Re: UKNM: dotcom advertising - or PR?

[Fiona Campbell-Howes]

I crafted a long email in defence of hi-tech PRs but when I reread it it

sounded a bit pathetic, as it tended to pass all the blame back to the

client.


PR can be a curse - trying to get "ongoing coverage" and justify a retainer

budget for clients that have only something interesting to say or someone

interesting to say it once in a blue moon.  I do agree that sometimes we

don't think hard enough about how to approach something so that all parties

benefit and no one gets pissed off.


The one thing that hi-tech PR agencies definitely do wrong is getting the

most junior staff (sometimes even administrators) to call journalists.

These poor creatures are usually really nervous and have had no time to

learn the basic principles of PR, understand the intricacies of the client's

technology or the markets in which the client operates, or grasp the

workings of the media. It's not their fault and they usually grow up to be

good PRs, but it reflects badly on the agency as a whole.


"Down-and-out deception" though, that sounds bad. I'd be mortified if I

thought I'd ever deliberately deceived a journalist.  What kind of thing did

you mean, Neil?


Fiona


----- Original Message -----

From: <

Neil [dot] McIntoshguardian [dot] co [dot] uk

>

To: <

uk-netmarketingchinwag [dot] com

>

Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 12:22 PM

Subject: RE: UKNM: dotcom advertising - or PR?



> Sorry to inflict on the list the sickly sight of former rival hacks

agreeing

> with each other, but Ben Rooney, the former editor of the much-mourned

> Connected, was spot on about the problems with a lot of tech PR.

>

> Tessa Hyams wrote:

> >So why do people always end up having a pop at PR? As usual the minority

> >give a bad name to the rest of us!

>

> I'm afraid (judging by the calls/faxes/emails which flow in here) the

> *majority*

> is giving the industry a bad name. There are, of course, wonderful

> exceptions

> who are professional and easy to deal with, but by and large the standard

is

> low, and getting worse.

>

> Some phone calls make for entertainment: "hi - we're a tech PR agency. We

> were

> wondering if the Guardian is planning to do anything on the internet at

> all?"

> but there are also the less and less rare acts of deliberate, down-and-out

> deception.

> I should add, tho, that the tech press doesn't come out of this smelling

of

> roses either - papers fall for this kind of stuff all the time. There's

> perhaps

> a whole new thread of discussion in why dot.com media in this country does

> not,

> on the whole, manage the quality of its US equivalent. We can't blame PRs

> for

> that... ;-).

>

> Neil Mc

>

> ===================

> Neil McIntosh

> Deputy editor, Online

> The Guardian, London

> t: 020 7239 9925

> f: 020 7713 4154

> www.guardian.co.uk



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 the UK's totally managed affiliate marketing solution.

 ukaffiliates.com >> the net.working

 http://www.ukaffiliates.com /

salesukaffiliates [dot] com (mailto:salesukaffiliates [dot] com)

 telephone: 020 7691 1880 / fax: 020 7691 1881

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com