In looking at the changing role of PR companies for a prospective business venture, I was reminded of a useful blog posting I'd read some while back
"Would PR Rather Not Be Measured? " by Brian Cavoli of Cymphony.
(Note: Its a real shame to see that Jim Nail and the crew at TNS/Cymfony haven't been updating their blog much recently. Perhaps the WPP takeover has taken up too much of their time)
This recent flurry of PR research has led me to observe that PR companies have changed significantly in the last few years, especially as I realised that Brian's article was written over 2 and a half years ago.
But this does beg the question of "what is the modern role of PR?"
Q: Is it to know a small number of media people who can be easily influenced over a dinner and beer?
A: Perhaps, but that's not the main part of their role. Even modern PR people admit you need results not just influence.
Q: Is it to blanket-bomb the same set of journalists and other market commentators on behalf of your client?
A: Errr.... No! Thanks to the long-tail of knowledge and specialisation, there are often far more industry-specific people to set up a dialogue with than general journo-types.
Q: Is it to monitor blogs and other social media on behalf of their clients?
A: Yes! In fact I am aware of more than one PR company that now watches numerous blog feeds at the same time (Indeed, one forward-thinking one has even built a Yahoo Pipes application to filter keyword and terms from numerous RSS sources). They should then provide honest feedback to their clients to enable them to make more informed decisons and communication plans.
Steve Rubel however mentions in a recent posting that perhaps PR is becoming obsolete, especially in the modern technical world. I disagree, but perhaps in the case of the Yahoo-Piping company above, PR may need to be more technical to survive.
3 comments:
Its funny how we can go round in circles. A couple of years ago every SEO blogger on the planet (well the States) was telling us that PR is dead and that SEO consultants would soon take the place of PRO's. And then some bright spark realised that actually these things work best together - an SEO to provide the technical expertise and a PRO to actually do the writing and the communicating and to advise on the brand. Hayden, are you shifting the debate back to circa 2005/6...?
Mr F
Thanks for your comment.
Like everything else in the modern world, I think business needs to evolve. This does not mean killing off older ways that work well, it means understanding what works better when certain underpinning fundamentals change (e.g. it is possible to engage with the long tail now).
I also have observed that some online roles have blurred, particularly as the technology becomes easier to understand or cheaper to deploy.
PR companies these days should not just be about tapping a few well-worn contacts, they should be about: listening, filtering, encouraging and optimising their clients work.
The lines are definitely blurring and I think that means that the roles are becoming more dynamic, more exciting and require a bit more thought. Which isn't a bad thing.
And it also creates some great opportunities for those of us that believe there's more to PR than a black book and an expense account.
Post a Comment