not something he’d ever seen since it is about my online marketing services. My blog is where I cover Internet marketing and advertising trends, and he clearly had never looked at it.
I emailed back and asked if we know each other. “I like your stuff,” he replied, “so I sent you this.”
I ran the video (which is great) on my blog, protected his name (I was in a good mood) and outed his firm. And then he and I sent several emails back and forth in which I gave him the following advice:
Here's my advice to flaks who have to pitch the media: • treat people like people, and talk to them like you're being straight with them and they will treat you the same way.
• don't try to fool people, it won't work The bottom line: just like back in the 80s, when I was making those awful media calls that every flak hates to make, PR is about quality, not quantity.
There’s never been, and never will be a reason to pitch 1,000 journalists. Pitch the ones who matter, whose work will trickle down to the rest.
And pitch them like you are talking to people.
His response: “A) thanks for saying that - your advice is well take, [sic] and I will use it.
Thanks again, and I'll be more direct, and human (my style, I swear it!) next time." Jeez, I hope so.
Related:
The Myth of Not Cultivating Bloggers
Here's a Good PR Pitch for a Change
Rules for Flaks Who Pitch What's Next Blog
|
Comments
Goods point about honesty in communications. One very field can use.
I have a question for you BL. With all the changes in the PR and marketing industry, especially the continued ineffectiveness of more traditional approaches do you see these, once very separate, functions merging?
It is my belief that "marketing" needs to take a more publicity like approach in order to garner attention.
What's your take on this?
Posted by: Harry hallman | 08.10.07
Just wait until your blog gets hit with the hyper-efficient Social Media Press Release (SMPR). I believe the firms developing the standard are already on v2.0...
PR's always been just one branch of the marketing family tree along with advertising. Still doesn't mean they necessarily fit well in any given garden?
Posted by: Ryan Turner | 08.10.07
I recently had a blunder like this, but it was more of a sales pitch than PR pitch. I simply didn't do enough research (essential research really), and the blogger/entreprenuer I had emailed called me out on it. I'm extremely glad he did, because it made me realize the mistake and taught me how to handle something similar in the future. I appreciate honesty as much as anyone, but another necessity is research, as you've pointed out, both here and in a nice post you did on a *good PR pitch from Mike Schultz.
Posted by: Daniel Monday | 08.11.07
Harry - when i did PR I called myself the clunky term "marketing communications specialist" because yes, the fields need to merge on many levels.
But I do think there is a separate function for PR - to inform in an objective way, that has been lost in a hail of hype that has made PR one of the least trusted fields.
Posted by: B.L. Ochman | 08.13.07
Ryan - yes, I've gotten these SMPR releases. Much ado about nothing.
Yes, it's all marketing, and it all needs to treat people like people - not customers, subjects, editors, prospects, etc etc.
Daniel - you are so right about research. no communications works without that as a basis.
Posted by: B.L. Ochman | 08.13.07