How PRs will need to adapt to the Fairfax and News Limited upheavals

In this guest post, Tina Alldis argues that the restructure of Fairfax and News Limited is good news for PR agencies with redundant journos on the job market and a single well placed story likely to go across multiple platforms.

Aside from the inevitable decrease in the numbers of journalists that we harass daily with our brand stories and announcements, what do all of these changes mean for PR practitioners and clients?

I believe these evolutions will result in improved PR campaigns, with stories running across multiple platforms and extending out into social media. Great news for our clients.

Now that we are faced with this increasingly competitive editorial space in print media, and the need for components of campaigns which lend themselves to online content that is genuinely sharable, it is time to ensure all our campaigns are truly born out of socially creative insights.

Socially creative campaigns will mean our stories will lend themselves to both online content and newsworthy print stories. This will help our media friends hit as many birds as possible with one stone, with genuinely sharable content. Sharable stories mean we’ll be helping media outlets to drive viewership of certain articles as we post links on our social media channels – an outcome that makes both media and clients happy.

We also need to be conscious of ensuring that our campaigns and stories can be easily adapted for other media types including iPad, tablet and smartphone content. In particular, the work of News Limited’s product innovation team will dictate at what pace PRs need to adapt to new mediums.

This shift towards content which appeals to traditional media, digital and social media channels does mean as an industry we will have to establish a standardised measurement tool for online and social media coverage, allowing our clients to fully understand the value of what we achieve for brands as the media landscape evolves.

As we start to see the full effect of these restructures and the reduced number of journalists, I believe media will become increasingly reliant on newswire services to provide content. In turn, this will mean there is less space for PR-created stories which will increase the perceived value of print coverage, both by industry and clients.

Less journos will also mean that publications will be looking for content they can syndicate across the networks. Knowing this we must ensure our stories either carry national interest or can easily be adapted for each metro and regional market as needed.

And with a significant number of Fairfax Media and News Limited employees likely to be on the hunt for new roles, it would be remiss not to expect that there will be an increasing number of former journos joining the ‘dark-side’ of publicity.

All in all, it’s an exciting time to be in PR.

I’m interested to see how many PRs are up for the challenge of evolving the way we work while journos enter the industry and challenge us for our roles.

  • Tina Alldis is head of publicity at PR agency Mango Sydney

7.30pm update: Mango MD Simone Drewry has issued the following statement:

“I would like to apologise on behalf of the Mango team for this opinion piece. While I encourage my team to have opinions and be active in the industry and media landscape, this piece is insensitive. We hold journalists in high esteem and apologise for the offence caused.

“Tina Alldis is a consummate professional who always acts with integrity – on this occasion she made a bad judgement call and she understands that.

“We have friends and peers who are impacted by the recent changes at News Ltd and Fairfax and we do not want to profit from the distress caused to them and their families. I hope that we can move on from this and build bridges with anyone who we have upset.”

7.40pm update: Tina Alldis adds:

“I would like to apologise in person to anyone who has been offended by this article. I can be reached on tinaa@thisismango.com.au. If you send me your number I will call you back.”

Comments


  1. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    2:00 pm

  2. Wow. (moderated by mumbrella)
    So it’s an exciting time to be in PR because understaffed newsrooms will be more likely to lap up a shill, is it? Charming.

  3. Ms No
    21 Jun 12
    2:10 pm

  4. Well said Anonymous. As a publisher I’m truly stunned by the PR industry.

    Why exactly would I want to run an article for free which helps promote your multinational client?

    The industry has some major issues and it’s not one I’d want to be part of.

  5. Mick
    21 Jun 12
    2:12 pm

  6. What a depressing outlook for the reader. And it’s ‘fewer’ not ‘less’ journos.

  7. chris mitchell (not the one from the Aus, Mumbrella should point out)
    21 Jun 12
    2:14 pm

  8. (moderated by mumbrella). The benefit of a strong editorial media with well-trained, informed and ethical journalists ensures people like this (who profess to represent the pr profession) don’t succeed.
    And 2,000 people losing their jobs – good news? Tina what planet are you on?
    In my limited experience journalists don’t make the progression into pr and vice versa. Long may that continue, as it keeps everybody honest.
    Next we’ll hear arguments why Gina Rinehart owning Fairfax is a great idea for press freedom.

  9. Tristan
    21 Jun 12
    2:16 pm

  10. Baffling.

  11. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    2:22 pm

  12. Certainly rocky times in the media world and it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. Building one’s profile as a journo has never been more important and cross promoting one’s opinions in NewsLtd then over on Sky News is a certain way to achieve it and also catch Kim Williams eye.

    I’m still wondering why there is such a hoo haa about Gina Rhinehart, certainly we have other shareholders with major percentages in media companies, yet not a whisper there….

  13. PR in publishing
    21 Jun 12
    2:26 pm

  14. I am a PR working in a publisher and I agree with Anonymous and Ms No.

    Wow Tina – how wrong have you got it with this article both in tone (totally insensitive to those in the media industry who are in the verge of redundancy) and content (blatantly jumping on this topical issue to wax on about future of PR – give me a break and “media friends” can you get any more patronising!!!)

    (edited by mumbrella)

  15. Norelle Feehan
    21 Jun 12
    2:32 pm

  16. As a publicist of many years I just couldn’t get up the puff to see the positive side of anything this week, least of all what a ‘great challenge’ it’s going to be – sorry Tina.

    I am so sad at the possible number of job losses. I can’t bear to think of all those important people and yes I include editors in country towns and suburbs not being able to share local news. I am personally up for the fight for awareness that newspapers are worth having. They integrate a consolidated view of the world seen through different ‘voices’. They are accountable to their editors, colleagues and the community (unlike many a blog). And this is all found in one place without spending 4 hours on twitter feeds – oh that’s called a newspaper! Let me know when I wake that this is the reality.

  17. Ouch
    21 Jun 12
    2:38 pm

  18. Tina, you’ve done very little to change my perception of PR practitioners. Do you understand why people are disturbed by your outlook? It’s part of your job to turn a negative situation into a positive outcome and I can see you’ve tried to do that, but you’re way off the mark. Lesson learned

  19. Barb
    21 Jun 12
    2:46 pm

  20. Great story, Tina. In fact, if you speak to some journos at News Ltd, they will tell you that yesterday’s announcement wasn’t a surprise and it should have come a few years ago. They are hopeful.

  21. Darren Horrigan
    21 Jun 12
    2:54 pm

  22. Tina needs an editor and a mentor – fast.

  23. RBall
    21 Jun 12
    2:55 pm

  24. You certainly have created shareable content here, Tina. You’ll reach more journalists with this posting than any news release you’ve written.
    Dead right, Chris Mitchell. Journos are not PRs and PRs are not journos. Period.
    And, some of the basic tenets of PR are tone, timing, audience and perception.
    Hmmm.
    No, Tina. You don’t speak for my corner of PR.

  25. Richard
    21 Jun 12
    2:57 pm

  26. Hopefully more journos will now move to the darkside – better hours, more pay. We will end up with smarter, more realistic campaigns with better outcomes.

  27. 'News'
    21 Jun 12
    3:07 pm

  28. PRs getting into newspapers is one of the reasons they’ve lost the trust of their audiences…

  29. stu
    21 Jun 12
    3:10 pm

  30. Bayoneting the wounded…

    But as always, no matter how good your PR yarn might be, if you timing is poor, the joke will be on you… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_timing

  31. Tina Alldis
    21 Jun 12
    3:22 pm

  32. I acknowledge everyone’s comments; restructures are an emotional and difficult time. It is sad to see talented individuals go through this.

    My intention with this article was to highlight how we as PRs need to adapt our ways of working as a result of the inevitable shake-up for the industry. We know that media will not publish PR-created pieces more readily.

    When I referenced the ‘challenge’ I meant that PRs will have their work cut out to develop content that can work for all platforms and audiences.

    This debate goes to show that we have a challenging and interesting road ahead.

    Tina

  33. A.Nonymous
    21 Jun 12
    3:25 pm

  34. There is never a winner in online debating!! This is an article represents a view about evolving and staying commercial. To those upset at an “insensitive” tone, you are all part of industries that churn through $$ and employees, so get used to it, money makes the world go around. This article is about bigger things, Bravo Tina.

    Guess this is an old message but perhaps worth raising in light of announcements this week – and this post…

    Media Owners – protect your revenue streams.

    PR certainly has its place but put simply – why would a business pay to reach your audience through advertising when they can reach them through a press release.

  35. Anon
    21 Jun 12
    3:33 pm

  36. To anonymous ’5′: How can you ask why Gina Rinehart’s bid will create a problem? She’s refusing to renounce interference in Fairfax’s editorial affairs, meaning if she wins out she can meddle as much as she likes.

  37. jenj
    21 Jun 12
    3:34 pm

  38. (moderated by Mumbrella)

  39. Kelly Keen
    21 Jun 12
    3:38 pm

  40. Typical aggressive comments attacking Tina – no surprises here. From one who is not threatened and moving with the times, I gotcha point Tina. This article is in no way insensitive – simply insightful and dead-on the money as far as I am concerned. Well done.

  41. Opposition
    21 Jun 12
    3:38 pm

  42. I’d argue the opposite -

    Less commercial and less popular MSM is bad new for PR. Lower chance of hijacking the newscycle.

    Which is, incidentally, great news for everyone else.

  43. RG
    21 Jun 12
    3:44 pm

  44. As a PR professional, I began taking exception to this article right from the phrase “that we harass daily” in the first para. Having PR people describe our work this way is seriously detrimental to our reputation as a whole. I think this article is ill-advised and it is not representative of the industry as a whole.

