There is also the problem of who you’re contacting. Don’t reporters spend their time muckraking? Aren’t they the folks who unearth scandals, find government waste and televise shoddy business practices? If you phone or write a reporter, won’t you get nosy questions in return?

As with any profession, reporters have certain obligations to those they serve, but with journalism such obligations are often obscured by public perceptions. We tend to see the glamour of journalism rather than the grinding realities.

At best, much of journalism can be described as labor intensive — there is nothing exciting about attending lengthy hearings, reading voluminous files or making dozens of phone calls while researching stories.

Then, of course, few professions are subject to such intense public scrutiny. Critics are everywhere and not all are particularly lucid.

What can you expect when dealing with reporters? Will reporters listen to your ideas or will you be ignored? Here are several observations.

Don’t expect to speak with a secretary. Print reporters and bloggers typically get their own email, answer their own phones, do their own typing, and open their own mail. You can speak with just about any writer directly, but neither a postage stamp nor the cost of a phone call earns you an unlimited commitment of journalistic time or attention. Access to television reporters, particularly anchor personnel, is more restricted.

Don’t worry about enlightened self-promotion. If you’ve got an idea that can be a good story and it happens coincidentally that you benefit, that’s not a problem. If your idea is entirely self-serving, don’t plan a long conversation.

Don’t expect to see a story before it’s online, in print or on the air. If a subject is technical and complex the reporter will either be competent enough to handle the topic or will ask for clarification. Remember that journalists often cover regular beats or work for specialized publications. They have ongoing access to experts in every field, and by virtue of their training and experience many are regarded as authorities in their own right.

Your schedule doesn’t count. Journalists report what is current — and the more-current the better. Alternatively, the publication or broadcast of “feature” material — stories not time sensitive — are often delayed.

Turf and territory are important with major media. With large media do not expect a reporter on one beat to write about a topic usually covered by someone else. The same proposition holds true at radio and TV stations as well. Smaller media and web outlets are far more flexible.

Competition in journalism is ongoing and universal, a process sometimes called “creative tension.” Journalistic competition includes not only external battles — one magazine versus another or one radio station against a second station — but also internal fights between individuals, staffs and sections. Success is measured by prestige assignments, column inches, posting placements, posting numbers, air time and positioning. If you’ve got a story that will lead page one, the reporter who writes it will look good to colleagues and peers — at least for a day. Conversely, the reporter who does great work for a year and is then less productive can be fired. There may be tenure in teaching and job security in many fields, but journalism isn’t one of them.

Individual Reporters

Recognize that the editorial process is complex and that the interest of a single reporter may not assure coverage. A local television station, for instance, may have assignment editors, reporters, anchors and producers involved in the decision to use or not use a particular item. Their preferences may be delayed or overturned if a hot story breaks, an executive producer dislikes the topic, or a camera crew isn’t available.

Don’t be surprised if you hear from a variety of people as a result of media coverage. Some will love what you say while others will think you’re subversive. Prospective purchasers will want your product while competitors will wonder how you got coverage and they didn’t. Then there will be individuals who feel that since you received media attention, you’re a rousing success and therefore obligated to finance their favorite charity. Most importantly, reporters constantly check competing media, so you’re likely to receive calls from other journalists as a result of one article or broadcast.

Be aware that you’re a seller in a buyer’s market. Even though you may have spent time with a reporter, been interviewed and supplied information, it doesn’t obligate a reporter to use your material, accept your views, or do a story.

Technorati Tags: beat, competition, contacting, expectations, journalism, self-promotion, turf

In formal language, a single newspaper might be called a “medium” but the term is convoluted and most people will not use it. No one says “I read the medium this morning and rain is expected tomorrow.”

For our purposes “media” is a collective term that describes more than one communication outlet or mode of contact while a “medium” is someone who purports to see the future.

In a similar sense, today we send out news releases and not press releases. Why? Because most releases are intended to reach media which have no presses.

Technorati Tags: Internet, media, medium, news, newspapers, press, radio, release, TV

That giant organizations are well covered by the media is hardly surprising. Much of our news concerns events and activities only large enterprises can organize or develop. Stories about a $700-million chemical plant are likely to feature gargantuan corporations rather than minor sub-contractors.

