Making the switch from journalist to the PR person journalists don’t hate
After deciding to make the switch to PR, Sarah Kendell promised herself she wouldn’t become one of the PRs she used to hate. Here, she details exactly how she did it.
Earlier this year, I made the move from journalism to PR, which was both an exciting and daunting prospect. Exciting because it was a good move for where I wanted to be in my career long-term, daunting because going to ‘the dark side’ meant giving up my seat at the media cool kids’ table.
In journalist circles, PR agencies in particular can often be looked upon as the professional equivalent of the charity muggers that haunt the CBD at lunchtime – an overly friendly nuisance you do your best to skirt around in order to get through your daily tasks.
It was for this reason that when I decided I would make the move to communications, I initially avoided applying for agency roles.
Some good points here. I work in a comms unit that has employed many former journos, and we always chuckle when we hear another one is coming to join us.
We know the poor soul will be in a state of utter shock for the first couple of months, while they leave the press bubble, come back down to earth and get used to being ignored, irrelevant and unimportant.
Let’s face it, people don’t jump to attention and scramble to assist when a mere PR contacts them, as they do when a journalist from a reputable media outlet calls.
Welcome to the other side, Sarah. You have lots to learn.
Agree! First leson – Don’t write cynical op-eds for Mumbrella when you are brand new to ‘the dark side’.
This.
Give it a little time and see where your perspective is at after a year of being treated like a dog!
I worked on the PR account for Oxfam and one of their senior staff told me, ‘We know people hate it (chugging), but it’s cost-effective and it works.’ Yes it’s annoying, but ultimately charities keep doing it because they are seeing a result out of it.
It’s the same for the PR follow-up call, since I started my career as a journalist I didn’t want to do follow-up calls in PR. Then I went to an agency where follow-up calling was the norm (I had previously been in more boutique agencies where it wasn’t really done), so I was definitely nervous making that first follow-up call.
But – I did find it was effective. For every journo that was a bit grumpy, I probably still got 2-3 pieces of extra coverage out of the pitch than if I hadn’t done the follow up calls. Or at the least I got some valuable feedback that gave me more knowledge, and that helped improve how I pitched or what I pitched in the future. I also found a decent amount of journalists were happy to give feedback, as long as I was strategic and didn’t call at 4pm on a Friday before deadline – I always tried to keep my follow ups to the morning where possible and got to the point quickly.
So yes it may be annoying for some journalists, but ultimately I have seen direct results from it – if you can have a tough skin and suck it up if a journalist decides to be a bit grumpy with you, it’s worth getting to the ones who will give you their time and feedback.
With that attitude I am sure the PR world will embrace her! We love people with no experience on ‘The Dark Side’ telling us how to do it…#goodjob
Now you will see how hard the job of a PR is… and see that arrogance has no place on this side of the fence 🙂
What patronising twaddle.
Perhaps the most important epiphany to achieve at this point is that it’s better to work through your steep learning curve in private.
I briefly did the PR for Oxfam and remember a senior executive there saying to me ‘people hate chugging – but it’s cost effective and it works.’ Yes we all hate chuggers – but charities keep doing it because they are getting a return on it.
It can be the same for PR, I also came from a journalism background before going into PR and initially didn’t do the follow-up call. I’d been in more boutique agencies where it wasn’t really done.
Then I worked in an agency where follow-up calls were standard practice, I was very nervous doing that first one – I was worried about getting my head bitten off but approached it by calling in the morning and making sure to get to my point quickly.
I’ve found that journalists may say they don’t like follow-up calls, but like charity chugging – it does work. For every campaign I committed to follow-up calls I often secured another 3-4 pieces of good coverage.
Or at the least, I got valuable feedback from the journalist that helped me with future pitching for their publication. Sure there was the occasional grumpy journo, but generally I found a lot of journalists were happy to give their feedback as long as you didn’t call at 4pm on a Friday or did a long spiel asking how their weekend was – I just got straight to the point and respected their time.
For the results it go me, it was worth taking the risk and sucking up someone’s irritation if need be.