    - wishing not to be painted with the same brush

  45. Darren
    21 Jun 12
    3:49 pm

  46. Who allowed this to actually appear on MuM – shocking that someone like this can speak for the entire PR sector so badly – ouch

  47. Jack B. Nimble
    21 Jun 12
    3:50 pm

  48. Tina, in your comment above you say “We know that media will not publish PR-created pieces more readily”.

    But your article trumpets “Less journos will also mean that publications will be looking for content they can syndicate across the networks. ”

    So which is it?

  49. LS
    21 Jun 12
    3:57 pm

  50. Agree totally with RBall. There are now tweets saying this article represents the PR Industry’s views. This is one person’s opinion and definitely isn’t shared by myself or any of the PRs I work with.

  51. Josh
    21 Jun 12
    3:58 pm

  52. The only thing Tina should be excited by is that journalists – people who actually know how to write – might be willing to accept a little freelance work to put some food on the table.
    If anything, it’s worse for PR agencies because the journalists who actually had the spare time to bother reading one of the mundane, uninformative and plain boring releases will no longer be in employment.
    For every good PR agent out there like Roxy Jacenko, there’s another one who reminds me of a joke I was told my a veteran journo as a wide-eyed cadet: What does PR stand for? Professional Riting…
    Hire an experienced journo, Tina – someone who actually has news sense and understands how to communicate to the wider, intelligent public – and then, and only then, will this culling of journalists be a good thing for your agency. And more than likely you will reap financial benefit.
    On the flip side, you have created interaction with your post so kudos to you :)

  53. Darryl Mason
    21 Jun 12
    4:07 pm

  54. RBall said: “Dead right, Chris Mitchell. Journos are not PRs and PRs are not journos. Period.”

    And have you seen the Murdch papers today pumping the hell out of its paywalled future, off the back of massive editorial staff cuts? Pure PR, some of it written by journalists now terrified for their jobs.

    The most remarkable thing is in a future where PR industry sourced stories make up most of a Fairfax or News Limited ‘news’ site, they will be expecting you to pay to read cut-and-pasted PR industry releases..

    Has a PR flack ever spoken as honestly as Tina Alldis does above?

    She details the thinking of many in PR across Australia, Europe, UK, US, but she will cop all the abuse and anger for telling the truth. The PR industry is happy, they are rejoicing.

  55. Mel Campbell
    21 Jun 12
    4:10 pm

  56. Guys guys – I think you’re being unnecessarily harsh here. Tina is just generating genuinely sharable content that is truly born out of genuinely creative insights! As a journo, and one of the many birds hit by her stone, I am completely up for her challenge of helping mUmbrella drive viewership of this article, and I’m more than happy to challenge Tina for her role.

  57. Juha
    21 Jun 12
    4:14 pm

  58. Why bother with dying, journo-infested media at all if you’re in PR? Social media and blogs make it much easier to get your key messages out there, uncontested and unmolested. Qantas will attest to that.

  59. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    4:14 pm

  60. I proudly work in PR (moderated by Mumbrella)

  61. Janelle
    21 Jun 12
    4:29 pm

  62. Interesting take, albeit not great timing.

    Emotions are high, people are confused and frustrated and the relationship between the media and PR’s is currently even more clouded than usual.

    I studied both PR and Journalism at uni to try to develop an understanding of the two and the beast that is the relationship (or lack of) between.

    What is evident both back then and now, after 7 years in the PR industry, is that we constantly forget how important each one is to the other and that neither party can offer the public truly well rounded information without the others influence and knowledge.

    I don’t think we can call this ‘an exciting time’, as it ignores the fact that for journalists, it is an extremely frightening and difficult time. But I think we can justifiably point out that this may create significant shifts in the way the relationship between the two is played out.

  63. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    4:29 pm

  64. Remind me to immediately bin any PR fluff I get from Mango.

    Companies using this PR agency would be best taking their business elsewhere.

    Way to go Mango.

  65. Cameron
    21 Jun 12
    4:29 pm

  66. In other words more spin less fact to keep Western civilisation hooked on the almighty dollar. Gross sentiments from that innovative industry of Mangos, Peaches, Apples, Bean Sprouts, PEPR and Believe it or not One Green Bean.

  67. Peter
    21 Jun 12
    4:32 pm

  68. (moderated by Mumbrella).

  69. Simon
    21 Jun 12
    4:39 pm

  70. Oops. I know for a fact this has been shared around Fairfax and News Limited newsrooms and the general consensus is “screw Mango, we won’t work with them.”

    Not very good brand management.

  71. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    4:41 pm

  72. Back on the Gina Rhinehart comment – Anon 19 – do journos really believe boards aren’t involved in what happens in TV land or print land or radio land? Are you kidding – if someone ‘loves’ a particular talent, yet they are awful to work with, need several producers and management want to get rid of them, one call from a board member and they stay – possibly on more money…this happens right now and has for many years. Packer used to call the 9 newsroom and pull stories all the time….please…..

  73. Marie
    21 Jun 12
    4:41 pm

  74. Was it Mango that was complaining to the PRIA and Comms council that consumer PR wasn’t taken seriously??? I WONDER WHY.

    http://mumbrella.com.au/pr-bod.....cies-66064

  75. anon
    21 Jun 12
    4:42 pm

  76. As a PR I am moderated by mumbrella

  77. s
    21 Jun 12
    4:45 pm

  78. You may be able to ‘hit as many birds as possible’, Mango, but how you going to put out this PR disaster..?

  79. Luke
    21 Jun 12
    4:45 pm

  80. This is a hopeless analysis, if anything the fact that mainstream media is going online and will now have to contend with the multitude of online publishers means that the competitive space will get even worse.

    The abundance of online publishers competing for space means PRs will have to contact far more of those outlets to get coverage.

    This is bad news for PRs

  81. andrea kerekes
    21 Jun 12
    4:47 pm

  82. I don’t know where to start other than to say to every journo and client in the country, I apologise on behalf of all the entire community of normal PR people who are collectively sitting around this afternoon in a state of horror after reading this article.

  83. Simon Lloyd
    21 Jun 12
    4:48 pm

  84. This has to be the most ill-conceived piece about PR I have ever read.

    Is it really any wonder our industry is viewed with such malevolence and contempt when people like this are let loose as practitioners in it, and, worse, then anoint themselves as spokespeople for it?

  85. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    4:49 pm

  86. They say that any publicity is good publicity, right? Right? Anybody?

  87. Tina's Fey
    21 Jun 12
    4:50 pm

  88. Little wonder the PR industry is looked upon with such disdain by real journos everywhere. (moderated by mumbrella)

  89. Belinda
    21 Jun 12
    4:51 pm

  90. Wow, there seems to be a lot of simmering resentment for the PR industry out there. Now I know how lawyers, investment bankers and parking police must feel.

  91. Alan
    21 Jun 12
    4:51 pm

  92. Very bad PR by Mango.

  93. Good PR
    21 Jun 12
    4:55 pm

  94. A real shame that the PR industry, an industry responsible for reputation is progressively seeing its own reputation slide. This will continue to result if PR people continue to make silly public comments on behalf of our industry. Looks like your media database and outreach has “fewer” names on it.

  95. Chipotle
    21 Jun 12
    5:08 pm

  96. Predictable PR nonsense.

  97. Amanda
    21 Jun 12
    5:15 pm

  98. This is definitely not the over arching views of PR practitioners.

    Regardless of the authors intention it came across as insensitive and self centered. Surely it’s apart of the writing craft to ensure tone and language carry forward the intent?

  99. Sophie
    21 Jun 12
    5:16 pm

  100. Actually smaller newsrooms mean even less people to read the eleventy billion inane press releases we get sent each week.

  101. Leila
    21 Jun 12
    5:20 pm

  102. Hear, hear, Norelle Feehan, sorry to see the good old days of local news fading before our eyes. And thanks, Mick – but does anyone know the difference between “less” and “fewer” these days? You can’t single Tina out for bad grammar – it’s on both sides of the barbed wire fence.

  103. @stevemcclure_
    21 Jun 12
    5:22 pm

  104. I’m not a journo, or in the PR industry, but Tina, it doesn’t appear that you have a grasp on the real issues of either.

  105. anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    5:23 pm

  106. I am embarrased to be in PR… This does not represent the view of an industry, especially publicists who have developed and nurtured productive relationships with “traditional” media, pre-iPad and pre-digital… Tina, redundancies in publishing does not make it an “exciting time to be in PR”… How insensitive. And you are Head of PR?? Hmmm…

  107. ST
    21 Jun 12
    5:23 pm

  108. Ive been in the pr/media industry for a long time and this piece has just floored me. This kind of thinking is just shallow and embarrassing. Rather than this being an ‘exciting time’ I’m devastated for my journo friends at both fairax and news and genuinely worried about what it all means for media in general. Intelligent, ethical reporting is essential in any progressive society. There are thousands of really great, smart people who will be out of a job, it’s not a win for PR, it’s a loss.

  109. WD
    21 Jun 12
    5:26 pm

  110. Oh dear. T(moderated by Mumbrella)

  111. Lynette Benton
    21 Jun 12
    5:32 pm

  112. I am a reader who appreciates the views of as many journalists as possible. No PR can compensate for the loss of true journalists

  113. SHG
    21 Jun 12
    5:33 pm

  114. You know, (moderated by Mumbrella)

  115. Anonymous PR
    21 Jun 12
    5:38 pm

  116. I work in PR but I’m struggling to see how fewer journalists benefits anyone. In my view the job cuts are a real concern for our democracy as well as the media and PR industries.

    My hope is that a viable model is developed whereby quality journalism is financially viable. I believe most clients of PR companies value the quality press much more than blogs but the current trend seems to be a race towards the bottom.

