Guest post: Sometimes it’s not the PR agency’s fault
In this guest posting, Michelle Hampton of Magnum PR answers an editor’s complaint that she lost out on a promised exclusive cover story
Jen Bishop from Dynamic Business Magazine yesterday posted an article about whether journalists can trust PRs when they promise an exclusive.
Although Jen raises some interesting points about the relationship and trust that exists between journalists and PRs (what a massive response!) as the co-director of Magnum PR, I’d like to clear up what actually happened with the story.
Not only do we feel she has misrepresented facts about what actually transpired, we feel disappointed that she has questioned our honesty and integrity as a PR company. Anyone who knows us well – clients, the media (and yes, we have loads of contacts we’ve built up over the years through providing honest, reliable and newsworthy content), peers and partners – will wholeheartedly support me when I say this, we are NOT in the business of deceiving journalists to get as much exposure possible for our clients. We are NOT that type of agency and have spent the last four years (since we started) building a reputation that is the exact opposite.
To make it 100% clear what actually happened with the story, I have included below the accurate account of what happened. By doing this, I am not trying to add to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ debate or ‘she said’, ‘you said’, nor further damage our relationship with Dynamic Business. We are all on the same team here – I just want to be clear that some key facts about the situation have been misrepresented.
After reviewing all communications, here are the facts:
- We never originally pitched the story (an interview with Max Brenner) as an exclusive. We pitched a story to Dynamic Business about our client and they were immediately interested in running it on the cover
- When Jen asked the question about what other magazines we had spoken to, we of course told her who we approached (none of which were business publications)
- The fact also still remains that The Age article in question isn’t a small business story so we never broke the exclusive! It was written by an arts reporter and placed in the Metro section of the newspaper – nothing to do with business. How could we have predicted that her story was to be then placed on the MySmallBusiness section of the Fairfax website?
- In all of our discussions and follow-up with the journalist from The Age we were not alerted to the fact it would be syndicated somewhere else. Of course we monitor the media, but this clip had only just been posted when Jen alerted us to it. Put your hands up if you’ve ever had an article pop up online that you weren’t immediately aware of?
- Even though Dynamic Business felt they had lost an exclusive, they still went ahead and published the story
Looking at the wider issue, this is obviously an interesting topic given the response it has had. I think the debate is a valid one and I’m looking forward to reading other posts but for the record, I want to clear our name that what transpired was completely ethical from our end and we never deceived anyone at any point.
To add another dimension to this debate, interesting to see that Dynamic Business magazine is looking for their own PR agency for an upcoming campaign to relaunch the magazine and website. Coincidence or a clever PR stunt at our expense??
- Michelle Hampton is co-director at Magnum PR
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
topics
business
Dynamic Business
Jen Bishop
journalism
journalist
magazine
Magnum PR
Michelle Hampton
PR
The Age
Hi, Adeline from Dynamic Export (sister publication of Dynamic Business) here. There are two things I want to note, beyond what has been said in both Jen’s and Michelle’s posts.
The first is that the cover story was conditional on the exclusivity factor. DB profiles many interesting business owners, so of course we were happy to run the profile inside the magazine, but there needed to be a good reason to put Max on the cover and exclusivity is a pretty good one.
Whether or not it was Magnum’s fault that the story appeared on the Fairfax site is irrelevant to the conditional: not exclusive, therefore not a cover story. Both sides can argue until they’re blue in the face about the whole exclusivity factor but I’m afraid the logic of the condition stands.
The second is that the PR campaign request is quite separate to this, as it has been driven from a separate department with its own timeline, but of course comes through Jen as the spokesperson for the brand.
Unfortunately we don’t have a crystal ball here, so we didn’t exactly anticipate that we’d have to redesign the cover in order for everything to coincide with our PR request. So, no, it isn’t a strategic PR stunt. If we were that clever, and had those kinds of resources, I think we’d have less need for a PR agency.
User ID not verified.
I really wish I were clever/creative/sneaky enough to have considered writing a guest post on Mumbrella about exclusives to promote our recruiting a PR agency, which is completely separate! Surely if we wanted to create our own PR we wouldn’t be asking for an agency’s help?
To suggest this is a stunt at Magnum’s expense is a little unfair. Yours was the first mention of that totally separate issue on this website. But I’m grateful for the extra exposure 🙂
User ID not verified.
I find it hard to believe that you didn’t pitch this as an exclusive! Otherwise, why would any of this matter? At least be honest and tell the truth. You’re coming across as an arrogant liar.
User ID not verified.
I’m sure there is an email trail somewhere huh?
“It was written by an arts reporter and placed in the Metro section of the newspaper”…looks to me as if “Jen” is trying to be a little creative on the PR side, or perhaps just a little crazy in the coconut.
User ID not verified.
Lets see the email pitch or is the whole thing made up to give both sides some extra exposure. huh? huh?
User ID not verified.
In a timely aside to this conversation.
The Wall Street Journal has just today banned embargoes.
