Guest post: Precious PR hacks and why they do their clients no good
Editor Jason Whittaker has had enough of PRs who try to tell him how to do his job.
My chances of a date with one of the most beautiful women in the world, admittedly slim to start with, have all but evaporated. And I may never be allowed in one particular retail outlet again.
I’m not surprised, of course. I’ve agitated more people as a journalist than I care to remember. But is it just me, or are you marketing types becoming even more precious of late, if that is even possible?
I recently wrote an innocuous story on the backend operations of a particular retailer that will remain nameless to protect the petty. Naturally, we chose to illustrate the story, in part, with photos of the store’s glamorous spokeswoman (her name we’ll also withhold to protect the vacuous). A beautiful red carpet portrait of said professional model, logos of the store displayed prominently in the background, adorns the cover of this particular national business title. The photos were acquired, under licence, through a professional photo library. Without a mouse-click of airbrushing the pretty clotheshorse looks smashing.
But the retailer is furious. The story reads well, the communications hack admits, but he never allowed photos of their spokeswoman to be used (this was implied, apparently, by not supplying their preferred photos of her). I have put the retailer in a “difficult position” with the model’s management, apparently. The company is now exploring “recourse” against us, and vows to “no longer fulfil any media requests associated with either yourself or the …magazine in the future”.
I can only guess just what the model’s slimy agent has taken offence at. The idea that their client, who prowls catwalks begging photographs to be taken of her, appeared on the cover of a magazine without her knowledge and certainly without payment (plus agent’s commission), no doubt. This after the company demanded to see the copy before publication, made a number of corrections, and then demanded to see another proof of the finished article. To the latter, at least, fat chance.
The behaviour of the communications team at this retail company was fairly hysterical. If the PR hack actually believes any other publication would have accepted a request not to use a photo of the model – when the manager of the business division in question describes his function in the story as “sexy” – they must be one of the more naïve representatives in the industry. But again, none of this comes as much of a surprise.
The remarkable thing about marketing people I’ve found in five years of business journalism is so many of them are amazingly ignorant of just how news media works. And even if they aren’t, they believe their position affords them the right to demand journalists say and do things in the interests of their brands. I find the attitude completely extraordinary.
My job editing business-based titles involves negotiating with these so-called media professionals on a daily basis. Yes you can do a story on us (bless you), but you’ll have to talk to these people, talk to them at this time, and use photographs that we supply. You will have to agree to provide the pre-published copy for approval for us before we agree to do the story, we will most likely make a number of changes to ensure the most positive coverage for our company and expect that each of these will be amended.
I’ve had entire articles re-written, not to reflect any inaccuracies necessarily but just because the PR hack (usually a failed/unemployed/frustrated journo) believes they can write it better. I’ve argued over a single word in two-word headlines. I’ve had a number of companies agree to a story, read the copy and then ‘retract their permission’ to run it (then are genuinely shocked when told the story will run regardless). I’ve had more than one company demand either the printing presses stopped, or tens of thousands of printed magazines pulped, because they are displeased with their article (again, the outrage when this isn’t put into action seems genuine).
The ground rules
For those marketers still unclear on how this works, here are the ground rules: we owe you nothing, save for fair and balanced coverage of your company. Our primary responsibility is to the reader, who would rightly protest any corporate interference in the stories we provide. What we publish is our prerogative alone. You know this, so don’t make demands we simply won’t adhere to. Capisce?
PR walks a fine line directing a healthy flow of information to market while protecting the corporate profile. It is a job that is not always easy, I understand that. But the marketing world needs to realise how just much damage it can actually do to its brands by building impenetrable walls around them. In practice, there is always another good business case study to write about – we’ll simply go elsewhere. And even if you manage to convince a journalist to publish your unedited spiel, don’t for a moment think anybody is going to read it – the audience is actually smarter than that.
I’m pretty good at what I do. The skill of a journalist is to engage an audience in the subject – surely the best outcome from a marketing perspective for any company, presuming you have nothing to hide. So don’t insult me thinking you know how better to present a story to an audience, and I won’t insult you by giving advice on your marketing efforts. As much as you may clearly need it.
It really is quite simple. You want to write some glowing copy promoting your company? Go for it; happy to run the splash over as many pages as you like and we’ll invoice you for an advertisement. We’ll do you a special rate, even. If you want a story done on your company – one people might actually read – you better learn to trust us. Or this is just never going to work.