  117. Debbie
    21 Jun 12
    5:42 pm

  118. (moderated by mumbrella) C’mon Mumbrella – you can do better than publishing this sort of utter rubbish. There are so many (scathing) things I could say but it’s all been said pretty here well already by others. *Rolls eyes*

  119. GC
    21 Jun 12
    5:42 pm

  120. *triple facepalm* Oh man. Our entire agency is mortified.

    Gutted for the people sitting down at their desks today in an uncertain work environment and then having to read that.

  121. Dave
    21 Jun 12
    5:47 pm

  122. Speaking as a working journo, I’ll delete everything that pops into my inbox from Mango PR from now on

  123. Katie
    21 Jun 12
    5:48 pm

  124. Mango PR sucks!

  125. Why I fired my PR agency
    21 Jun 12
    6:11 pm

  126. This got published?

    This is exactly why I dont have PR anymore. I will note in future when I do need a PR agency to NOT go to Mango.

    I really feel for the clients of Mango.

  127. David of Victoria
    21 Jun 12
    6:27 pm

  128. Having worked in PR for many years I’m (moderated by Mumbrella)

  129. Fairfax of the future
    21 Jun 12
    6:29 pm

  130. When Fairfax’s newspapers eventually disappear, I wonder if Tina will regret her words. Tablet apps will only contain quality content produced by the remaining journalists, while the drivel her agency spits out will not get a look in. Will that be “great news” for your clients Tina?

  131. Such and such
    21 Jun 12
    6:50 pm

  132. I already have all of Mango’s soon to be ex-clients on speed dial.

  133. Juha
    21 Jun 12
    6:52 pm

  134. #MangoPR is now on Twitter.

  135. Mortified
    21 Jun 12
    6:53 pm

  136. This what happens when consumer PR people believe that journalism is only a channel, confusing the real role of this function in society. They equate The SMH with Dolly magazine, The Australian with TMZ. No context, no thinking, no sense of how the serious media really works and why it does what it does. Couple that with creative social media buzzwords & brand manger speak (generated by ad agencies, ironically enough) to mask your ignorance and voila, you have this bimbo and her agency. Appalled.

  137. Fairfax of the future
    21 Jun 12
    7:12 pm

  138. After sending Mango an email with my thoughts, it was enlightening to get a call from their Melbourne GM, Elly Hargreaves, apologising for this article. She said it wasn’t authorised and “does not reflect the views of the company at all.”

    I’m prepared to give Mango another chance, (moderated by Mumbrella)

  139. oops!
    21 Jun 12
    7:20 pm

  140. Maybe Tina will be looking for work soon too.

  141. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    7:25 pm

  142. Why did you allow this to be published, Tim? I suspect you knew the reaction it would get. Tina’s comments are terribly misplaced but I think you’ve thrown her to the wolves in the name of chasing clicks. Still, not your job to save her from herself, eh?

  143. Mark M
    21 Jun 12
    7:34 pm

  144. Wow. (Emails link to every client in Aussie). It’s been a long time since I read anything so ignorant and ill conceived.

    Just wow.

  145. Jacob
    21 Jun 12
    7:37 pm

  146. I refuse to believe that PR people are ALL this arrogant and ignorant. It just canna be.

  147. Craig Ashley Russell
    21 Jun 12
    7:38 pm

  148. (moderated by Mumbrella)

  149. Rebekah Brooks
    21 Jun 12
    7:39 pm

  150. Hi I’ve just lost my job on a London tabloid. Can I get a job at Mango please as part of this exciting time for PR??

  151. Fm
    21 Jun 12
    7:40 pm

  152. I endorse everything said by ST. This is naive and embarrassing – a bit like the agency’s name. As a journo turned PR consultant my first reaction was sadness about the loss of jobs and writing resources. I have already started to dread the day when I won’t be able to crack open my broadsheet copy of Granny. Less and fewer of these publicists attempting commentary please and commiserations to all facing uncertainty in Australian newsrooms.

  153. The Internetz
    21 Jun 12
    7:54 pm

  154. An insensitive and harsh article, but Tina is going to be in a world of pain tonight. Tina – Cherish this mistake and learn from it.

    Did Simone approve this byline before it went out?

  155. Julia C
    21 Jun 12
    8:02 pm

  156. I await Mango PR’s Media Release tomorrow (moderated by Mumbrella)

  157. Kate
    21 Jun 12
    8:09 pm

  158. So many papers just cut and paste the press release instead of doing an interview or the like. It’s not journalism anymore. Sad but true.
    (moderated by Mumbrella)

  159. AB
    21 Jun 12
    8:15 pm

  160. I feel confident that no journalist I respect will join your ranks.

  161. PR rocks
    21 Jun 12
    8:19 pm

  162. Journos have never had any problem picking over the bones of other professions facing trouble in the interests of a story or headline.. When the shoe is on the other foot they all start sooking like children. They all need to grow and accept the standards they apply to others will be applied to them.. Go Tina, having an opinion is not a crime, if you worked for a newspaper and offended this many people they’d give you an award and a column..

  163. Phil
    21 Jun 12
    8:26 pm

  164. Reading through the comments, its sad to see people slagging off MangoPR. Any person especially journo’s who are worth their weight in gold knows any opinion piece is entirely that, an opinion of one person. (moderated by Mumbrella)

    It is a shame that many journo’s futures are in limbo and I wish them all the best, as we all know journalism is a career of passion rather than “just a job”. I hope that any journalist that reads Tina’s “opinion” and my “opinion” understands that it is just that, an opinion.

    For reference I have no association to MangoPR or any PR, marketing or advertising agency, just an avid reader.

    I agree with The Internetz (comment 79).

    A very harsh lesson – but pick yourself up Tina and move on.

    Makes me think of the days when we could say ‘Todays mistake is tomorrows fish & chip wrapping’.

    Not so simple anymore – and actually quite ironic this week.

  165. Craig Ashley Russell
    21 Jun 12
    8:33 pm

  166. I wonder if the brand, comms and/or marketing managers of Telstra, Everready, Arnotts, Energizer, Kettle Chips, Tourism Australia, Unilever, Continental, Nutrimetics (and wow, the woman who founded Nutrimetics is seriously tough), Pokerstars.net, VW, McDonald’s, Mars, Tetley, Whirlpool, Michelin, Maytag and the token charity Ronald McDonald House, would care to comment on their PR agency’s stance?

    Or are you all too busy reviewing the termination clause of your contracts with Mango?

  167. PR Doctor
    21 Jun 12
    8:37 pm

  168. (moderated by mumbrella)

  169. anon
    21 Jun 12
    8:40 pm

  170. (moderated by mumbrella)

  171. Cameron
    21 Jun 12
    8:41 pm

  172. (moderated by Mumbrella).

  173. Fiona
    21 Jun 12
    8:44 pm

  174. I’m a Fairfax journo and I hope I still will be in three months’ time. Tina’s piece was poorly written and badly thought-out, but I can’t see the point of monstering someone for this. Yes, it was silly and, no doubt, an embarrassment, but instruction is better than abuse.
    A bit of compassion all round wouldn’t go astray.

  175. Anon
    21 Jun 12
    8:49 pm

  176. Head of publicity? Good job girl.

  177. Davy Brones
    21 Jun 12
    8:59 pm

  178. (moderated by Mumbrella).

  179. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    9:04 pm

  180. When did we start calling ourselves PRs?

  181. Heather
    21 Jun 12
    9:14 pm

  182. Wow! I work in PR and I do not agree with you Tina. The changes are scary and upsetting and your post is insensitive.

  183. Darryl Mason
    21 Jun 12
    9:17 pm

  184. Sounds like her words cut to the bone of both journalists and PRers.

  185. Fabfour
    21 Jun 12
    9:48 pm

  186. Jeez … (moderated by Mumbrella)

  187. Therese
    21 Jun 12
    9:54 pm

  188. Yes, the article was poorly written and insensitive, but c’mon. This is starting to become unnecesarily mean-spirited. I’ve worked in PR, media and marketing and it’s not like this is the first stupid choice made by an individual in any of these areas. Certainly won’t be the last.

  189. Hang on
    21 Jun 12
    10:02 pm

  190. At First I was dumbstruck by this piece. Then I re read it and actually Tina never says its “good news”- that’s just in the intro. Most of the outage is from people who have only read the first paragraph and got all worked up to make themselves look better.
    I don’t think the timing is right, but she does obviously care about the industry and is trying to think about what this means for PRs.

  191. John Bastick
    21 Jun 12
    10:09 pm

  192. Have worked as a journalist for nigh on 20 years. Edited FHM for eight years. Have written for The Oz, SMH, Tele, Rolling Stone, Men’s Style, Ralph, Men’s Health, Cleo, too many websites to count. Have never once read, used or published a press release. Never will.

  193. Peter
    21 Jun 12
    10:11 pm

  194. I’m still laughing out loud at comment 77, Rebekah Brooks! Says it all really!
    But yeah, I shudder at the thought of our new media landscape.

  195. Mel
    21 Jun 12
    10:14 pm

  196. There’ll be “fewer” journalists, not “less” and the journos who remain will be busier; too busy to take calls asking if they received a press release, too busy to make small talk with someone whose name they can’t remember, too busy to deal with talk of pointless embargoes and useless interviews unrelated to their rounds, and too busy to deal with agencies who treat the redundancies of their colleagues and friends as a challenge to be embraced and enjoyed. Got it?

  197. X19
    21 Jun 12
    10:19 pm

  198. I’d hate to be Tina right now.

    And did I read a comment about Roxy Jacenko being a good PR!?

  199. Martin P
    21 Jun 12
    10:20 pm

  200. Hey Tim, Seems part of this issue is about the relationship between editors and the PR consultants that pitch story ideas to them. So, in the interest of clarity and context, why don’t you tell us how Tina came to pitch this story to you (or perhaps you commissioned it?) and how you judged the news value in her contribution and decided to publish it?You perhaps formed some views about her insights and cleverness or suspected it might generate some discussion regardless of the accuracy or tone of her analysis. I suspect Tina excitedly told her colleagues her contribution had been accepted by Mumbrella and she was looking forward to showing her bosses how she was being “active in the industry and media landscape” while raising (in a positive way) the profile of Mango. So enlighten us Tim. How did it come about and how did you judge it?

