PR vs journalists debate concludes: we’re on the same side
A debate on journalists and PRs convinced the audience at last night’s Public Relations Institute of Australia discussion that the two professions are indeed two sides of the same coin.
When the question was put to the vote, the proposition was easily carried – although not before some strong hyperbole from both sides.
For: Marie Najjar of Public City kicked off the debate, telling the room: “At the end of the day, regardless of whether you are PR practitioner or journalist, you both need to understand what makes news and understand the audience.”
Against: But Lukas Picton of PR firm Text 100 argued: “The truth is that PR and journalism is not and never will be two sides of the same coin. The objective of PR is to manipulate the public and the objective of journalism is to overcome that manipulation. It should be renamed PM – Public Manipulation.”
For: Sophia Russell, a writer for B&T magazine, disagreed, saying: “The PR people I’ve spoken to don’t look clever enough to do that.”
She added: “We’re both story tellers; we practice the same craft. Some of us have even done the same degrees. We’re all in business. I know as journalists, we talk about a higher purpose. But that higher purpose is Rupert Murdoch. It’s all about generating talkability.”
Against: Clint Drieberg of 2UE said that journalists were governed by the Press Council, while radio has its own code of conduct. He told the PRs: “You have nothing like that – you are not a real profession. It’s not a real job. You guys are not even willing to be watched over or regulated.”
For: Journalist Simon Sharwood argued: “At the core of PR is honesty – truth well told, as one of the ad agencies says. Journalists collect the information and synthesise it into a new product.”
Against: PR Pru Quinlan, boss of Einsteinz Communications, told the journalists: ‘We take tiny slivers and manipulate them, and you buy them. We like a good story, but PM is a novel. PR is but a brief fairytale.”
The verdict was decided by the loudest applause, which, in a room mainly containing PRs, easily went to the team arguing that both are indeed two sides of the same coin.
Afterwards, several of the speakers rushed to assure Mumbrella that the arguments they had advanced were not their own views.
The tweetstream from the event can be seen at #priadebate. A podcast of the audio can be found on the PRIA website.
Update: The same issues appear to rise all over the world. The National newspaper in Abu Dhabi explored it yesterday, with Tala Al Rahami complaining:
“There is a misconception that our job is to publish their press releases as “news”, and at a time that is convenient for their clients.”

Government funding bodies are lazy and decadent, says industry veteran Michael Thornhill but in a piece that first appeared in
Life is sweet for freelance writer Max Kitchen, but in a feature that first appeared in
First there was the Grand Prix. Next came the reported $500m bid for cricket rights, then Ten secured the 2014 winter Olympics. So, can sport save the ailing network? In a feature that first appeared in 

Cosmo’s Kate Leaver tells us how to bluff it in her job in a feature that first appeared in
Hi Chris,
Brett Clegg, group director – business media, Fairfax Media, in a Q&A that first appeared in
Anyone can throw up a tent in a high-traffic area and harass the general public, but what does it take to pull off an effective experiential event? In a piece that first appeared in 
With scores of redundancies in 2012 and a mass exodus of experienced journos, is this the worst time to be a journalist? In a feature that first appeared in 
Advertising suits have a thankless job that is currently being eroded by the changing industry says Naren Sanghrajka in a piece that first appeared in 

Comments
7 May 09
9:31 am
How disappointingly sensible and friendly!
Kidding!
7 May 09
10:03 am
What a great night and thank you Tim and Alice for your support. Yes, we are working towards a similar goal but we CAN do this in a mutually supportive way with good relationships to produce quality information for our publics.
Check out Twitter #priadebate – we even made it on the trending list!
7 May 09
12:20 pm
Sounds like a rare PR triumph for PRs. In my experience, there are two types of PR – the ones who know what a story is – and the majority.
8 May 09
4:38 am
of course, if there were readers in the room the PRs would have been assasinated. together with the complying journos. PRs should, generally, be ttreated as spin agents of low purpose. like pimps in brothels or dealers in heroin. journos who deal should similarly be tainted. this is one of the great benefits of the web. it shows you is masturbating. and who is assisiting.
8 May 09
1:18 pm
Valence, don’t sink this debate into low waters. It was a constructive debate and helpful in establising a spirit of recognised, mutual, credible intent and professionalism between the two factions.
8 May 09
1:19 pm
valence – WT? Your assasination plans will wipe out 80% of the journalist population according to research presented on the night. And I’d suggest everyone in the room that night were “readers”
9 May 09
10:51 am
The same side?
‘Journalism’ has nothing to do with the PR side except doubt every utterance and frame. Otherwise we all lose.
15 May 09
5:58 pm
THAT WAS THEN— THIS,O,U NO.SHE WAS IN IT