One thing that always amuses me is when people write an opinion piece (be it good or bad) on Mumbrella with their full name and details, but the majority of the snipers are too cowardly to use their name(s) in reply.
David – think of it as a real life lesson for her in managing negative reactions. I have a feeling she might need the experience.
Oh I learned long ago those who wish you harm are the ones that keep schtum and stay in the shadows.
Oh and by the way, I never see a shortage of PR types telling journos how to do THEIR job 🙂 “Your readers will love this story”, or “This is something your readers NEED to know”: type crap.
Trump supporter David?
Ha! Best lauigh I’ve had all day 🙂
Sadly Ms Kendell, you may eventually find yourself in the position of having to defend a client who has done the indefensible. You will then discover that your prized relationships, which you’ve spent so much time cultivating, count for nothing… and you’ll then watch as your ‘friends’ in the media will turn on you, and happily rip you and your client to shreds if you don’t tell them everything they want to know immediately.
Hi all,
Thanks for the feedback to this piece, regardless of whether good bad or indifferent I’m glad I managed to get people talking! One of the things I think is interesting is how much positive feedback I’ve gotten from journos in particular about how true the comments in the piece are, yet some PRs are reacting quite negatively. I think one of the things people are taking issue with is that as a journo making the switch across to PR I clearly don’t know what I’m talking about as I haven’t been in the business for long enough.
One spanner that I’ll throw into the works – I took a bit of creative licence with this piece as I thought it would confuse the narrative a little, but I actually did work in PR previously from 2012-2015. I’ve switched back and forth between the two fields a couple of times over the course of my career. So I do apologise if the piece came off as ‘uppity journo telling us what to do’, in fact it’s probably more written from the perspective of someone who’s worked equally on both sides of the fence and was trying to be quite forthright about what’s worked for me, and what I therefore wanted to be true to when I re-entered the industry.
I do take the point about follow-up calls being annoying but effective from a numbers game perspective – I would say I’ve probably had 1 positive reaction for every 20 negative reactions to a follow-up call, so I suppose it depends on how you look at it. Either that’s 1 piece of coverage you may not have gotten if you didn’t do the 21 calls, or it’s 20 journalists you’ve annoyed who may not pick up the phone again when they see your number on caller ID. Again, not saying those who abide by the numbers game theory are 100% wrong, but it’s just not the way I personally want to do business.
Please keep the feedback coming all!
Phone calls in general are the etiquette equivalent of walking into someone’s office, putting your shoes on their work and starting a loud conversation with them while they try to work.
If you call someone rather than emailing or texting…it bloody well better be an emergency or otherwise you are a long, long way behind before you even started speaking.
Now *THAT* is claptrap! Rooled gold, moite … What the hell do you think people did before the advent of email and text? Carrier pigeon? Semaphore? Smoke signals? Sent a letter?
The key word in your response is *before*
you’re showing your age, David….everyone under 60 in this game views phone calls as a last resort because they’re unwelcome and disruptive
Don’cha love it when you are lumped in with “everyone”. So, I assume phones of all types then (using the all inclusion example) are a waste of time as verbal discussion apparatus? Just a bloody nuisance and “disruptive”. SO what else is it used for? Oh yeah. Crap that apparently takes over your life.
That is disrputive.
Reality check folks (under 60) If I call you I actually may have something important to say. Like “I want to give you money”.
And why “60”? Why not 58? or 62 1/2?
Gawd you read some awful nonsense here. And so much stereotyping is pitiful. I hope you never have to pitch an idea for a campaign that targets “the old”.
Oh sorry. Gotta run. My phone is ringing. It might not even be some “disruptive” bastard. You never know… Perhaps they are over 60.
Run back to journalism while you can!
In the media landscape, they are the dodgy, half brother you keep under the stairs and feed a bucket of fish heads to from time to time.
As a journalist, everything Sarah’s written is absolutely bang on. So, to all the PR practitioners out there who are crying foul, it’d do you – and your clients – better if you all just shut up and pay attention because you might actually get more coverage that way.