  201. Sal
    21 Jun 12
    10:24 pm

  202. (moderated by Mumbrella).

  203. Simon
    21 Jun 12
    10:25 pm

  204. Truly sorry? Take this drivel down.

  205. Phil Dobbie
    21 Jun 12
    10:27 pm

  206. Come on. When will newspapers stop being so awkward and just handover the passwords to their content management systems.

  207. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    10:30 pm

  208. Yikes. We all make mistakes but this is a howler. Will Tina still be able to tick “write thought leadership article” off her KPI list?

  209. Journos everywhere
    21 Jun 12
    10:34 pm

  210. Ah, a release from MangoPR has just arrived. Wonder what it says? Hang on, no I don’t. Spike!

  211. Hello Mango!
    21 Jun 12
    10:43 pm

  212. Hello Mango MD Simone Drewry. Did you get to see this before it was sent out? I suspect you might have! I have not a drop of evidence to prove this of course but you know…………. I hope you haven’t hung poor Tina out to dry.

  213. Anon
    21 Jun 12
    10:47 pm

  214. This is Tina’s opinion on how changes to the Australian media landscape may affect publicity strategies…

    Yes, this may appear insensitive but the purpose of this piece was not to detail the devastating redundancies.

    However, personal comments on this opinion piece about Tina’s career and her employer are insensitive.

  215. ex PR dude
    21 Jun 12
    11:15 pm

  216. Many, many years ago on my first day working at a PR agency my boss (incidentally an ex senior journalist) said to me: “Public relations is not the same as publicity”.

    Seems pertinent to this discussion.

  217. Ash Nallawalla
    21 Jun 12
    11:15 pm

  218. If ~2000 journos are downsized, life for PRs will be worse, not better. There will be fewer print journos to court by surviving agencies and fewer online publications with a significant readership. I expect more online fragmentation to occur if some of these journos decide to band together and start their own portals.

  219. Oscar Jones
    21 Jun 12
    11:16 pm

  220. I’ve worked in PR in the UK and USA and I find Aussie PRS the most clueless lot full of attitude.

    It says something that when publicizing a product or person it’s twice as easy in markets like New York or London. Of course the best PRs are the naturals and not the ones who get some weird degree in marketing.

    the big mistake I’ve found with Australian PRs is that they do not think beyond the current publications. They think when someone gets the sack (so common in the media) that person will not emerge again. Yet they always rise and in the meantime, a swathe of PRs have created an enemy for themselves after dropping that hack from their list.

    And that probably explains something I’ve never really seen elsewhere-the amazing number of publicists, PR firms that are dropped by their clients.

  221. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    11:17 pm

  222. I have the weirdest boner right now

  223. Hernán Cattáneo
    21 Jun 12
    11:18 pm

  224. God you journos are a precious bunch. Tina isn’t the one that ruined your careers, progress did.

    Why do you have to try and make out like what she’s written is so heinous that she deserves to be fired for it?

    The key message here is that PR people need to adapt to new media. It’s not a new idea and there’s no need for vitriol just because your employers aren’t reflexive enough to cope with change.

  225. Amy
    21 Jun 12
    11:26 pm

  226. (Moderated by Mumbrella)

  227. Anonymous
    21 Jun 12
    11:34 pm

  228. So when Journos attack the public, celebs and sportsmen that’s ok. BUT Don’t YOU DARE do it to us

  229. Aidan
    21 Jun 12
    11:35 pm

  230. (moderated by mumbrella)

  231. Rina Ginehart
    21 Jun 12
    11:59 pm

  232. Someone get me that girls contact details … I’ll have an editor’s job available for her soon.

  233. Lisa
    22 Jun 12
    12:05 am

  234. Wow, it looks like everybody on here needed a punching bag. Talk about a soft target. The real issue here is that everyone is upset about the Fairfax and News Limited shake-up. Period. In that case, perhaps you should be sending your emails and comments to the people who are actually responsible for this situation. Then again, that would be every single one of you considering you are reading and interacting with online news sites and blogs like mumbrella: as it is online media that has unfortunately helped lead to the slow demise of traditional print media (which has been coming for a long time if you hadn’t noticed.). Actually, here’s an idea, write a letter to the Editor to be published in a print edition and help the journos keep their jobs. Or, like the article’s author, try and look at the new opportunities this will present – as, what else can be done?

  235. Don
    22 Jun 12
    12:07 am

  236. What a putrid, unfeeling way to look at the current media landscape. No one does better out of this.

  237. Lisa
    22 Jun 12
    12:09 am

  238. Wow, it looks like everybody on here needed a punching bag. Talk about a soft target. The real issue here is that everyone is upset about the Fairfax and News Limited shake-up. Period. In that case, perhaps you should be sending your emails and comments to the people who are actually responsible for this situation. Then again, that would be every single one of you considering you are reading and interacting with online news sites and blogs like mumbrella: as it is online media that has unfortunately helped lead to the slow demise of traditional print media (which has been coming for a long time if you hadn’t noticed). Actually, here’s an idea, write a letter to the Editor to be published in a print edition and help the journos keep their jobs. Or, like the article’s author, try and look at the new opportunities this will present – as, what else can be done?

  239. Brett de Hoedt
    22 Jun 12
    12:30 am

  240. My thoughts as a former and oft-sacked journo and publicist can be found here: http://www.hootville.com/a-ver.....ney-office

  241. Leith Phillips
    22 Jun 12
    1:08 am

  242. (moderated by Mumbrella)

  243. Barb
    22 Jun 12
    5:28 am

  244. One of the changes at News was to remove the international news team as the national news team already does the same job. There are valid reasons for the restructure. Some logical and some that we all question. Rather than criticise Tina, why not discuss the actual news we’ve all learned this week (& speak to the journos affected who are in 2 minds with some thinking that News is playing “catch up ). It’s okay to disagree but some of the comments on here are unintelligent & abusive.
    Tim – can we have intelligent debate here rather than abuse?!
    I think it was smart of Mango’s Tina to discuss the impact on the PR industry. Op-eds are thought provoking & timed with current affairs. Maybe other PRs are jealous they didn’t think of writing one themselves?!

  245. Shoot the messenger
    22 Jun 12
    6:19 am

  246. I think we’re all in agreement that this article was in poor taste, but how did the thing get out the door ? Head of publicity or not, if you’re sharing your opinion on the biggest issue to hit your industry since the dawn of time, on the main industry website, surely another pair of eyes would have reviewed it? What’s the go Mango? Did someone else at the agency look at it? I know we all have our own opinions but given the platform and the topic somebody should have reviewed it. I don’t know Tina but I do feel she’s been fed to the wolves a bit by her agency here…

  247. Emma
    22 Jun 12
    6:53 am

  248. Why do journalists think they are better than PR professionals? You certainly love us when we give you an exclusive on topics that meet your approval. As journalists you get people to trust you so that one day you can betray them and yourself (GW magazine, ‘Secret Life of Us’, pg 31). Tina you came across as a ‘bottom feeder’ but so too do many journalists, many days of the week.

  249. mumbrella
    22 Jun 12
    7:14 am

  250. Hi Martin P,

    Most comment posts are pitched to us. This was one of those.

    As is our usual practice, I wrote the headline and standfirst.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella

  251. Craig
    22 Jun 12
    8:02 am

  252. Ironic – I wrote a post arguing the reverse based on the impact of paywalls, focused on the impact on government communications, arguing that it will force more organisations to become media owners, not just content providers – http://egovau.blogspot.com.au/.....-mean.html

    The decisions being taken by Fairfax and News devalue masthead sites in the long-run.

    It is a classic situation where the profit goals of media organisations run counter to the communication goals of their clients, not to mention involves ‘sacking’ many of their readers.

  253. Dani
    22 Jun 12
    8:11 am

  254. I love the fellow who has generalised that every PR person in Australia is a dufus. Jeeeeez…. Some of us are good at what we do, respected by our journalist peers and conscious of good PR etiquette. Do not brandish us all with the same brush, please and thank you.

  255. Michael Byrne
    22 Jun 12
    8:12 am

  256. What a bag of crushed fruit is Mango.

    We all know the market-capitalist system eats its own on its march onwards.
    Indeed journalists feed off its product.

    And so as the journo’s come into the immediate food chain they squeal about a story of some insight that sees one capitalist corpus about to take advantage, or be under threat, of the corporeal discards of another.

    Of concern to me is the emo that flows in contemporary discourse.. life is good..life can be tough.. get on with it..

    Cheers

    http://www.localforlife.com.au

  257. Ian
    22 Jun 12
    8:13 am

  258. I am not in PR or am I a Journalist. I am one of the public. I can’t tell you how happy I am at seeing the prospect of dozens of unemployed journalists.

  259. Ingmar
    22 Jun 12
    8:18 am

  260. Tina’s a writer?

    Awful thoughts, appallingly written.
    Born out of…’ etc; give me a break.

  261. A journalist
    22 Jun 12
    8:27 am

  262. Just thought I’d pipe up to say I’ve been forwarded internal emails from PRs in another prominent firm who said more or less the same thing. They just didn’t say it publicly. I’m not sure such attitudes are unique to Mango.

  263. Patrick
    22 Jun 12
    8:35 am

  264. Dear Emma (127),

    Journalists think they are better than PR because they deal in facts.

  265. Sam de Brito
    22 Jun 12
    8:39 am

  266. That went well.

  267. Jose
    22 Jun 12
    8:43 am

  268. Wow … the journos are really quick to call out the PR b*llshit when it’s directed at them. Pity about the rest of the time.

