Top >> Opinion__Comment Opinion: An uneasy alliance - media, PR, companies published November-December 2005 By Grant Common Editor Grant has 30 years direct experience in public relations and communication in Australia and New Zealand - as well as directing and managing programs in the UK and USA. He has consulted to Governments, publicly listed companies, industry bodies, marketing organisations, multinationals and not-for-profit organisations. He is Managing Director of Sydney-based Network PR and as a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors (having completed the Company Directors Diploma examination) he is also one of the few PR practitioners to have the perspective of the company director. A vitriolic attack on PR in the Australian Financial Review in early November by one of Australia’s most prolific and well respected marketing and media journalists ruffled quite a few PR feathers. This was because Neil Shoebridge’s article delved into the uneasy and uneven relationship - often called one of love/hate - between media and PR. Apparently drawing on his personal journalistic experience, Shoebridge pinged PR people for almost every imaginable sin. These ranged from sending too many media releases to not responding to phone calls. He inferred that dealing with the media was not difficult and that it all it required was honesty and responsiveness. He also inferred that much of the problem was with PR people over-selling what they could achieve in the media for clients. He said that clients should do all the media work themselves. Of course, he’s right about many of the things he writes about. Media are hounded by PR people, too many media releases are sent out and sometimes calls from journalists are not returned. But all industries have their problems. Too many salespeople make unwanted calls and often mislead potential customers. Tradespeople are notoriously unreliable. Doctors habitually keep patients waiting. We all get annoyed by telemarketing. It happens. However, media are not without their own issues. Some have been known to misrepresent people in stories, quote people wrongly and run material without even bothering to check they have the facts (in fact there’s a weekly television program that exposes these - go to Media Watch). Some media even blatantly promote information about themselves as news.  PR people with a similar length of experience to Shoebridge could write an equally scathing article on the failings and inconsistencies of journalists. There are two sides to every story! But so what - it’s just an occupational hazard, and not something to get upset about. PR people shouldn’t be absolved from their sins. But nor should the messenger - the PR person - be blamed for everything.  What Shoebridge’s flogging of PR people missed was the fact that if there is a problem it’s a three-angled one - involving companies, their PR people and the media. All three contribute to it! Here are some observations: What’s News? The more inconsistent media is in treatment of news, the more pressure it puts on those supplying so-called news.  And the Australian media can be extremely inconsistent. News is subjective. It can’t be assessed by running it through a computer program. One media outlet can run something on the front page - while another consigns it to the rubbish bin. Some media run stuff that is blatantly not news - but just run it on someone’s personal whim. Some media, and individual journalists, have their own ‘causes’ that they pursue - so something that would ordinarily not make news appears as news. These inconsistencies make it difficult for clients and their PR people.  If Company A was lucky or connected enough to have had publicity for something quite mundane, it will be a brave PR consultant to Company B, wanting to say something equally mundane, who will say - “don’t release it because it’s not news”. It’s often the client who pushes for the media exposure PR is a competitive business - with around 120 registered consultancies/agencies across Australia - and probably another 500 who claim to be in PR.  Despite all the talk about media only being a small part of what PR does, it still dominates client thinking - especially amongst medium sized companies. If 20 companies issue competitive briefs this month to PR agencies you can bet that 15 of them are primarily looking for publicity. Up to six agencies will enter each beauty parade - and the one most likely to win is the one that can offer or promise the best chance of publicity. Suggesting that the product or company isn’t going to be attractive to media, and that alternate communication channels should be considered, is often something the prospective client doesn’t want to hear. Just as in the beauty parades, they say it’s on other factors, but usually it comes down to just one thing. If Shoebridge contends that the media is inundated with media releases (and he is right) he would be staggered to see the number and types of releases that companies try to get up, only to be knocked back by their PR people.  The issue here is that the mentality of companies needs to be appreciated.  Often in the commercial world it’s a numbers game - so what if you send 100 pieces of paper (or even emails, as they cost nothing) and you only get one response? That’s one you wouldn’t have received if you hadn’t sent out the hundred. That’s how they sell their products, so why shouldn’t the same process apply to gaining coverage? Many of them don’t want a professional relationship, they just want results. PR people are in the middle PR people are the tip of the iceberg that the journalist sees. That’s why companies pay PR agencies. They often want them to build and manage the relationship with the media, because they don’t have the time or, in many cases, the requisite understanding to do so themselves. They have outsourced that function to a PR agency just as they might outsource their accounting, IT maintenance or advertising. But the media wants the relationship to be with the client, often seeing PR agencies as a hindrance to that end. Having media understand their clients’ wants is a delicate proposition for a PR agency, and it’s not helped by the fact that there are now fewer journalists on publications than there were just a few short years ago, and that they are therefore more time-poor. Try explaining to a journalist that the client wants a relationship with the media, but insists that the relationship be managed by a third party - the PR agency.  It’s not what journalist wants to hear, it’s often not what the PR agency wants either, but it is what the client wants to happen. PR people in general have made great strides over recent years in educating clients about the role of PR and the importance of the relationship with the media.  Rather than PR people taking umbridge at what Shoebridge wrote perhaps it’s just evidence of what an uneasy alliance it is between journalism, PR and companies.  Shoebridge did concede that there are some PR people and agencies who do a good job (they must do something right because quite a large proportion of what appears in the media does in fact emanate from PR sources (see this report by the Australian Broadcasting Authority or our previous story).  But whoever it was that put the burr under Shoebridge’s saddle was obviously not from one of those agencies. Grant Common Editor Footnote An exception to this general situation can be found within IT media where a specialist company, founded and run by ex-journos, actually brings all three players together twice a year to sit down and talk amongst themselves, to form relationships and to develop protocols that will satisfy the needs of all three parties. Over 100 people from clients, agencies and media attend these events, with all claiming them to be extremely beneficial. It doesn’t solve all the issues - but it helps. Have something to say about this article? Why not email our editor at editor@prinfluences.com.au

PR Influences Australia: An uneasy alliance – media, Public Relations, companies