« Don't Get Sandbagged | Main | The Strategy Paradox: Interview with the Author »

Twitter Me This: PR's Biggest Challenge

Via Twitter, I recently posed this question to my network:

Twitterq

I quickly received an interesting range of replies.

amandachapel: the single most important issue will be the Web's total rejection of "surreptitious selling."  

 

ericeggertson: Agencies need to enable, guide, coach. Running campaigns still important, but only if customer is smarter company afterward.  

 

MikeDriehorst: Specialization is ineffective. Integration/expansion of services; not just PR, not just social media, not just web, not just ad, etc.  If not integrate, then at least understand other comms strategies. Clients looks at entire pic; we should too.

 

kamichat: Search, how to be found. I thought this article on Google Relations was insightful, http://tinyurl.com/24orqp.  

 

ikepigott: differentiating what YOU do vs. unethical practices of other PR people now that PR is in limelight.

 

Gotta love the concise cogency that Twitter’s 140–character limit enforces on PR people.

While Kami Huyse is right, of course, that SEO will play a larger role in PR practices, it seems to me that a common thread running through these responses relates to Transparency.

Amanda, the “Strumpette,” rails against the very nature of PR as a behind-the-scenes force of influence.  Ike Pigott suggests – whether he realized it or not – that a PR firm’s works should be “watermarked” for all to see, and judge.  Eric Eggertson sees PR pros as educators – but this implies that we have the battle scars to prove that our counsel is sage, for having been tested.  Mike’s point seems to be that PR is just one component of the marketing mix – yet needs to be better integrated than before … that’s a call for inter-disciplinary transparency (though not all disciplines are as motivated as the PR industry to share their toys).

We already know that journalists are “not god anymore.”  The subjects of their stories can post their own notes, retorts, audio files, etc.  This will require journalists to be incredibly scrupulous about how they write stories.  Journalists are no longer going to be the sole gatekeepers of either content or context.

So too will PR pros lose the luxury of working behind the scenes.  More and more often, in these early days of the blogosphere, a bone-headed pitch will be instantly revealed/reviled.  The crappy PR firms, the dialers-for-dollars, will get smart or get out.  Those that remain will likely have faced up to the fact that more and more of their agency’s work will be disinfected by the sunlight. 

This is an unprecedented opportunity (but no, Brian Solis, it’s not a call for PR 3.0). 

PR has always been about finding the right words and concepts to influence those who could influence the fortunes of our clients.  We’re accustomed to catering to stakeholders; to researching their likes/dislikes; to finding information that met their needs.  The fact that much of that work happened “in the shadows” did not make that work dishonorable or disingenuous; it was just the way things were done because in large part our audience was very narrow – and disliked acknowledging the importance of our role (when we did it right). 

But this back-alley way of doing things allowed too many lackluster PR firms to survive (and thus darken the reputation of the industry as a whole).

Now our audience is growing exponentially large.  We can talk directly to them.  The good PR firms can be as smart and funny and accommodating to the ultimate audience as they had been all along to the media. 

We can be strategic in the sunlight.

Posted by Todd Defren on April 27, 2007 09:50 PM |

Comments

And as it is a resource for collecting information, it so is a channel for sharing insight. Great post Todd. You're right...engage or die!

Posted by: Brian Solis | April 27, 2007 10:13 PM

I've been so busy this week I missed your Tweet. So I'll add my two cents here.

Coming out of the shadows and the courage to do so is the biggest challenge I see facing the industry. We can talk to audiences directly but it will be hard for many PRs to do so and still demonstrate tranparency or "watermarking" of their efforts.

Also many PRs will blend so much of the other disciplines they will lose a bit of themselves. I'm biased, but I think PR remains the best way to reach customers and audiences and we should work to maintain our leadership and dominate position.

I guess I needed more tha 140 characters!

Posted by: Michael Sommermeyer | April 28, 2007 12:02 AM

You are right Todd, and I think that search is also fueling that need to be open and honest. If you aren't, everyone will instantly find you out. Why? Because everything is out there to be found. In other words, we don't control the message or even the delivery of the message, if we ever really did.