  269. Wow
    22 Jun 12
    9:04 am

  270. More comments now than an anti LAFHA story?

  271. Professional
    22 Jun 12
    9:11 am

  272. I really wish “PRs” would stop referring to themselves as “PRs”. You are not a “Public Relations”. You might be a Professional, a Publicist, an Account Director or something of the like, but you are not a “PR”. That being said, you also cannot “PR” something; the lack of respect for the English language does not help our cause (journalists already hate us, the least you could do is learn to speak their language).

  273. Cassandra
    22 Jun 12
    9:16 am

  274. Ian (132)

    Why say such a thing?

  275. lisa
    22 Jun 12
    9:19 am

  276. It is all made up anyway by journo or PR people anyway

    The less middle people the better – so we get to facts quicker

    How believes what they read in the papers anyway!

  277. Anonymous
    22 Jun 12
    9:21 am

  278. (moderated by mumbrella)

  279. Anonymous
    22 Jun 12
    9:29 am

  280. Could not agree with comment 139 more!

  281. AMc
    22 Jun 12
    9:30 am

  282. I’m in PR and I pride myself on creating relevant content, providing real thought leadership, contributing to the conversation and maintaining valuable relationships with members of the various media. I don’t see this contact as “harassment”; just two entities maintaining a dialogue for the benefit of a wider audience.

    However, the comments from Tina I do agree with relate to the need for PR to refine their content to suit the medium.

    All in all, I don’t think this is a bad OPINION piece- even though it’s perhaps ill timed under the circumstances.

  283. Jim Ward
    22 Jun 12
    9:41 am

  284. Wow.. just stumbled across this post and thought it was an interesting opinion piece. Then I see the public apology from the Mango MD, followed by Tina herself who also apologises, no doubt humiliated in public. Then I see the 100+ flaming comments attacking Tina.

    Gotta tell you, I didn’t read this and think its insensitive. I thought she’s making a good point that PR needs to be able to adapt to the changing media landscape.

    In fact the first 80% of the article talks about just that. Its only at the end she mentions the looming pressures on newsrooms due to cuts made by Fairfax and the impending cuts at News. Is that really “insensitive”?

    She’s not laying the boot into anyone, or “bayonetting the wounded” as someone said above. I’ve read other opinion pieces which have belittled Fairfax journos by alleging the lowering of journalistic standards over the years as a prime reason why papers don’t sell as much anymore. That’s what I’d call laying the boot in.

    Tina’s just stating the facts of what’s happening, not dancing on anyone’s grave. get a grip you sensitive people. Since when was there a law that said you cant talk about an industry or its outlook because some people have been made redundant? What tosh. The changing media landscape is very topical, and if we’re not allowed to talk about the implications, then we’re living in a nanny state.

    As far as i can tell the article is trying to look forward.. with less journos, things will change and she’s putting forward a point of view of what will happen. Whether you agree or not with her point of view is a different matter. But to flame her down gutlessly and anonymously like so many have above is pathetic. Not one of you have put forward a rebuttal or alternate point of view.

    Its just so sickening… like an online version of a lynch mob.

  285. Fiona
    22 Jun 12
    9:44 am

  286. For heaven’s sake, posts on here remind me of a pack of schoolyard bullies. If someone says something silly at a BBQ, do you turn on them and savage them are do many of you are here? No, you’d either ignore it. Or attempt to show them the errors in their thinking. Why should your behavior be different online?
    I’m a Fairfax journalist and it may be my job on the line, but I’m appalled at the lack of civility shown here.
    Words have power.

  287. bob is a rabbit
    22 Jun 12
    9:51 am

  288. moderated by Mumbrella.

  289. Jack Dalton
    22 Jun 12
    9:53 am

  290. Is that the thunder of feet I hear in the distance as current and potential clients of Mango Sydney flee for the exits. (moderated by mumbrella) What client would risk hiring your company now. Any call to media would be greeted by the crash of someone slamming the phone down.

  291. Ern Malley
    22 Jun 12
    9:56 am

  292. Campbell McComas was much funnier at this sort of thing.

  293. Mark - Ross Davie Advertising
    22 Jun 12
    10:00 am

  294. I started writing a comment to defend Tina, but I just cant without saying that clearly the sacked Journalists are not “excited” about the effects on the PR industry or advertising or… any OTHER industry. Very self indulgent to write an article about how their loss of a job affects you. So, that being said, I can understand journos being angry with these comments, but the rival PR companies and individuals who are questioning the agency and its clients (some anonymously) should get back to their day job.

  295. Sydney Journalist
    22 Jun 12
    10:02 am

  296. Absolutely stunned by the reaction from Mango MD Simone Drewry. Your explanation is that Mango washes its hands of this Tina incident, yet we’d all find it pretty hard to believe that either you or someone else high up DID NOT READ or APPROVE this before it was published.
    How about taking some responsibility for your AGENCY and apologising on behalf of Mango, instead of making Tina your scapegoat.
    If I was shopping around for a PR firm right now, I’d avoid Mango simply because the person who runs it lacks INTEGRITY and is quick to point blame at an employee instead of accept the wrong on behalf of the agency.
    Just appalling behaviour.

  297. James Doakes
    22 Jun 12
    10:07 am

  298. Agreed, some people seem (sadly) really happy about Tina getting into strife over her opinion. Day job? They should get back to their troll caves.

  299. Felicity
    22 Jun 12
    10:38 am

  300. Hi Mumbrella,

    You can drop my 11.22pm comment about Simone’s spelling.

    Her spelling of “consumate” was miraculously changed to “consummate”.

    Nice work.

  301. archie
    22 Jun 12
    10:39 am

  302. had to laugh at the journo who declared that they are better than PRs because they’re concerned with “facts”

    if that’s the case why do newspapers have PR heads?

    truth is relative

    opinions are often presented as facts

    journalists are usually biased and frame the debate accordingly

    newspapers are businesses with the aim of securing eyeballs

    it’s the courts’ job to find the truth

  303. archie
    22 Jun 12
    10:44 am

  304. oh, and everyone knows Tim generally doesn’t like PRs unless you’re Stuart McGregor so probably had a wee chuckle to himself as he took Tina’s ball and ran with it in the opening precis: Tina Alldis argues that the restructure of Fairfax and News Limited is good news for PR agencies

  305. libby
    22 Jun 12
    10:56 am

  306. moderated by mumbrella

  307. mumbrella
    22 Jun 12
    10:56 am

  308. Hi Felicity,

    The typo was my bad.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella

  309. Col Inchez
    22 Jun 12
    10:59 am

  310. Are all mangoes soft inside?

  311. Really?
    22 Jun 12
    11:07 am

  312. Tina never directly links “less journos” as “good for clients” or “good for PR”. They’re separate lines, separate paragraphs. The headline and byline was added by Mumbrella, so all those on the bandwagon, get your facts and your quotes correct
    On that note, for those grammatical do-gooders who are repeating one person’s original comment with regards to the use of fewer instead of less…what about the other key-stone of writing: context? It appears you have all taken it out of context!! Oops!

  313. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    11:09 am

  314. The problem I have with this article, as a journalist, is that it just kicks the crap our of 2000-3000 people in the media industry who have lost their jobs.

    People are making comments with the essence of “Oh, journos belittle and have a go at people and are insensitive, but when the shoe is on the other foot, boy do they get precious”. In other words,: “It is only journalists losing their jobs”.

    But what the people making these types of comments need to remember is that not every person caught up in the job losses and media shakeup is a journalist. There are printers, distribution people will be effected, sales people, and a multitude of others involved in the industry.

    In fact, non-journos would be the majority of people being affected and losing jobs.

    So if people behind various comments here don’t care so much because it is “only journalists”, think again … maybe you all need to reassess your thoughts and prejudices.

    The people who lay out the paper, who help print it, who distribute it, or who help sell and ad or three – have they ever written a story to annoy you? No. But they’re losing their jobs as well.

    Personally, I find this article unbelievably insensitive to all of those losing their jobs. If I, as a journalist, wrote an article kicking the PR industry as it shed thousands of jobs and only looked at the issue from a “How this will help journalism” angle, I’d be rightly condemned.

    Yet this is what Tina from Mango has done here, and its OK because “they’re only journos”? No – its wrong, thoughtless and insensitive.

    As a side point – I can’t believe Mango’s leadership would allow this to be published without first checking over it, vetting it and ensuring it was well written and conveyed its points well. Not a great effort there.

  315. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    11:10 am

  316. Apols for the couple of typos above as well.

  317. Sydney Editor
    22 Jun 12
    11:19 am

  318. Simone Drewry wants to “build bridges”?

    Build this. (edited by Mumbrella)

  319. Bob
    22 Jun 12
    11:23 am

  320. Hi Simone,

    I read your apology and although it was well-crafted and sounded genuine there is only one solution: (moderated by Mumbrella)

  321. Tony Healy
    22 Jun 12
    11:26 am

  322. Tim, what’s the point of allowing a discussion to generate into nasty personal attacks? It’s cheap.

    I suspect the arguments Alldis presents are pretty common in PR land, which is why Alldis didn’t realise they would be controversial.

  323. red
    22 Jun 12
    11:29 am

  324. I’ve been a journo and a PR practitioner (yes, it is possible to switch from one to the other and prove yourself as both). I think the criticism Tina has copped was fair in essence, but seriously over the top in execution.

    Hands up everyone who has never screwed up, never made an error of judgement, never said something dumb before realising how off-base it was. What? No hands?

    Yes, she screwed up. She’s sorry. She’s also (as far as I can tell) pretty young. Give her a break.

  325. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    11:47 am

  326. Really (comment 159) – I disagree.

    Tina’s article is built on the premise of how the shake-up at Fairfax and News may benefit the PR industry and its clients.