Jason Whittaker edits industry-leading national trade titles for a print and online publisher, and blogs on media and policy at importanceofideas.com.
Tim Burrowes founded Mumbrella in 2008. He worked on Mumbrella until 2021. At various points he was editor, content director and editor-at-large.
Linkedin
i lament the blurring of the obvious line between editorial and advertising. is it just me or do others worry that PR flacks get access to “editorial” for input/approval/re-writing prior to a story being published? Anything with company and/or PR flacks grubby fingerprints all over it demands complete disclosure
User ID not verified.
Shouldn’t give them copy approval. It’s an inch, and of course they’ve taken the mile.
User ID not verified.
On behalf of genuine PR folk I send my apologies to Jason for having to deal with the idiots he’s described who are masquerading as professional PR’s.
And to Rob – if PR has any hand in re-writing a story then I totally agree it should be disclosed as a footnote at least.
Interestingly I know of at least one editor with integrity who recently left his role after his publisher pulled rank (from an editorial perspective) and insisted on allowing PR’s and advertisers to “shape” the editorial without any disclosure to the readers – essentially turning the magazine into pure advertorial. I’m looking forward to seeing how the magazine fares with its new “compliant” editor – it won’t take long for the readers to work it out and leave in droves.
User ID not verified.
While I wholeheartedly agree that requesting things like copy approval is ludicrous, I would just like to point out that PRs create access to people who are often too cautious to give interviews under any other circumstances.
For all the times that PRs behave like twits, there are many more times that PRs lobby (often difficult) personalities to play ball with the media in a transparent and meaningful way.
User ID not verified.
Until my current maternity leave I worked as a staff journo and freelancer for over 10+ years. It didn’t matter whether I was writing for national broadsheets or trade titles, PRs pretty much always demanded to see copy before publication. My blanket rule was that there was no hope in hell that they’d see copy for approval. Only a handful of times was I threatened with “we’ll deny we even spoke to you”. Just don’t give them an inch and they can’t take a mile. I very rarely encountered a PR with any journalism experience, let alone one who had bothered to study Journalism 101. Most didn’t understand editorial processes (or even know what a subeditor’s role involved). I saw my role as part educator / part agitator and most of the uneducated PRs I dealt with wised up eventually. Many do a good job at promoting their clients effectively and ethically, so bravo to them. As for the others issuing ludicrous threats, I feel sorry for your clients and for you as you won’t keep them for long.
User ID not verified.
Agree with Pru – my apologies for this experience Jason. Not all PR professionals are like this, in fact, many do take the time to learn and relearn the inner workings of the media factory so that we can ‘leverage’ it to our best advantage. The experience you have described is akin to shooting oneself in the foot.. in fact, some journos I know might have decided to take the company to task in spite.
Examples like this open our industry to ridicule and scorn, with a damaging impact to our reputation and the reinforcement of the term ‘spin doctors’. It is largely up to the lobbying and training from our expensive national body – the PRIA – to work to ensure we move beyond spin, to proper two-way engagement with a thorough understanding of all of our tools, including media relations. Where is the PRIA in this argument? They offer basic media relations CPD programs through the RMIT… surely it should be mandatory?
User ID not verified.
Jason were you and Neil Shoebridge hanging out together on the weekend?
User ID not verified.
For what it’s worth, I actually thought the Supply Chain cover with Jen Hawkins looked really good. It seems odd that Myer would be down on you. Maybe it was a contractual thing with Hawkins?
User ID not verified.
“Editor Jason Whittaker has had enough of PRs who try to tell him how to do his job”…. but then precedes to tell an entire industry how to do their job…? huh?
Pretty much had enough of this argument.
Yes, some PR people are overly assertive in the pursuit of what is right for the client. so what? it is their job.. just like it is a journalists job to have an inflated ego and act like a victim (joke haha).
But seriously, it must be said that many journalists are lazy, and just plain rude. Just like a journalist can be caught out for plagiarism, PRs can be caught out for manipulation.
Maybe it is time to tone down the self-righteousness, and just get on with it?
… back to the theatre, princess.
User ID not verified.