Posted by: Kami Huyse | April 28, 2007 03:09 PM

The big challenge will be getting businesses to change direction in marketing strategy. We all see the path, but the CMO, the SVP over 40 years old does not. That means we have to fight control-the-message instincts, and counter with influential transparency. This is the battle early new media adapters now face.

Posted by: Geoff Livingston | April 29, 2007 11:20 PM

Hey Todd, I'll add my 2 cents as well, and try to keep it Twitter length (and fail):

I'd suggest our biggest issue will be effectively understanding the recipe that bridges what we did then, to what we do now, and what we'll be doing 3 years from now (and ensuring that what we bake up is good for ourselves and our clients)... 'cuz a lot of the first two will still be relevant.

At the same time, I'd suggest that the transformation of communications departments from disseminators of content to creators and disseminators of content (and our ability to figure that out), will be equally significant.

Posted by: Brendan Hodgson | April 30, 2007 12:38 PM

The link 'sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants' resolves to

http://citebite.com/fetch?v=00022&u=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLouis_Brandeis%23Selected_quotations&q=Sunlight%20is%20said%20to%20be%20the%20best%20of%20disinfectants

which is the Citebite application. This is not nearly as handy as resolving to the Citebite quote page itself, like so:

http://pages.citebite.com/x1f6o2s3v8mki

Posted by: ron | April 30, 2007 01:16 PM

Ron - fixed, thanks!

Brendan - how would you describe "what we did then" with "what we do now"?

Posted by: Todd Defren | April 30, 2007 01:29 PM

What we did then: traditional PR, meaning both a strategic and tactical focus on media relations, trade shows and speaking events, and grassroots advocacy (but without the web).

What we do now: the same as what we did then, plus... adjusting our strategy to take into account the evolving nature of today's "social" web (pardon the jargon), thereby incorporating such elements as blogger and non-traditional media outreach (as appropriate), embracing tools such as RSS, social networks, YouTube etc, establishing corporate blogging communities and podcasts in order to communicate "our own stories" and engage in direct discussions with others (rather than via the media), and significantly more robust use of the corporate website overall to reach and engage audiences directly. I'd also add deeper integration with other disciplines - online, advertising etc. (which certainly didn't happen "then") ... to name a few.

My point being I guess that what we've been doing for years is still critically important - recognizing that the mainstream media will still be around (and may, in fact become an even more important and credible broker of information than it's ever been before), as will trade shows, in-person lobbying and other facets of our business. That said, we need to adjust that model and extend it in order to integrate the new tools and strategies that address the expectations of audiences who are increasingly comfortable with this more direct, interactive, social and transparent web.

The nature of media relations will certainly change... but it's not an either-or proposition.

Posted by: Brendan Hodgson | April 30, 2007 02:07 PM

Brendan, that's a cogent, well-written, accurate & thoughtful response. You're hired! (Oops, wait. You already have a job. Sorry.)

I guess I keep hoping for "MORE" without being sure what "MORE" is - and yet, at the same time, being VERY SURE that 99% of clients aren't going to be ready for the "MORE".

Posted by: Todd Defren | April 30, 2007 04:00 PM

Thanks Todd, I'm gonna hold you to that!... :-).

To the question of 'More': To me, the 'More' is the blending of old and new, and the strategies and opportunities that will emerge as a result of it. If done right, and when the folks at both ends (the traditionally-focused luddites and the hard-core evangelists) realize the benefits that the other end provides when it's all seamlessly integrated, the role of PR will definitely be strengthened within the comms and marketing mix.

Posted by: Brendan Hodgson | April 30, 2007 05:02 PM

PRChallenge: Staying relevant especially as the boundaries around PR, advertising and marketing collapse. Media contacts are no longer enough.

Posted by: Dan Greenfield | May 1, 2007 05:16 PM

Clicky Web Analytics