“but will take exclusives if handed to them”
http://paidcontent.org/article.....embargoes/
User ID not verified.
Why are we promoting sickeningly sweet obesity inducing overly indulgent chocolate retail experiences anyway?
And, more importantly, why can’t we all just get along?
User ID not verified.
YAWN. Boring. Surely there is something more interesting than this happening in the media landscape.
User ID not verified.
“By doing this, I am not trying to add to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ debate or ‘she said’, ‘you said’, nor further damage our relationship with Dynamic Business.”
And yet you do so anyway. Bravo.
User ID not verified.
Would like to add my support to Magnum PR. Any PR worth their salt would never jeopardise a relationship with a journo by offering a story to a competitor once an exclusive deal had been agreed upon – we know too well what vindictive divas you can be as we have to smile through our teeth dealing with you every day!
Keep in mind trust goes both ways. I can’t tell you how many times we have had journos reject an exclusive in the first instance – giving us the green light to pitch elsewhere – and then run the story anyway, in a lesser form, damaging our chances of further coverage and our reputation with the journo that finally did agree to run the story.
So my message to the journos is take a deep breath and get over yourself. And to all you hard working PRs – don’t worry about it, we all know who is right on this one!
User ID not verified.
Agree with Veronica on this one (and, predictably, I’m a PR). This debate portrays us as a bunch of ruthless headline hunters who’ll go to any lengths and tell any lies to achieve them. In fact, most of us don’t make promises we can’t keep in order to get the story, mostly because it would be very easy to get caught out! From a professional point of view, that’s a really shortsighted strategy for a PR; that type tends not to last very long. Oh, and there’s that integrity thing, of course…
User ID not verified.
Magnum – yes we have all been there! Nothing I read here surprised me. Except for the fact that – well – it’s here! In public! When it should perhaps have been a communication in private to Jen, to resolve an issue with your customer (Dynamic Business), which I now suspect is only going to escalate…
You didn’t have a publicity crisis, you had a customer one, which should first be resolved in private. Go public with the positive outcome! Good behaviour generates good PR!
Magnum PR, from what I’ve heard, certainly is a very professional outfit. However even good agencies make bad decisions sometimes. I think writing this article was one of them. Your ideal outcome would have been an appeased editor, who I’m sure would have posted that the situation was clarified and amicably resolved.
Before I got married, my uncle told me that the secret to any great relationship is open communication.
We split six months later.
So I guess what I’m trying to say is, I’m single? Anyone?
User ID not verified.
Marie you maniac, this is mumbrella not RSVP!!
Nice try though boss 😉
User ID not verified.
A PR company going into full PR mode to defend itself is a beautiful thing — Jen, you MUST give the gig to Magnum at once!
Congrats to Mumbrella for giving Michele right of reply — it is, after all, an important element of our code of ethics 😉
User ID not verified.
The people who write on this thing miss the point every time. What has obviously happened is that Magnum’s given the story to Epicure, and they’ve just passed it to MySmallBusiness without telling anyone. It happens all the time. As if DB wouldn’t have screwed Magnum without the slightest hesitation, if they needed to in order to further their own agenda.
Note to communications professionals: referring to yourselves as “PRs” and buying into these ridiculous debates demeans us and commodifies our entire industry, reducing it to mere publicity. Media is such a tiny part of real public relations professionals’ lives these days, we should not be drawn into these pathetic “PR v media” debates. They’re so 90s.
User ID not verified.
Miss Media: Yes, it’s a slow news day…
User ID not verified.
It always amuses me the amount of venom some people choose to pour into these debates. Chillax peeps.
It would be uncommon in my experience for a media outlet such as The Age to advise the PR agency what they were doing with a story once it leaves the agency’s hands. And an agency that constantly hounds an editor wanting a second-by-second update on the status of their story will find themselves on the DO-NOT-CALL register pretty quickly.
The only thing Magnum should possibly have done is put a courtesy call in to Jen when they saw the placement of The Age piece. Jen still gets screwed, but at least the agency can try and protect its position and relationship. Kudos to Jen for having a ‘Plan B’ ready to rock & roll!
Lets face it, the ONLY time anyone can offer an exclusive with a modicum of certainty, is if they only speak to ONE journo. Which, incidentally, I did recently and then had to wait many weeks for the piece to go to print as it constantly got bumped from week to week. Meanwhile, I’m on the phone reassuring the client “SURE it’s going to run!” (with crossed fingers)
User ID not verified.
These comments have been very amusing. I’m a bit perplexed at how this whole thing happened. As Marie says this is a matter that should have been resolved in private but again agreeing with Marie, I also think that Magnum PR should not have responded in kind. At the end of the day, a journalist can write a post like this and it doesn’t really affect their business but Magnum PR have far more to lose.
Sometimes (and Marie, you can take this advice into your next relationship), it’s not about is right or wrong. Sometimes you need to just suck it up and do what’s best for the long term relationship. I honestly believe that Magnum PR was neglectful in advising The Age that there was a business exclusive knowing full well that they have a business section but I can see how that mistake could be made. I have certainly learnt something from this and I hope Magnum PR has as well.
