Posts Tagged ‘spam’

Authentic PR or Pseudo-News Flurries and Diversions, ala the Nixon White House

Thursday, June 11th, 2009

Posted by Erin Koch

In today’s “information overload” environment, it is obvious that PR agencies must be selective about what qualifies as news. At Gable PR, we often have to provide the journalists’ perspective and tell our clients no when they suggest that “let’s do a press release on that!” Of course we do it tactfully, applying the “so what, who cares” test. Why? Because just like in the story of the boy who cried wolf or the start-up from the Silicon Valley that cranked out one release a day for months before collapsing, the media will ignore the missives if they are too frequent (or too frequently irrelevant). Much better to be highly selective, or authentic. And to target the media who are most likely to care.

This week, Slate.com had a particularly relevant example, from well before the age of information overload. It turns out that in his final days, Nixon’s press office bombarded the national media with press releases from every Cabinet department in the hopes of somehow pushing the impeachment news off the front pages.

It didn’t work, because the news wasn’t authentic. The media instantly recognized this and continued following the scent of the real story.
So if your company has a “major” product development or if you’re “incredibly excited” about a “transformative” new employee who has joined your firm, that’s great! But before sharing this “news” with the world, give some serious thought as whether or not anyone else will really care. It just might make more sense to go after the spotlight when you have something more “shine-worthy” and truly exciting to the news media and outside audiences.

Nine Ways to Insure Your News Doesn’t Get Through

Monday, March 16th, 2009

Wondering why your news isn’t getting through?  In some cases, it may be DOA (dead on arrival) and you may never have had the benefit of a crime scene investigation (CSI) to tell you why, until now.  In surveying former colleagues and friends in the media, we found nine key reasons for failure:

Wrong Outlet – The perpetrator failed to determine the editorial focus, needs and requirements of each target. This often involves having junior people compile lists and fire off news and semi-news willy-nilly without further research (i.e. sending a color mug shot of the new VP marketing at a private start-up to The Wall Street Journal; launching an earnings report from a local company, to the national media, major dailies, Web sites, blogs, television stations and daily newspapers throughout country; or sullying the inboxes of key bloggers with standard corporate news releases).

Wrong Target – Media database and list services aren’t always up to date, so due diligence is required. You can get the outlet right but throw a wild pitch.  Don’t send something addressed simply to the Editor; that’s like home junk mail addressed to “Occupant.” Avoid misdirection such as sending a biotech pitch to the telecom writer or a software story to the city columnist. Phone calls and emails can work wonders in finding the right target and even starting a relationship.

Lame Subject Lines – Media sources cited “See the attached” (with nothing in the message section); “for immediate release”; and anything that includes empty words such as leading, paradigm, synergy, best of breed, solutions and superlatives in general; has an exclamation point (!); or no subject line.

Burying the News – If it’s not in the headline, first paragraph, or both, it’s goodbye. Be brilliant in the first 100 words. Think like an editor.  Simply ask yourself, from an outside point of view: so what and who cares?

Content, of Course – Editors are amazed by how many pitches and releases are crammed with unsubstantiated claims (world leader), superlatives, lack of supporting data, hyperbole, self-serving quotes by the CEO or others, and jargon-laden copy understood by only a few engineers, Ph.D.s or cognoscenti in the business. Is it a good story for your target’s audience?  Does it stand above whatever the competition is doing? Is the story interesting to someone other than the CEO quoted in the story and his or her immediate family?

Obvious Spam – Anything with more than one name or zero names in the “TO:” or “CC:” lines.

Clogging the Pipeline – Not every writer/editor/blogger has high-speed connections or capacity for huge attachments.  Some media limit the size of files accepted by their systems, so you may never get through. Put essential news into the body of the email and offer to provide more information or high-resolution graphics if desired.

Lack of Style – Beyond content, connect with the media in their own news style, which is dictated by the Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual (Perseus Books).  Typical errors: capitalizing every possible title after a name (Joe Smythe, Asst. Vice President of Outside Sales, Lower Echelon Division), leaving out a first or last name of a person cited in the story, or their titles, or both.

Credibility – If you’ve violated any of the eight tenets listed above, you and your organization my find yourself in a “Bozo Filter,” a term coined by major media for filters set up to automatically delete any email from certain companies and agencies based on their previous performance, or lack of same. A similar fate – blacklisting – awaits those who violate some of the written and unwritten laws of the blogosphere.

###

Posted by Tom Gable