I don’t think Jason is telling a whole industry how to do its job – rather the gist of the article is informing the uninformed of the way the media – particularly print – works. I’ve been a journo for a while now and, very early in the piece, it was drummed into me a uni then on the job that the first rule of journalism is NEVER to let anyone sneak a peak at your copy who isn’t employed to do so (subbie, editor etc). I’ve never done it. I have, where applicable, read or emailed quotes when requested, particularly if transcribing from shorthand. No one owns your copy or has the right to tweak it. Doing so only upsets the second rule of journalism: fair and balanced reporting. I agree, Jason, PRs (and there are a few bad apples among a largely savvy lot) wanting to direct copy should buy an ad. God knows we could do with the bucks.
User ID not verified.
As far as I can see, the only difference between journalists and PR’s is that journalists have an outlet for whinging, criticizing, humiliating, shaming and embarrassing us PR’s. PR’s can’t publish their similar experiences with journalists anywhere – that i am aware of. Hmmm… blog idea in the making????
We all get it wrong sometimes because we are human.
For every one of the PR Hacks mentioned in Jason’s ‘story’ – I will raise you an incompetent, lazy, rude and ill-informed journalist who even when provided with correct information STILL manages to publish incorrect or inaccurate material. The sooner we realise that what we do is a symbiotic relationship, and not a pissing contest about who works the hardest or has the most integrity, the better.
Jodie,
If I can be of service as an outlet for your frustrations, then the Mumbrella floor is yours…
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
So the PR folks you dealt with were unprofessional, you thought…
http://twitter.com/thetowncrier
6:17 AM Apr 29th from TweetDeck in reply to SnarkyPlatypusI am so FED UP WITH BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO BY CORPORATE PR HACKS!! I DON’T OWN SHARES, I DON’T CARE ABOUT YOUR SHARE PRICE. FUCK OFF.
6:08 AM Apr 29th from TweetDeck in reply to wolfcatFor the record, I’ve heard Jennifer is a complete slut and everything at Myer is made in Asian sweat shops. Just so you know.
6:06 AM Apr 29th from TweetDeck Now I have the entire Myer corporation on my ass worried their contract with little Miss Universe could be under threat. Seriously.
6:05 AM Apr 29th from TweetDeck Seems Jennifer didn’t think on the cover of Australasia’s premier logistics management publication was a good portfolio piece…
6:04 AM Apr 29th from TweetDeck Had some wacky experiences working in b2b. Could write a book. But this might be wackiest yet: apparently I’ve pissed off Jennifer Hawkins.
User ID not verified.
^^^ Gold ^^^
User ID not verified.
On the question of showing copy to story subjects. Clearly the ideal situation is to never do it. The ‘give them an inch and they take a mile’ philosophy certainly applies. But when you’re NOT the Financial Review and when you work on titles that are so recognised in particular sectors and have a close relationship with readers you have to make the call each time about the value of having the story verses any restrictions that might be put on it.
IF a company demands to see copy, we make it very clear this affords them the right to amend FACTUAL ERRORS ONLY. Any changes they make are mere suggestions; I feel no obligation to change anything if I don’t feel it’s warranted. I make that clear up front. What goes to print is MY story each time.
It’s less than ideal but sometimes you have to play that game in b2b. And if you draw clear lines and maintain your right to reject any changes they think are necessary then I’m reasonably comfortable with how it works. Until the corporate communications department decides to play rough, that is….
Kind of a shame that “Anonymous” has dug up my personal Twitter stream demonstrating my frustration with a particular matter (with tongue firmly planted in cheek, clearly) rather than add to what is a good debate on the relationship between journalism and PR and how both sides need to manage this. I think the example I have is a really instructive case on how NOT to manage media relations. I’m more than comfortable with my conduct.
User ID not verified.
Jason,
In the hubris of a piece in which you challenge PR people’s skills, you have been hung out to dry by your own PR petard.
In a double whammy, it is ironic that some low-level investigative blog-journalism has tripped you, a journalist, up so publicly. It’s not a shame, it’s an internet blog.
There may be some empathy about your points, but you increasingly appear on the back foot about them.
Which is what PR is all about…
User ID not verified.
Not quite sure how I’ve been tripped up, AdGrunt. What exactly has been exposed so publicly? My frustration with dealing with PR people who expect too much and do their brands damage as a result? Well, guilty.
I’ve written a wholly positive piece on this particular company; any bad PR that comes from this is entirely their own doing.
User ID not verified.
There sure are some angry, hostile PR/advertising people out there. And they’re commenting right here.