User ID not verified.
Marie, I’m a journalist and I would love to date you – but can you promise we will be “exclusive”..? 😛
User ID not verified.
Jack, I nearly spat my Milo on the keyboard 🙂 I can’t wait to hear Marie’s response.
User ID not verified.
Jack, that is too good! 🙂
User ID not verified.
did someone say dating?
User ID not verified.
This wasn’t really the hand in hand relationship I was referring to in Jen Bishop’s original thread but this could work too :-p
User ID not verified.
@mumbrelladating to accompany @mumbrellajobs perhaps!? 😉
Interesting debate guys 🙂
User ID not verified.
Hi Jack,
I can promise you MEDIA exclusivity, if you can guarantee me a piece that’s big, front and centre and not surprise me with something small, unnoticeable and stuck in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Otherwise, I will be trying different angles elsewhere.
(*Marie is not my real name).
😉
User ID not verified.
And then there’s @mumbrellacomedy…
User ID not verified.
Moral of the story? There’s no such thing as a ‘business’ story. A story is a story is a story and ,as such, can only ever be offered to one outlet as an ‘exclusive’.
User ID not verified.
marie – you sound like a super chick with a great sense of humour – Jack, you’d be a lucky fella – go forth!
User ID not verified.
I’ll give Jack and Marie my blessing as well. Imagine the networking opportunities at the wedding :-p
User ID not verified.
Marie,
I would love to consider taking up all sorts of angles with you. We journalists try to be flexible.
However, I cannot promise how many column-inches I can give you, as the publisher is doing some (very painful) cutbacks.
Jack
User ID not verified.
The only interesting thing about this exclusivity drivel is that one of them is telling fibs.
User ID not verified.
Chillax?!?
User ID not verified.
Michelle,
You say
“We never originally pitched the story (an interview with Max Brenner) as an exclusive…”
and later
“The fact also still remains that The Age article in question isn’t a small business story so we never broke the exclusive!”
So was their an exclusive deal or not? Something appears unsaid here. How did DB come away with such a strong impression of exclusivity?
Cheers,
User ID not verified.
A PR agency who tries to point the gun away from themselves and manages to blow off all their toes with – “By doing this, I am not trying to add to the ‘us’ and ‘them’ debate or ‘she said’, ‘you said’, nor further damage our relationship with Dynamic Business.” should not be in business
User ID not verified.
Sir G, I was confused about that as well. I didn’t know whether Michelle was saying that Magnum PR never pitched it as an exclusive but Dynamic Business wanted an exclusive OR that it was never an exclusive. You could read it in two ways.
If it wasn’t an exclusive, wouldn’t this be the first thing you write in your response to Dynamic Business and deny that an exclusive deal was made? No, instead Michelle says “I think this article raises some important points but I’d firstly like to clarify that we never broke the business exclusive.”
User ID not verified.
To add to my post, Michelle then adds “We kept our word with Dynamic Business Magazine.” Would this not imply there was an exclusive agreement in place?
User ID not verified.
Gillian,
Very good point. Very sharp spotting.
User ID not verified.
Jack,
When you see the goods (and boy is this one juicy) you will be spitting all the inches in the world my way. I only deliver the kind of content that jumps off pages and causes a bang. I’m sure you and your editor will not be disappointed.
Regards,
Marie*
* I repeat, Marie is not my real name.
Samantha – thank you 🙂
And Tim, thank you for not barring me from your site.
PEACE.
User ID not verified.
Nothing like a bit of comic relief on a Friday!! (nutters!)
User ID not verified.
Marie,
I am already somewhat familiar with your assets*, so I happen to know that you are not misrepresenting your client’s unique selling proposition.
Speaking of propositions however, we all know that many PRs, in their attempt to arouse interest from the journalist, promise much – sometimes even a one-on-one – yet fail to deliver (my lame attempt to make this post relevant to the thread).
Fortunately, I have seen you debate passionately on the side of journalists and PRs being two sides of the same coin. All I have now to ask is if you would like heads or tails?
* Because Jack is not my real name either…
User ID not verified.
Oh I love a good bitchfight. This is better than an episode of Dynasty!
User ID not verified.
Dynamic Business magazine eh? Can’t say I’ve had the pleasure of reading Australia’s leading SME publication. Which industry super fund do I have to join to receive a free copy with my quarterly update?
Well done to you Michelle from Magnum. You could have taken the easy route and let it slide as yet another rant from an editor who conveniently forgot which industry provides most of the “editorial” content slapped between the MYOB software ads in her trade rag each month – but instead you chose to call her out. So Bravo.
I wonder which piece the Max Brenner people were more pleased with?
Happy client? Happy life.
Scorned editor of trade press? errr…Send content to Australia’s ‘other leading SME magazine’.
User ID not verified.
Dear ‘Neutral,’ Dynamic Business is available in news agencies nationally, should you want to get a more accurate view of the publication. No need to join any super fund 🙂
User ID not verified.