    Given that a key part of that shakeup is thousands of job losses – something Tina herself acknowledges in her piece – I think it is entirely fair that there is criticism of the article on the basis that she is looking at what is a dreadful time in one industry and simply analysing how it could benefit her own industry and its clients.

    I do believe this is, at the very least, very badly thought out and poorly articulated, and at worst, highly insensitive to those who are to lose their jobs, their families and those that rely on them for wages.

    As I wrote in my earlier comment – if I as a journalist came out and wrote an article which looked at how journalism and the media would benefit from a shakeup in the PR industry where thousands of jobs were to be lost, I’d have no doubt it would be tagged as insensitive and perhaps even labelled “dancing on the graves” of those who were to lose their jobs.

    Yet what Tina has done is exactly this, but in reverse. The article’s entire premise and theme ought to be condemned on that basis.

  327. Isabelle
    22 Jun 12
    11:48 am

  328. Hate to break it to all the journos out there, outraged at their job losses. But where was the sufficient coverage of the Alcoa and Qantas, and other manufacturing jobs? It seems there is much more outrage about Fairfax and News Ltd than any other blue collar worker jobs. This once again proves that the media controls the message, and that journalists write more about the shock and horror of their job losses and not any one elses. Yes, the media is important to the fabric and quality of our political and national affairs, but don’t we think everyone’s getting a bit insensitive about this article, which merely is an opinion expressed by someone who, in their line of work, becomes frustrated with the limited nature and interest of journalists in publishing work of their client’s if it doens’t float their boat?

  329. Nicky
    22 Jun 12
    11:53 am

  330. As a PR, I was embarrassed reading this piece. No one should celebrate in any way when jobs are lost – least not journalist positions, who all PRs should have a lot a respect for. Talk about not tailoring messages to audiences….

    However I do feel for Tina and the lack of support from her bosses at Mango. Surely someone approved this before it went to Mumbrella?!

  331. Another old hack
    22 Jun 12
    11:54 am

  332. Moderated by Mumbrella.

  333. BJ
    22 Jun 12
    11:55 am

  334. Those complaining about Tina’s article are acting like princesses. Grow some. It wasn’t THAT insensitive that it requires apology or retraction. Talk about an overreaction.

  335. @Bob
    22 Jun 12
    11:56 am

  336. Someone has a vendetta?

  337. Sarah
    22 Jun 12
    11:56 am

  338. Guess not so many ‘likes’ on the ol’ Mango PR facebook page now! It was a very silly, insensitive article and the agency will certainly lose work over this so no need to flame this woman – she’ll be feeling the professional ramifications of this for a very long time!

  339. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    11:58 am

  340. Isabelle (comment 167) – The media has provided, and does provide, plenty of coverage to those mass job losses of which you write. And that includes media of all types – TV, radio and print – as well as at all levels – local publications, state and national outlets.

    My question would, again, be – did the media in its coverage of, say, job losses at Qantas or Alcoa, offer up comment on how those job losses would benefit their own industry, or even other industries?

    No. The coverage looked at the impacts of the job losses and perhaps some of the reasons why, as well as what involved parties were trying to do in terms of taking action.

    Tina’s story above is built on the premise of how the changes and job losses at Fairfax and News may benefit the PR industry and its clients.

    That is the key difference, and that is why it is insensitive.

  341. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    12:02 pm

  342. And again Isabelle – it isn’t just journos losing their jobs.

    If you don’t like journalists, fine. But remember that there are others who are involved in the industry, but who are not journalists, that are going to be hurt by the changes.

  343. Dani
    22 Jun 12
    12:02 pm

  344. *face palm*

    I’m due to start an internship at Mango in about a month and now I’m not so sure if that will be the best idea!

  345. Advocate of involvement
    22 Jun 12
    12:11 pm

  346. Ladies (and the few gents weighing in) please put your claws away. Very contentious issue and a bit much positive spin administered by a practitioner who, I imagine is usually engaged in the positive amplification of brand work. Maybe not quite the right person selected for a column on this issue but I admire Mango (for the record I’m a competitor and used to work for them years ago) and I feel for Simone’s team and any journalists offended at what must be a very difficult time. But please, can we not get into the slagging off of the whole PR industry. There is a vast array of skill sets and areas of expertise in our industry an the opinion of one Mango employee is just that. I also suspect our papers might look a little empty if media releases suddenly stopped flying into inboxes.

  347. From Facebook
    22 Jun 12
    12:13 pm

  348. “Mango PR shared a link.
    13 hours ago
    Mango PR is recruiting! We are looking for a fabulous, super-organised and enthusiastic PR assistant to make sure everything runs smoothly – a perfect role for anyone looking for a start in PR.”

  349. Woody
    22 Jun 12
    12:16 pm

  350. Mango – an overpriced, overrated, sickly fruit that can only thrive in a warm, damp spot, kinda like a fungus. Perhaps Mango should change its name to Tinea? It’s easily as irritating.

  351. Guest
    22 Jun 12
    12:17 pm

  352. Lighten up guys. Journos take potshots at people of all kinds on a day-to-day basis with little thought of ramifications. This is minor and lightweight in comparison.

  353. Fiona
    22 Jun 12
    12:22 pm

  354. Dani, what a wonderful opportunity to view crisis management first hand. You’d be mad if you didn’t do it. It is at times like this that good pr operatives can really earn their stripes by turning it around .
    Calm down Please everyone else. Tina won’t and shouldn’t lose her job and the agency won’t lose any business that wasn’t going to walk anyway.
    I rarely have the time to talk to agency prs, there’s probably less than five that I’d even recognise. But if Tina called me, I’d give her more than a fair hearing because I really dislike bullying.
    She had every right to try to analyse how her company could make this industry disruption work for, rather than against, them. Her problem was that her analysis wasn’t very good or well-written. I suspect she is young, somewhat inexperienced, and she probably dashed the column off in a nanosecond with not enough thought.

  355. Isabelle
    22 Jun 12
    12:32 pm

  356. Sure, Chirs, you make valid points about the insensitivity of this article, but i do wonder where the voices of the manufacturing workers in the news facing job losses are in all this online comment and angst?
    It seems a lot of journos are peddling this story, but most of the losses will come from behind the scenes, am I right? Since the story goes that print journalism has been on the decline for many years, the people most at risk are the ones who can’t write and who aren’t engaging online.
    I don’t not like journalists, I am however, concerned on a general level on what all these losses will mean for Australians. I merely have an objection to the loudest voices being the media. Go figure.

  357. Isabelle
    22 Jun 12
    12:35 pm

  358. Also, i worry most that the people in the print side will not be able to find jobs elsewhere, but the media industry side of things will always land on their feet

  359. Mindy Laube
    22 Jun 12
    12:38 pm

  360. As an online section editor at Fairfax – Life and Style – I feel compelled to refute the entire premise of this article. Tina is correct about one thing and one thing only – yes, I am harrassed by PRs all day, every day – fair enough, that’s their job – but the number of stories that are generated from press releases in my section is negligible – in five years, I would have run no more than five stories based on information that came to light via a press release and NEVER, would anyone in this company run a story pre-written by a PR or publicist. I’m fascinated to know who Tina is working with in the media industry because it’s not me or any of my immediate colleagues. And I fail to see how fewer journalists (and presumably fewer outlets for PRs) could possibly benefit the publicity and marketing industries. If anything, the inevitable reduction in media content that will result from lay-offs at Fairfax and News Ltd can only translate into fewer opportunities for PRs to generate stories. Fewer Motoring and Drive articles nationally means greater competition for coverage of new car model releases, for example. The same holds true for all aspects of media coverage. However, Tina’s offer of job placement for newly unemployed journalists is, I’m sure, deeply appreciated by those facing the axe. I expect she’ll be getting a few calls. I can only hope she’s willing to carry through on the promise.

  361. Joanne
    22 Jun 12
    12:40 pm

  362. As a PR agency Principal and former Fairfax Journalist I apologise on Tina’s behalf to all journalists – those in work and those aspiring to join the profession. At Icon we respect our peers across the communications industry and understand the importance of a healthy, diverse media. Tina’s simplistic view of journalism (and PR for that matter) simply underscores the difference between the ‘old’ PR paradigm characterised by Mango et al and the new. Get with the program.

  363. U What?
    22 Jun 12
    12:42 pm

  364. And there is me reading this article concerning ‘PR”, thinking it was all about Permanent Residency..?

    Public Relations – ah ha! Or are we referring to Press Release? Oh blimey this is confusing?

    “As a PR” – what does that mean? As a Press Release? As a Public Relations? H’mmm neither make sense?

    Poor girl; surely you would not place your professional badge next to an article about such a topic, without getting it vetted by your office first…………. ;)

  365. Andrew Hamilron
    22 Jun 12
    12:48 pm

  366. The saddest thing about this article is the comments.

    What deplorable level of faceless hatred runs through the comms industry.

    Most of you would never have the guts to ever put yourself out there and contribute an opinion piece to the industry but many of you are quite willing to crucify her for contemplating with poor timed optimism the future of the PR industry instead of engaging in a productive discussion about the uncertain time ahead.

    It’s hard to go through Mumbrella articles without finding unproductive criticism at every turn. What a shame.

  367. Kate
    22 Jun 12
    1:06 pm

  368. @Sydney Editor – Comment #162 -Your comment is both sexist and disgusting. I pity the women who work with you.

  369. Tom
    22 Jun 12
    1:10 pm

  370. She is only telling the truth. The entire PR industry is built on agencies making vast misrepresentations (read “genuinely shareable content”) to clients and charging them through the nose for “work” that widely overstated.
    As for the PR’s claiming they have higher standards and Tina doesn’t speak for them at least they are good at their jobs – telling untruth’s.
    The vast majority of PR people are grubs.

