Posts Tagged ‘online PR’
#PRdebate: Can PR step up to the digital challenge?
April 22nd, 2009
I attended the NMK - What happens to online PR debate last night, and it was a very interesting and worthwhile session. Big thanks to Ian Delaney and Jenny Tyler at NMK for organising.
The session was structured as an Oxford-style debate on the issue of ‘has the PR industry lost its capability to lead clients in a New Media Landscape?’, with Roger Warner of Content and Motion and Antony Mayfield from iCrossing in the ‘yes’ camp, and Stuart Bruce of Wolfstar and James Warren of Weber Shandwick in the ‘no’ camp. Mike Nutley, editor-in-chief at NMA chaired the discussion.
I should also point out that a great many of the agencies that ‘get’ online PR and social media were there too. However, there was a real lack of client-side attendance, which meant there was a heavy bias towards the PR angle and argument, which was always going to win the debate in such a crowd. Please read Roger Warner’s write up for a different and more digitally-focused point of view.
As you can tell by the panel, it was a meeting of strong opinions, but i was surprised not so much by the differences discussed on the night, but more by the similarities. Obviously, the two sides had differing opinions on many of the issues, but overall I felt the vision for the future of online PR, digital communications, call it what you will, were similar. Let me make it clear that both sides made a good argument for digital or PR to lead clients in a New Media Landscape, but what i took from it was that it will in fact be a mixture of skills coming from both sides that will win out, something that i totally agree with.
For exampIe, I agree with the ‘yes’ debaters that you need specific skill sets in an online environment, and that not all PRs have this, but I also agree with the ‘no’ side that the art of communications, not the way in which we reach our audience, is the key factor.
From a personal point of view, i also found it difficult to choose a side. I come from a traditional PR background, but what we’ve been trying to do with Liberate Media over the last three years is very far from traditional. We are part of a newer breed of PR agencies that are trying to break free from the shackles of traditional agencies in terms of our set up, approach and skill sets. So from that point I agree traditional agencies cannot lead unless they bite the bullet and evolve. But from a communications stand point, i also believe this blend of skills, be it PR, digital or journalism will be the future not either - or.
This part of the debate was also flavoured with the point that PR has become media relations in many cases, and this is why digital must lead as media relations alone is not relevant. This has been an issue, but taking the PR panel members as an example, it’s certainly not true in their cases, and i would argue to a greater degree that more of an emphasis has been put on strategy and communications development in the leading PR agencies over recent years to move away from this problem. And at the top, i don’t think this is a major issue.
So, where does that leave me? Well, if by ‘the PR industry’ you mean traditional agencies or ‘the dinosaurs that run PR who don’t get the significance of digital’, as James Warren put it, then i agree PR has already lost. But if we’re talking about the growing band of smart new agencies and the intelligent approach of the larger agencies of which a few were represented last night, then no. These sorts of comms professionals know they still have a lot to learn, but they are building digital skill sets by hiring in experienced individuals or looking beyond the boundaries of what would traditionally be PR. Yes, the social media specific agencies and digital agencies have a lead in understanding the environment, but they also need to skill up in terms of comms strategy and delivery. Something that they have also been doing over the last few years.
Who will win? Well, it’s simple really, the winners will be the agencies that get this blend of skills right, be they digital or PR in original orientation.
The debate continues on Twitter: #PRDebate
December 23rd, 2008
So here we are again, the end of the year, well end of the working year for us at Liberate Media at least. Traditionally this is the time for looking back at last year’s predictions and making new predictions for the year ahead.
However, I don’t feel that next year will be a year quite like any other, so I’m going to avoid making a set of predictions as such and look at what we know.
First of all, don’t worry, this isn’t a post of doom and gloom, but allow me to set the scene before we delve deeper: Financial crisis, GDP at lowest level since 1990, recession, nearly everyone is feeling the squeeze in some way or other, in fact let’s be honest, most people just want 2009 to be over before it has already begun.
So, where does that leave us in the PR industry? Well for starters the game has changed. By game I mean whatever strategy, business plan or focus you had, will ultimately need to change to consider this new environment. No prediction there, just common sense.
Secondly, there will be casualties, agencies will make redundancies or disappear just as we have seen businesses go across the board. Clients will at least cast a close eye over PR spend and probably make reductions, and in some cases stop all together.
However, it’s not all bad, there are opportunities. Over the last month, at Liberate Media, we’ve had a large amount of new business enquires. This isn’t me shouting about how clever we are, this is simply a fact. Of those new enquires, most have been linked to social media or online methodologies in some respect. In affect, what was true prior to the crisis is true now, brands are investing in social media and progressive PR, but they are looking at it from a different perspective and in some cases this spend isn’t coming from a PR or marketing budget, it’s coming from a digital budget. There is no doubt that clients are more cautious, but the opportunity is there.
So, is this leading up to a big sales pitch for Liberate, no it’s not supposed to be. The point i’m making is simple, the PR industry was going through an evolution already, it started years before this economic crisis, but now the affects of this evolution are much more obvious.
As i said in my recent post: PR isn’t online or offline it’s through the line, the fundamentals of good PR are as true now as they have ever been: open and honest communications either online or offline is a simple rule to live by, where as spinning a story and talking ‘at’ audiences is a sure way to fail. The fact that an open and measureable communications model is the accepted approach online, puts the emphasis on online as the new model, but in reality the same is true offline.
So, although we will see a slow down across the board i think those that have embraced the change that PR has needed for so long, will continue to see opportunity. It’s a harsh way to look at it, but perhaps for the PR industry at least, this new environment will help to accelerate our much needed evolution.
If you’re after more predictions, allow me to point you in the direction of Stephen Waddington, who has done an excellent predictions post that I heartily agree with.
Merry Christmas!
Wendy McAuliffe: Who owns online PR? E-consultancy video
December 15th, 2008
Here is my take on the subject of who owns online PR, from a recent E-constancy roundtable debate. Other views on the subject can also be found on the E-consulancy YouTube page
Agree or disagree with my views…as always please let me know!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=1df4956d-dd66-418a-9f76-f3ec15b1ac82)
PR is not online or offline, it’s through-the-line
December 10th, 2008
Social media and online PR have been the hot topics of discussion in the PR industry for some time, and the temperature is increasing as we approach 2009, which is seen by many to be the year of social media.
However, when it comes to offline or traditional PR, which is often wrongly labelled as simply media relations, the excitement dies and the level of conversation follows a similar downward spiral.
But why is this? Is traditional PR slowly dying? Are we moving online at such a rate that offline communications have become devalued? Put simply, no, that’s very far from the truth.
Don’t get me wrong, at Liberate Media we’ve been talking about the benefits and necessity of online communications since our inception, and that hasn’t changed. But neither has our vision that online and offline are in fact the mechanisms through which we deliver good PR, not the definition itself.
So what happens when we blur the lines and combine offline and online PR? “Not a lot” I hear you say, “It’s hardly a revolutionary thought”. Very true, but how many case studies are you aware of that are combining the two areas successfully via a seamless strategy? Sure, many brands engage in both online and offline PR, many via separate agencies or specialists, but the links, although evident, are rarely maximised.
Let me give you an example. There have been instances in recent new business meetings where we’ve been informed that the PR to date has been handled offline by agency X and online by agency Y, and when we try to explain that Liberate Media offers a joint strategy, not one bolted onto the other, we are met with quizzical looks and a degree of disbelief.
So why is this? I think that we, the agencies, are mainly to blame. PR agencies that offer online, or social media consultancy, have usually differentiated this offering through their online or digital department/division/individual, making it appear as though they are specialists operating separately to give credence to their capabilities. Furthermore, there are also a growing number of specialists that do a great job of offering online consultancy but rarely offer traditional PR services as well.
So we’ve divided the two specialisms and that divide, we believe, should not exist. Not just because our company offers both services but because the customer journey may begin online or offline and switch between the two. So how do we engage communities effectively where ever they are, if not by meeting them of their own turf?
The simple truth is, at the moment we’re still taking a channel approach, ring-fencing online away from the rest of PR.
There is no real reason why the two shouldn’t co-exist and in fact aren’t better suited to co-exist through a purpose-built strategy, not two strategies coming together and then being revised to fit.
The fundamentals of good PR work equally well online as they do offline. The rules of open and honest two-way communications aren’t particularly new, but enforcing these rules through brand communications is.
So what I am asking is for is a shift in thinking: as we evolve PR and continue to develop new campaigns that encapsulate core business objectives, please don’t compartmentalise thinking into offline or online. Simply state your objectives and look to your agency/contacts/internal PR department to develop a clear through-the-line strategy.
Let’s break free from the online vs offline thinking trap now and avoid revisiting it in a year when the dye is cast. Let’s break free from the mistakes of the past, when we waited until the market as a whole was comfortable with seperate offerings before pulling together delivery. Instead, let’s embrace PR in all its forms and simply develop brand communications that engage our target communities at their point of interest.
Will SEO drop out of the social media mix in the future?
November 20th, 2008
After reading an excellent post by Learn to Duck, titled SEO is dead, I started to wonder, where does that leave SEO? And, who now owns the majority slice of the social media mix, if not SEO?
To recap, the main points of the ‘SEO Is dead’ post were:
- There was a time when SEO consultants could charge a fortune for services, but now everyone is a so called SEO expert.
- Web designers are designing websites with SEO in mind.
- Platforms such as Wordpress have SEO principals in their framework.
- SEO organisations need to re-position themselves within the next three years.
So where does this leave the SEO specialists, if in three years time SEO is dead and buried?
I think there will always be a need for SEO expertise, but not in the traditional stand alone sense. We have to develop a more joined up sense of how online PR, or any other element of the social media mix, links with SEO tactics. The joined up approach is the way Liberate Media likes to operate, meaning in an ideal scenario our client’s online services will be streamlined and focused on the same overall strategy, like a well-oiled machine. So, SEO expertise is still a very valued service but in the wider context of a digital strategy. In the future, I don’t think SEO will be seen as a standalone service.
Therefore, if we remove the channel approach, who will own the future SEO slice of the social media pie if not search agencies? - Online PR, marketers, digital agencys, freelance consultants, something completely new, or all of the above? Will our skills need to encompass the entire digital range to become truly proficient social media marketeers?