User ID not verified.
Jason – you say you are “more than comfortable with my conduct” when you call Jennifer Hawkins “a complete slut” and then toss out that line about Myer and “Asian sweatshops”?
The rest of your Twitter comments are not really an issue, just an expression of what was happening and how the situation made you feel. Maybe a bit tactless, but no crime.
But the “complete slut” and “Asian sweatshop” remarks are downright rude, churlish, aggressive and offensive – equally so that you think those are acceptable.
How would you feel if a PR posted similar comments about you and your magazine, trashing your brand and reputation? Would you feel aggrieved if the PR shrugged and said he/she was “more than comfortable with my conduct”? I think not.
So, in the light of Pru’s apology to Jason on behalf of her fellow PRs, as a journalist I would like to apologise to PRs for those remarks of Jason.
User ID not verified.
Wow, Twitter post was bad form. Apologise. Quickly.
User ID not verified.
Why should anyone apologise for expressing their current emotional state, even if it’s frustration, and even if it’s “strong language”? All Twitter does is put the previously-private and previous-ephemeral conversations into permanent, searchable form. Gossip in public, if you like.
Yes, we all have some new social rules to learn — but in the long run I actually think it’s A Good Thing that we start presenting one, unified face to the world, not a split personality of an all-roses-and-rainbows but ultimately dishonest “professional” face on the one hand, and a separate, honest face that we reserve for our friends on the other.
What’s pathetic is that the anonymous person who posted the random Twitter grabs didn’t have the spine to post under their own name.
User ID not verified.
Jason, Having been a ‘media hack’ for longer than I care to remember and now a ‘PR flack’ I have seen both sides of the game close up and personal. Yes there are PRs out there who don’t have a clue and give the rest a bad name, but there are just as many journos who are so lazy they will take a PR release and use it verbatim because they are too idle to pick up the phone and do some work. They are also happy to let PR people see and change their stories which has led to a culture of companies expecting to be able to control the media. The real issue is that we now have a host of “newsrooms” across the nation filled with journos who are no longer given proper training and who have few role models as many experienced journos have taken the proffered redundancy package and walked.
User ID not verified.
Hi MS,
Thanks for your comment.
I think the ‘lazy journos’ view when press releases are recycled is itself something of a lazy stereotype.
From what I’ve seen of it, this tends to happen when there is simply not enough resource. Journos are expected to produce a great deal of content, so they have to cut corners to get it out.
Even if time available means they are producing an inferior product, most journalists are working harder than ever before. But lazy doesn’t come into it.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Stigherrian – Twitter may be a form of expressing a current emotional state but it is still a publishing medium, just like blogs, just like newspapers, just like TV.
It is still open to the same rules of society and the same laws of defamation and libel.
So i would be very careful about calling someone a ‘complete slut’, even if that is how you feel at that point in time.
User ID not verified.
David, I’ve said somewhere else (and I can’t find it at the moment, sorry) that while under current law Twitter and other social media are indeed “publishing”, I suspect the law and, by implication, social rules need to be adjusted, rather than trying to force a new medium to fit into old models.
Law is meant to serve our needs, not the other way around.
I contend (no research, y’see) that most Twitter users would see a tweet as ephemeral chit-chat rather than An Act Of Publication. And in ephemeral chit-chat, if we offend someone then we usually apologise. Or ignore it and move on.
While technically we might defame someone in a conversation at a pub, if their response was to call in the lawyers we’d probably think they were even more of a tool. We’d tell them to get over themselves and move on. And, except in the case of narcissists and other obsessives, it’d all soon be forgotten.
But what happens now that ephemeral conversations are not forgotten, but recorded forever and, potentially, quoted out of context years later? Where the original context might have been ironic rather than literal? As a society, do we really want to start applying those big sticks to trifling little insults?
Conversely, do we want to slam as “unprofessional” anyone who’s ever said something they later regret, just because now it won’t fade from public record? If so, we wouldn’t have a single person left in the media industry — or any other industry for that matter.
Time to adjust to a new reality, I reckon. If we can.
User ID not verified.
I can’t believe people are asking for copy?!! How frustrating it is when the lazy and unprofessional people in our PR industry continue to erode what little credibility we’ve manage to retain. Do your job properly PR – create news and provide engaging spokespeople – not advertorial blah. It is just embarassing!
User ID not verified.