  371. GC
    22 Jun 12
    1:31 pm

  372. As an ex-journo turned PR, this kind of thing just pisses me off! Way to live up to the PR stereotype that I’m trying to prove wrong every single day.

    (moderated by Mumbrella). Assess each PR you deal with on their merits – some might actually make your life easier.

  373. Journo
    22 Jun 12
    1:45 pm

  374. The irony is that as the free ink market dries up, traditional pr skills will also become redundant… As pr changes into corporate journalism, it’s ex-reporters who will be hired to replace publicists.

  375. Ian
    22 Jun 12
    1:45 pm

  376. [ Ian (132)

    Why say such a thing? ]

    Cassandra@140

    because journalists have lied, obfuscated, blatantly misled the public in so much of our political debate. If they have not done it individually they have stood by, mute, and allowed it to happen.

    This may be a generalisation, but how many journalists can, when looking their children in the eye say ” I’m fighting for the world you need to inherit ” . How many Cassandra?

  377. My Girl Friday
    22 Jun 12
    1:46 pm

  378. Who cares! any redundant journos are welcome to post on my blog – anytime -harden up princesses and Tina , don’t apologise, I enjoyed your piece – Fact is the economy is going so well , as reported by fairfax and news ltd journos so they shouldn’t have any trouble getting work? Right? enjoy lining up at Centrecare-welcome to real world.

  379. Sae
    22 Jun 12
    1:49 pm

  380. Typical lynch mob in the comments section. Well done, internets. Disagreeing with Tina’s remarks is no basis for calling on her to be sacked, unless you’re a troll.

    What, have you guys never gotten upset with what a journalist has written?

  381. Question
    22 Jun 12
    1:52 pm

  382. Just wondering who else was involved in approving this article?
    Surely there was a chain of command and other people within Mango that allowed Tina to send this article?

  383. mumbrella
    22 Jun 12
    1:59 pm

  384. A heads-up that the tone of this is becoming somewhat personal.

    I’m happy to leave this thread open if everyone is willing to stick to the issues, but otherwise may feel it necessary to shut it down to new comments.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella

  385. Lisa OF
    22 Jun 12
    2:02 pm

  386. I actually agree with many of the points Tina has made – unpalatable as they may be to journalists about to get the chop. I do feel sorry for the journalists who stand to lose their jobs. However the writing has been on the wall for a decade and the print media has been very slow to react. They should have started to embrace the digital platforms much much sooner and Fairfax and News have let their employees down by being slow our of the blocks. You only have to be on Twitter to see how many news agencies there are out there already and to see how much content is available from multiple sources. That is why no one advertises in print anymore and why few people read a daily newspaper. So this makes what Tina has said true – journos/PRs/writers generally will have to deliver content for multiple platforms not just one. I see the paradigm as shifting towards journos having many masters, not just one and why would that be a bad thing. Good journos will always get work and the smart ones will be the ones who are quickest to adapt. Don’t shoot the messenger.

  387. Steve
    22 Jun 12
    2:15 pm

  388. (moderated by Mumbrella)

  389. Chris
    22 Jun 12
    2:19 pm

  390. Lisa – (comment 196)

    I hate to say it, but many journos in the print industry have KNOWN the writing is, and has been, on the wall for years.

    But the problem is, the journos aren’t the ones holding the pursestrings at Fairfax and News Limited – they aren’t in charge, and they cant affect change.

    I worked at Fairfax for a number of years, and I’ll say right now that my colleagues and I were constantly disappointed that some of the people who ran the organisation were either unable to, or unwilling to, grasp the need for change when they had a chance.

    It has been a decade or so since I left Fairfax’s employee, but many of us journos, editorial staff and advertising staff “on the ground” could see the day of reckoning coming even back then.

    Yet all we heard about from up on high was talk talk talk. There was very little action taken when it could have and should have been.

    Eric Beecher wrote a very enlightening article this week about how members of the Fairfax board were blind to the problems that were growing, and believed that the model that had served them so well would continue to do so. How wrong were they.

    But of course it isn’t the people on the board or the high-ups that will suffer in these cuts. It is of course the people lower down the chain … and most ironically, those who know the lay of the land and saw the problems coming years ago.

    So its all fine for Lisa and others to say that “the print media has been very slow to react”. Yes – indeed it has. But be very aware that those in charge of the companies who have been “very slow to react” won’t be feeling the most pain – it will be those who saw this coming years ago and watched the higher-ups do very little of any great consequence to address the situation.

    The “Cassandras”, as it were.

    In the end, many journalists and others will lose jobs because people higher up the chain of command at print media companies didn’t, or couldn’t, respond to the challenges that were staring them in the face.

    And that isn’t their fault.

  391. Appalled
    22 Jun 12
    2:28 pm

  392. Moderator, why has comment #162 from Sydney Editor not been removed? Not only is it degrading to women, but deeply offensive to human beings generally. Not on. One can only hope that Sydney Editor is one of the journos on the way out. Newsrooms (not to mention wider society) would be better places were plankton like this expunged more often.

  393. mumbrella
    22 Jun 12
    2:30 pm

  394. Hi Appalled,

    Mainly because it went over my head. Now moderated.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella

  395. Appalled
    22 Jun 12
    2:34 pm

  396. Appreciated, thanks

  397. Brett
    22 Jun 12
    2:42 pm

  398. Tina actually makes a few really interesting points – if worded a little clumsily.

    I think this hypersensitive reaction highlights the uncertainty on both sides of the fence about the future of journalism / media and public relations.

    It’s going to be okay. We are the people we’ve been waiting for. H-O-P-E
    Aussie jobs. Aussie jobs. Aussie jobs.

  399. Pity the subordinate
    22 Jun 12
    2:43 pm

  400. Yo Bob (comment 163). (moderated by Mumbrella) / approval systems within the business that SHE heads up, so errors like this can’t happen? If I was a client of Mango, I’d be seriously concerned about what might be going out the door with my name on it that I hadn’t approved, right about now. This is fairly basic processes and systems stuff that a tightly run ship shouldn’t have any issues with.

    Anyway, shouldn’t the captain go down with the sinking ship? Reads a lot like Simone threw the Second Mate overboard, if you ask me.

  401. James
    22 Jun 12
    2:55 pm

  402. @167

    Are you really surprised that Journalists would be writing copy about their own industry turmoil? I’m sure if the Qantas and Alcoa staffers (whos job losses were very well covered) had their own mouthpieces they would have used them too..

  403. Anon
    22 Jun 12
    2:57 pm

  404. Waiting for The Australian to realise they’ve made a typo in the first line of a story attacking Tina and Mango. Journalists aren’t perfect either.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.a.....6405471035

  405. Pissed off PR
    22 Jun 12
    2:59 pm

  406. While I’m deeply concerned by the destructions of journalists’ jobs in newsrooms around the country, I’m equally sick of the near universal PR bashing that goes on daily. To be frank, while there are many brilliant, tireless and ethical journalists out there, there are just as many lazy ones. Especially in the lifestyle, vertical and online media sectors.

    If the PR industry ceased to exist tomorrow, there would be an awful lot of journalists who’d suddenly have to research and write their own stories. Every. Single. Day. Quelle horreur.

  407. Bad Press
    22 Jun 12
    3:00 pm

  408. Journos crying out about the insensitivity of this opinion piece is hypocrisy most breathtaking, and shows how some don’t like the taste of their own medicine.

  409. James
    22 Jun 12
    3:07 pm

  410. @206

    Maybe if they weren’t flooded with constant phone calls, emails, requests for presence at aimless and redundant press conferences, they’d have time to properly go out and research stories.

    Or when they did research stories PR agencies didn’t stonewall them or constantly spin themselves into a frenzy to avoid the real facts getting out.

    Oh, but wait, it’s all the journalists fault.

  411. Pissed off PR
    22 Jun 12
    3:18 pm

  412. James, just once, I’d like to see a journalist publicly thank a PR person for genuinely helping them pull together a good story. It happens every day and you know it. Are you going to say that a PR has never helped you with a story, in a truly positive way?

    There are as many PRs who are a help, as there are those who are a hindrance.

  413. Ben
    22 Jun 12
    3:22 pm

  414. @ian (132), your first sentence was redundant given your spelling and grammar

  415. Jim Ward
    22 Jun 12
    3:27 pm

  416. Oh for the last time people, Tina wasn’t “celebrating” the death of jobs at Fairfax (post 168). Her article, quite clearly, was talking about PR’s future in a very different industry landscape in the future.

    The job cuts at Fairfax are facts, she wasn’t having a dig at anyone or saying journos deserve it or anything like that. She was opining on what this might mean for the PR industry going forward. Not to say I agree with all her predictions, but grow up people!

    The future of the marketing industry is very topical right now with all the changes to the industry happening before our eyes, and we should be having an open debate on what this may mean for our industry. These are certainly interesting times to be in the media industry..

    I’m appalled most of the comments on here are adding nothing intellectual to the debate, and cowardly hide behind anonymity.

  417. @Tim
    22 Jun 12
    3:28 pm

  418. Tim @ Mumbrella:
    Will you apologise to Tina for this poor editing job of an internal document?

  419. Dandy
    22 Jun 12
    3:36 pm

  420. To all the haughty journos out there so disgusted with Tina’s comments….

    1. journos DO venture into the “darkside”. Just look at the last major Fairfax redundancy where news producers and senior journalists put out their grubby greedy mitts for whatever top paying Comms and PR role they could find, leaving those who actually careered their studies and work into such roles, with the dreg roles or the unemployment queue! It will happen again. You’re all deluded or in denial if you think otherwise.

    2. Tina’s grammar is woeful??? Now that many of you will be off work and twiddling their thumbs waiting for the next job to get posted, have a read of the online offerings of your past (or perhaps still present) employers. Comms and PR people have to do it everyday as part of their job and THAT is what is woeful.