In the competition for media time and attention, large organizations often enjoy continuing media access not because they are big, but because they can be readily covered by the media. And immediate access, in turn, is a fundamental consideration in the process of choosing stories.

Proximity Counts

Suppose a plane crashes in Washington killing 30 people. On the same day, a mine disaster in a remote Montana valley results in an equal number of deaths. Both are terrible tragedies, but you can be certain the plane crash will draw far more attention.

Why? Because the Washington crash offers immediate access. The Nation’s capital is a major media center and so nearby reporters and camera crews can be routed to the crash site in minutes. Film can be developed and edited immediately while reporters on the scene provide live up-dates as new information is received.

As for the mine disaster, it surely deserves coverage, but it takes so long to send cameras and reporters to the scene that the element of immediacy is lost. Even though “long” may be just a few hours in this example, in the competition for media time and space the mine disaster loses. Figure the Montana accident for extensive local coverage, but elsewhere it will rate a short story on day one, a follow-up with photo on day two and possibly a few paragraphs in a national news magazine a week later, perhaps as the lead for a general article on mine safety.

Immediate Access

In less dramatic fashion, large organizations also offer immediate access. They arrange their affairs so that reporters can easily obtain information, interviews, files and photos on short notice. Knowledgeable media contacts employed by major organizations — often former journalists — keep reporters abreast of new developments, respond to media inquiries and suggest story ideas. Some organizations even advertise their availability as sources and list company contacts in media journals.

To see how immediate access works on a practical basis, consider the case of a real estate reporter writing about local housing trends. There are hundreds of area realty companies, and potentially a reporter could look in the phone book, pick names at random and see what different brokers might say. And although such random calls can occur, the reporter also knows three major firms with active media information operations dominate the local market; that major companies maintain extensive sales reports; and, that each has a knowledgeable, quotable spokesman who can discuss current sales trends.

How did the reporter know about the company studies or who to contact? Several reasons stand out.

One presumes large firms in certain fields have specialized information relating to their own activities.

Large firms routinely have information specialists who contact journalists and make sure reporters know what the company is doing. The very effort to reach the media, in and of itself, influences news coverage.

It’s easier and quicker for reporters to call three known sources who understand how to work with the media then to unearth new contacts at random, particularly when deadlines loom. Alternatively, not contacting large firms in a given field could result in a weak or incomplete story.

Beat Journalism

Journalists who regularly cover individual “beats” such as housing, insurance, securities or banking develop sources over time and know who is a good contact and who isn’t. The companies above have probably been sources in the past. Reporters may have heard or seen information elsewhere and are now following up with their own stories.

Although the “immediate” access created by large organizations seems to benefit both reporter and subject, the process contains two sizable flaws.

First, many large organizations have articulate, professional information specialists who constantly update reporters. Indeed, information from such sources is so voluminous that some journalists can probably sit back and cover certain industries just on the basis of the hand-outs they receive.

But continually getting information from a limited number of sources creates a problem: If reporters use too much material from one source — even if that information is the best available — readers, listeners and viewers may wonder where the reportorial effort begins and the company information program ends, or how one can tell the difference between the two.

Second, although “immediate” access is convenient, often helpful and certainly the right approach for firms and organizations, the term “immediate” should not be confused with “complete” or “unbiased” access.

For stories to be accurate, fair and in context, it takes more information — and viewpoints — than a single source can readily provide. Conversely, if immediate access does nothing more than allow large organizations, or anyone, to gain a hearing for their views, that’s a substantial advantage in the battle for media time and attention.

Technorati Tags: access, beat, big, companies, complete, corporations, journalists, unbiased, unions

But for many of us, it’s not enough to just receive information. We want more from the media and by “more” we mean access. We want to appear in print and on the air. We want to promote our ideas, publicize our products and enhance our names. We want access for reasons of commerce and ego; because appearing in the media creates a certain cachet, importance, currency and credibility machines can’t build and dollars can’t buy.

Yet as much as we want media access, most efforts to reach print and broadcast outlets fail. An informal survey of one Washington news bureau showed that it received nearly 2,000 news releases, announcements and letters plus more than 100 telephone contacts — in a single week! Today a lot of the mail and phone calls would be replaced with email, but you can bet that the results would be largely the same: Of all these pleas, pitches and petitions, not more than one or two percent of all PR pitches ever found their way into the media.

