Is It Time We PRs Grew A Pair?
I've just been reading an interesting post entitled Why that rubbish press release isn't the PROs fault. I would argue that actually - it is.
We work mainly with PR agencies – and before I start my rant, there are a load of PRs out there who I really rate – we even did a name and fame blog about them once (need to update that soon).
But, I am more than familiar with the laborious “sign-off” process which can often look like this:
We draft a robust, newsy piece of copy in the style of their target publication - we send it to the PR to get sign-off from their client - the press release comes back littered with unnecessary branding, notes to editors, logos, embargos - even prices.
Saw my head off.
We then enter into a conversation about why the release has been changed to that extent. The answer is usually the same - "the client insisted we change it".
But hang on a second - aren't you, the PR, not supposed to be the expert? Should they not be listening to you about what is actually going to achieve coverage?
I've had PRs admit to me before that they know the release probably won't make but that they don't want to upset the client. MADNESS!
The problem is that as a PR, a lot of the time you'll be dealing with marketing folk - people who understand the brand but not the press.
And that is why they have hired you. They need to be educated - told how it works and have the process explained. Sometimes you need to be firm - show them what works and what doesn't.
Achieving coverage and keeping the brand people happy is an extremely delicate balancing act and, a lot of the time (from what I see), PRs are getting it wrong.
Written by Harriet
72Point Blog
72 Point are national news PR & survey specialists. Achieving daily print & online news exposure for the UK’s largest brands and PR agencies.
May 20th, 2010 - 16:06
Great post Harriet and I completely agree with you. As PRs we should be acting as consultants, and in my career I have had clients who make this an easy and enjoyable process, and those who don’t! However, when it’s not so easy, it’s usually because the client doesn’t understand why something should be done a certain way (a problem that often arises in trade PR when the client is more used to working with consumer PRs). In those circumstances it’s up to us to explain and educate and in most cases we can then ensure the best outcome for everyone involved.
May 20th, 2010 - 16:16
I have a lot of sympathy for what you say (I could even point to a few scars) but when you are in front of some egos, telling them you know best can be a quick way to lose the business. Some people argue you should give your client what he/she wants, not what you think he/she needs. As a PR, you have two clients, the one that pays the bill and the journalist that chooses to run your story (or not). These two clients want different things and have different rules. It’s our job to satisfy them both. I think that word “delicate” in your final sentence sums up the challenge for many PRs, especially in cash-strapped times.
May 20th, 2010 - 16:17
Agree completely with your sentiment Harriet but the reality is that clients still pay the bills, and we can only push back so much. You’re absolutely right we’re here to offer counsel but we’re also here to keep clients and sometimes you just have to suck it up and do what you’re told. Do we like doing that? Of course not, but I think thats just the reality.
One observation though - clients that haven’t a clue and won’t listen to feedback generally don’t hang around in their positions that long…;-)
May 20th, 2010 - 21:27
I think you’ve nailed it with your comment about dealing with marketing folk. Marketers can’t help speaking with a sales brochure voice, whereas any half-decent PRO speaks with a journalists voice, and if skilfull, loosely tunes it to the accent of the target publications.
However, as PR folk are increasingly reporting into Communications instead of Marketing, so the sales brochure dialect should be heard less.
May 21st, 2010 - 09:44
@Rebecca Taylor – Thanks Rebecca – completely agree – we should be acting as consultants and that means holding our ground – even if that isn’t always enjoyable.
@Duncan Hopwood – Your point about giving your client what he/she wants and not what you think he/she needs is valid – however i do feel as the PR we have a better idea of what is realistic in terms of achievables and it is therefore our duty to be honest and firm with clients – without of course being rude
@Nick – Yes, clients do pay the bills and you’re right that we can only push back so much. If they are categorically refusing to listen to you, there is little point in starting a fight. Sometimes it gives you a good excuse for lack of pick-up too…”well - we did it your way so you can’t moan about coverage”
@andrew thomas – Good point – lets hope you are right.
May 21st, 2010 - 13:46
Great post - and something I advocate myself.
Being on the online PR side, I feel the consulting bit is a little easier. Since my clients are mostly looking for direction from the beginning, I’m able to push back on what I know will work and what won’t.
For traditional PRs, the way forward is to manage expectations from the beginning - right even from that creds/chemistry meeting. There’s no need to be pushy, but it’s pretty easy to tell from the onset if the client wants to run the show.
May 21st, 2010 - 13:50
Grow a pair and meet me for a drink later.
May 21st, 2010 - 14:37
@Melanie Seasons - thanks for your comment - I guess because online is a relatively new PR platform, clients would need to put their trust in you even more. Totally agree with you about managing expectations - again a delicate balancing act, especially at the pitch stage where it’s very easy to over-promise.