    3. TINA is insensitive??? Lordy, lordy the big black pot calling the kettle dark grey!

    4. We should be sensitive to the poor hundreds losing their jobs?? Wow, check out the unemployment queue and while you’re there join the rest of us competing for a decent job. Based on the drivel that we have to read daily, it makes complete justifiable sense to cut back on what is obviously an over-engagement of boringly opinionated “journalists”. Tina is so very right when she surmises that fewer resources will fine tune the “news” feed and hopefully bring us back to solid, well-written news stories, and thankfully less of them.

  421. Ashley
    22 Jun 12
    3:38 pm

  422. I just hope that Tina, reads this response, because to all you out there that think what she said was rude. it wasn’t. it was the truth. I dare any of you to come back to this article in 2 years time, and see if what she is saying isn’t right. Tina has express foresight were none of you have. Although with progress there seems always to be loss of some type. “ending whaling, put out a whole generation out of workers” – “automatic rubbish collection put nearly 2k of people out of work”, but no one at the time stuck up for those workers. Tina, you are right in what you are saying. but people just don’t like liserning to things they don’t won’t to hear.

  423. hunter
    22 Jun 12
    3:39 pm

  424. It’s common knowledge that very few people calling themselves ‘Journalists’ have any concept of ‘Journalistic Integrity’ these days and, a good percentage of any ‘News’ content is simply rehashed prose – mostly proffered by interested parties themselves and offered to the verious News Houses which, invariably, will re-post it with very little editing, alteration or additional, original content. I don’t think we’re going to lose much in the way of ‘quality reporting’ as there has been very little of this for a long time anyway. Sadly, I feel that Tinas opinion is very close to the visceral reality of the industry and indicative of it’s future – whether you want to accept it or not.

  425. theDishwasher
    22 Jun 12
    3:46 pm

  426. gameover news and fairfax jornos your time is up.

    Look at the recent Melbourne #earthquake tweets, people turn to twitter for the news with personality and social, not ‘overhyped’ by the mainstream media.

  427. World of pain
    22 Jun 12
    3:46 pm

  428. Here’s an opinion piece I’d like to submit:

    Why I got out of PR – clients suck & journalists are assholes

  429. Matt
    22 Jun 12
    3:47 pm

  430. I personally think Tina has hit the nail on the head. Print media has been in need of a shake up for a long time, especially with the rise of Digital Media, has thus meant that print media is old news before it even gets to the printer.

    As for timing, while it may not have been the best timing in the world, I thought the whole think of PR was to put spin either positively or negatively on a news story. From a PR perspective a low in Journo jobs IS a positive for certain sections of the media – given that PR is just media as much as Journalism is.

    So in the end PR and Journalism are really just competitors/complimentaries. In the end the amount of outcry over this story puts those doing the outcry to shame. Yes people are losing their jobs – which is never a good thing, however by sheding positions, the company has ensured that it will survive into the future – it also opens up an opportunity for those who will loss their jobs to persue different channels of work opportunities.

  431. Leah
    22 Jun 12
    3:55 pm

  432. To be honest, I don’t see the big problem with this piece. As neither a journalist nor a PR (but a journalism degree graduate), I think Tina is probably right. Yes this is probably a matter of ‘too soon’. And maybe it should have been shared in a staff meeting or PR conference and not on the internet. But I don’t think Tina is taking a “let’s take joy in the fact lots of people are losing their jobs” view, but rather a “this is what’s happening, and this is how I think we can use it to our advantage”. And don’t tell me any other profession wouldn’t do that. If a particular car was produced with a specific fault, I am sure the mechanics would all be out there training up on how to fix that specific fault to ramp up their business.

    Yes perhaps wrong place, wrong time but not the she-demon so many people are making her out to be.

  433. Heather
    22 Jun 12
    3:59 pm

  434. Crikey – poor Tina. I pity the girl. She is clearly quite inexperienced and had no idea what she was walking into. I suggest the hardened cynics slamming her in this forum cast their minds back to when they were young and keen and didn’t know any better. I’ve spent half my career as a newspaper journalist and the other half in PR and I can tell you from experience that the newspaper cadets are just as guilty of having poor spelling and grammar as young PR people. It’s a product of youth, inexperience and declining education standards – nothing to do with whether they studied Comms, PR, Marketing or Journalism as uni. It’s very sad to be witnessing the end of an era in media but industries that don’t evolve will die. This is a reality that Tina, however insensitively, is correctly pointing out.

  435. John Botica
    22 Jun 12
    4:01 pm

  436. The irony is… everything she said was pretty much absolutely true! The game of journalism lost any credibility it may have once had, years ago! Why else are we constantly bombarded with crap about Lady Ga Ga, Lara Bingle and the likes? The recent changes make it much easier for more crap to surface to the top…. so she’s right… it is better for her clients… a little insensitive perhaps… but nonetheless, absolutely true! what’s all the fuss and why should she apologise for telling it exactly how it is?

  437. Peter Griffin
    22 Jun 12
    4:06 pm

  438. Errr hello – Opinion piece!!!!! What sucks here is the piss weak defense/retraction by Simone Drewry. Tina is spot on in her observation, should not be hung drawn and quartered for expressing it and the absolute last thing I want from a PR company is one that backs away from a challenge when the flack flies. It was not a “bad judgement call” making the comments, not backing your team was the bad call.

  439. Graeme
    22 Jun 12
    4:06 pm

  440. I’m not in the media or pr, but I’d think everything this woman has said is correct. For starters if anyone should have to apologise wouldn’t it be Fairfax for sacking people, not this lady for, in my opinion, just pointing out what is likely to happen now? How many newspaper articles these days are true journalism? Most seem to be a mixture of self-opinionated pieces by journos (especially in the sports pages) or stories made up from pr feeds. So stands to reason if more journos get sacked more stories will eminate from pr people. It may have been insensitive of this woman to point it, out since when did we start hanging people for telling the truth. I’m on her side.

  441. Realist
    22 Jun 12
    4:07 pm

  442. It is dog-eat-dog. That is the world. This is no time or place for your Gen-X and Gen-Y idealistic, Disney-inspired, fantasy world. It is not real. Man up. Find the opportunity in all things, good or bad. Tina can see it. She is a visionary. She will be benefitting from this unfortunate upheaval while you wallow in self pity, wringing your hands, or vacantly stare, shell-shocked, as your world crumbles away.

  443. Edward
    22 Jun 12
    4:07 pm

  444. Moderated by Mumbrella.

  445. Howard
    22 Jun 12
    4:16 pm

  446. Some uncomfortable truths. It’s been getting worse for years and with the final nails in the coffins now being lined up, PR nonsense and fake news will dominate. Terrible for consumers terrible for democracy.

  447. steph
    22 Jun 12
    4:20 pm

  448. I think what Tina is saying is true. No one is claiming that redundancies are good for anyone. If the article was read properly people would see that she has many good points in relation to the future workings of PR. I really don’t think it’s that bad – feel like people have really overreacted.

  449. Graeme
    22 Jun 12
    4:28 pm

  450. To all those who have made comments like “Speaking as a working journo, I’ll delete everything that pops into my inbox from Mango PR from now on” – I think your comments have been editted, because they have left off the bit that should say “while continuing to accept everything from all other PR companies to use as a basis of my stories, because my employers won’t allow us the time to do proper journalism.” I’m sorry to say the current generation of journos are thought of as lowly as used car salesman, or whoever, were in the past and coming out and slagging this lady is not going to help your image.

  451. LC
    22 Jun 12
    4:57 pm

  452. GUYS, CAN WE JUST LEAVE IT BE.

    This woman has been spammed all over the internet for this and surely we have sunk the boot in enough. Us Aussies love to kick a dog when it’s down it seems…

    Regardless of whether we agree or disagree with her opinions, the fact that ‘keyboard warriors’ all around Australia are continuing to bash her anonymously is a joke and needs to stop.

    We all make mistakes, let’s not make Tina the punching bag any longer and move on. It’s Friday, let’s wrap up this soap opera and move onto something more constructive.

  453. Anonymous
    22 Jun 12
    5:08 pm

  454. Poor kid. Give her a break. She has an opinion and she expressed it. Isn’t that what blogging is all about. You don’t have to like it or agree with it but then its her opinion not yours! We are all mature enough to understand that.

  455. dylan
    22 Jun 12
    5:18 pm

  456. I think its unfair to out her for her comments. It seems to me that fairfax is the one who should be answering to this, because they have opened the doors to their publications becoming just what Tina has described.

    Not that I believe readers are getting worthwhile stories at the moment, but if the quality drops to just being PR, readers will just stop wasting their money on it.

  457. Peabody
    22 Jun 12
    5:27 pm

  458. BoooHoooHooo. All you people comenting are crybabies or whingers. Who cares what she wrote. Whom was it attacking? How was it insensitive? How was it nonesense. Like old mate said “get a grip”. Get a life more like it. And who was the instigator who said it was insensitive. The most pathetic part of the piece was the 2 apologies. Stand up for yourselfs, and tell evyone else to gets tuffed.

  459. mumbrella
    22 Jun 12
    5:37 pm

  460. I’ve taken the decision to close this comment thread.

    While people are of course entitled to react to an opinion piece, and many of the comments are not on their own crossing the line, my concern is that in totality they are adding up to more of an attack on Tina than she deserves.

    There are a number of comments currently awaiting moderation, which I will look at, and may publish a few that stick to the issues rather than the person.

    But I am now at the point where I’m not comfortable with further comments on this thread on an issue which has become personalised.

    My apologies to some of the commenters whose words I’ve moderated – in many cases, on their own they would have been fair enough in a debate, but together are adding up to something disproportionate.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella