Posts Tagged ‘PR Week’
July 10th, 2009
I’m a bit late to the party, but two articles struck me in last week’s PR Week. The first was the piece titled ‘journalists should beware PR option‘ about the increasing numbers of senior journalists joining the PR industry and the second was ‘PR ponders place in marketing mix‘ after ad agencies won a whole host of awards with PR-led campaigns at Cannes Lions ad festival (to be fair I’m not sure that’s a great measure as Cannes Lions is an Ad festival, but still). Why did they strike me? Well, to my mind, both of these articles are relevant to the same ‘future of PR’ discussion.
Let’s begin with the latter. ‘PR ponders place in marketing mix’ Well about bloody time in my opinion! As anyone who knows anything about Liberate Media, and the reasons that Wendy and I set it up, will know we believe strongly that PR must evolve. Evolve out of traditional PR and develop an understanding of how to communicate online. Evolve out of a blinkered view that no one else can do what we do and instead learn everything we can about a broad spectrum of marketing techniques, and evolve to realise that actually if we can do those things we are in a strong position to take more responsibility in the marketing mix.
Before I continue I wish to make something clear: I’m not here to say PR people are better suited to take the lead in marketing or social media than any other discipline, or any of that pathetic argument that has been raging for so long most people have either lost the will to continue, or never cared in the first place. I was, and am, the latter by the way. If you want to ‘take the lead’ you fill your boots, we’ll just get on with it. No, I’m talking about what PRs should be good at; developing communications strategies, identifying audiences, telling a story and getting the job done.
If PRs can understand the other elements of the marketing mix, pull together the skills or partner with likeminded agencies within these areas to get the job done, why shouldn’t this situation be a positive? Yes Ad agencies have the backing and the power, yes clients will probably look to them first, but we have to prove our worth.
PRs can’t sit there and say Ad agencies can’t do PR and expect everything to continue as before. We know for a fact Ad agencies are skilling up in terms of digital, we know they can move quickly in any sector if there is a profit, (ask search and digital agencies) but why can’t PR agencies develop their knowledge to keep pace?
Some PR agencies already have, but most haven’t and as I’m sure they are realising if they haven’t already started to expand their knowledge and skills, they had better soon get on with it otherwise they will very quickly disappear.
So that leads me to the second point. ‘journalists should beware PR option’. Now we all know journalists becoming PRs is not a new phenomenon, it makes sense and many great PRs have been journalists. In fact we have two on the team at Liberate. The reasons they make great PRs are also the reason that we now need to get more skills into agencies, because they see and understand things that traditionally trained PRs don’t see easily. We need search, web development, content development and broader communications skills, etc. PR agencies need to be the sponge of the comms industry and suck up this knowledge as quickly as we possibly can.
At Liberate we’ve followed this approach from day one and it has worked brilliantly. Not because we did it when we had to, not because of a recession, not because it seems to be the trend, but because it’s the only way PR can survive, it’s as simple as that. That may sound big headed, but it’s not supposed to be. It’s the simple truth, and it was as clear three years ago as it is today.<-->
Should PR fight its corner? Or just evolve…
April 18th, 2008
Danny Rogers’ leader article in PR Week raised a common and often debated subject this week. In Danny’s words: ‘Since the beginning of the year there have been several diatribes against the PR industry in the national media, equating it to a malevolent force’.
Nothing new there then eh!
Two quotes from the piece stand out in particular:
Exhibit A: Nick Davies’ book: Flat Earth News, argues PR’s raison d’etre is ‘… that the masses are a political threat whose thinking must be controlled by the techniques of PR’.
and
Exhibit B: A quote from this week’s Independent: ‘The aim (of PR) is to undermine or marginalise independent journalism, control decision-making, and lastly, mystify and misinform the public.’
PR gets a rough ride from the media as it is the media on the receiving end of much of what is wrong with the industry. To be fair their experiences have probably led them to these assumptions/conclusions, and after more than 10 years in the industry i can see why. I have met an assortment of PR professionals over this time, some that i am proud to say are the most intelligent, creative and real people I’ve met, and others well, are not.
So am i here to defend PR? No. Am i here to slate it? Nah. Do i have a point? I hope so…
The point is that as with all industries and stages of evolution, the strongest, or in fact the most suited to their environment, survive. PR’s evolution is based on moving away from the controlling instincts that the quotes accuse us of. Those that persist in employing these outdated models in a new environment will be found out and go the way of the famous flightless bird from Mauritius (featured above).
I think many of us, especially in the digital space, have already moved away from controlling the message/audience/issue. I feel a great many agencies and individuals have changed inline with their environment and as a result they are flourishing.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think PR needs another slagging match, or even defend itself to these allegations. What PR needs to do is understand how communications has changed, not just on the web but in all walks of life.
So, should PR fight its corner as Danny says? Or just get on with it, shed this archaic image and prove the doubters wrong.