The story in newsrooms around the country is basically the same. Substantial amounts of time and money are spent developing campaigns that often produce few tangible results. Visit any news operation, whether it’s print or broadcast, and you’re certain to find piles of discarded news releases, unused photos and unread documents. Judging from the large number of promotional efforts that fail, it’s clear few people understand how journalists work or why they choose one story and not another.

But while promotional failures are common, there are some professionals, some businesses and some individuals who are successful and who receive positive coverage on a continuing basis.

How do successful PR practitioners do it?

All promoters are different and the precise strategy that works for one may not work for another. Yet despite differences, successful promoters do have something in common: They behave within definable guidelines that can be observed, measured and copied by others.

This is a guide to the media; how information is obtained, packaged and distributed; how you can obtain ongoing news coverage; and the sales, profits, and prestige which flow from such attention.

Based on training, experience and observation over a period of more than 40 years, it argues that media access is not reserved for corporate giants or presidential candidates. You’re important and reporters would like to hear from you, but only if you know how the system works and how to package your ideas. In turn, if more people are familiar with the news business, journalists will spend less time sorting through unusable email and unworkable story proposals.

Competing in the Information Age

Understanding how the media works is not merely a matter of idle curiosity. Whether you work for a corporation, company, association or cause, whether you are self-employed, having access to the media on a continuing, positive and productive basis is a decided advantage, one that can often be measured in terms of enhanced prestige, greater recognition and larger revenues.

Not only is an understanding of the media important today, but the probability is such that information will become increasingly important in the coming years. The reason: Our growing development as an information-based society.

If it’s true that information has value, it is also true that information per se is not particularly valuable in isolation. A cure for cancer would be wonderful, but if the discovery is made by a hermit who refuses to share his secret, few if any people will benefit.

To have maximum value, information must be widely disbursed, freely received, evaluated, and then redistributed so the entire cycle can begin again. For this process to be successful, to avoid the problem of ideas in isolation, there must lines of communication and those lines are what we call the “media.” Websites, blogs, social media, search engines, specialized magazines, business weeklies, cable TV, books, company newsletters, morning newspapers, computer networks, letters to clients, radio broadcasts and advertising mail are all examples of the media.

Technorati Tags: experience, fail, failure, media, newspapers, promotion, public, radio, relations, success, TV

In a word, no.

Every year Fortune magazine identifies the 500 largest American companies, the very organizations that should dominate the media, if domination were possible, on the basis of size, resources and influence. But how many Fortune 500 firms can you name? Suppose you stop 100 people on the street and showed them the Fortune list. How many could identify the principle products or services offered by individual companies?

There is a somewhat perverse reality concerning large organizations and the media. Although corporate giants, unions, government and other institutions receive extensive press attention, one can argue that general media coverage is remarkably limited considering the players involved.

The Missing Ingredient

Suppose General Widget, a $5 billion conglomerate with 32 factories in 11 states, increases sales by 12 percent. A news release goes out, but what gets into print? Maybe a paragraph or two in business sections or just a single line in a list of corporate earnings. What gets on radio or TV? Five seconds on a business report or maybe nothing.

What’s the problem?

Large organizations often have little to offer to reporters other than size. They’ve grown big over many years doing things that in many cases are not new (“We built the Cloverdale Works in 1903 . . .”), innovative (“We’ve been making the #407 widget for 36 years . . .”), or particularly understandable to anyone outside the industry (“The reverse camber rod flexes inversely when the glombar decelerates, causing the rear fleenstones to twist laterally . . .”).

There are many General Widgets in the world and they often compete for attention in a limited number of national media outlets. With so much competition and so little space, it’s obvious that not everyone will receive coverage.

General Widget — with its excellent information program and media contacts — is always there. A journalist who cannot find information and ideas from other sources can always go back to a General Widget.

The Advantages of Small

Individuals and small organizations, however, are rarely beset by the problems above. Being small often means being new, innovative, and highly-competitive. There may be similar companies or organizations elsewhere, but relative to a given area or industry a small firm can be unique.

Small businesses are often at the heart of terrific stories. Would you rather read about companies closing and factories laying off workers or about new technologies and prosperous entrepreneurs? Small organizations must be doing something right, they consistent generate more new jobs than the largest companies.

The absolute best case, of course, concerns the Internet. Just look at the leading Internet sites today and ask how many of the companies behind them even existed 10 years ago. These companies are often the source of great stories.

What Reporters Want

The media, for its part, loves to hear from individuals and small organizations. But for journalists, the problem of dealing with individuals and small businesses is that it’s hard to tell who represents a good story and who doesn’t. There may be 5,000 small organizations in an area or industry, but do reporters really have the time to call each one?

If you’re a professional individual, association leader or have a small business you might want to help those websites, periodicals and stations that might reasonably have an interest in you or your ideas, products or services. It’s okay to send a brief email to a few journalists, something that says, “If it ever happens that you do a story about my product (or service or industry or whatever we may be able to provide (information, a plant tour, statistics, reports, a lively interview, etc.). We’ve been in the business for 14 years (or: “We’ve developed a new technology,” or “I’m the president of an industry group,” or “We’re the largest broker in town,” etc.) and we may be a useful source when it comes time to develop a story. Please feel free to call.”

Given a choice between calling old sources time and again, or new sources who may offer different perspectives, journalists will be open to new contacts. After all, the very fact that there is a new source may justify or validate an otherwise mundane story in a business always looking for something new, something different, and something unique.

Technorati Tags: email, getting, journalist, new, old, reporter, source, started

The use of publicity agents, the forerunners of today’s more sophisticated public relations practitioners, became common not only in industry, but also with unions, associations, and government. While publicity agents did much to open up the organizations they served, not everyone was pleased by their efforts to influence media coverage.

The government, for its part, was so distressed by the new practice of public relations that in 1913 it prohibited the hiring of publicity experts. To this day the government has vast armies of “information officers” but not a single “public relations” practitioner. (See 38, Part 1, U.S. Stat. 212)

Technorati Tags: 1913, affairs, banned, law, PR, practitioners, public, relations, Sinclair, Tarbell

Advertising is a multi-billion dollar industry and it’s hard to believe a business of such size is possible without an observable record of success. Certainly advertising does offer benefits; each year selected products and services increase sales and expand their market share because of successful ad campaigns.

Yet the concept of advertising is not always attractive or plausible. It presumes, by definition, that would-be advertisers have money to spend, an unlikely situation for new firms, companies operating at a loss or organizations with limited revenues.

Even if you have the money to advertise there are still problems. Audiences must be defined, themes and concepts developed and the entire presentation packaged in a creative manner. Given these requirements, developing productive ads isn’t simple and results are not guaranteed.

Competition For Time & Attention

Ads must also be placed with great care. Not only do ads compete among themselves for the time and attention of readers, viewers and listeners, they also compete with the editorial material they surround.

If you’re an advertiser, you want your ad to appear in a successful medium that attracts a specific audience, yet you don’t want a medium that’s “too” successful. Such a publication or program will attract many ads and your’s may not stand out in such a saturated environment. At the same time, you also don’t want a medium offering such riveting editorial content that your ad is ignored, a concern which may explain the mundane nature of so much television programming.

For many people, money alone is the difference between advertising and media marketing. The only problem with this quick and neat distinction is accuracy: “Free” promotion, in an absolute sense, is an illusion.

Although media coverage may be free, the expense of obtaining such exposure is not. Whether you do it yourself or hire professionals, it takes time, preparation and considerable thinking to generate worthwhile media exposure.

The Dollar Value Of Advertising

If media marketing is not free, then how much is it worth? Why can’t you place a price tag on media marketing efforts by calculating the cost for equivalent advertising space? Suppose you can buy advertising space at $100 per column inch in a metropolitan daily. Shouldn’t a 15-inch story be valued at $1,500?

In statistical terms it’s certainly possible to calculate the value of media coverage if our standard is raw space, impressions or air time. The problem, however, is that we’re attempting to compare radically different concepts.

Advertising is unfiltered communication that allows you to control the content of your message. Short of libel, crazed medical claims or bigotry, you can say whatever you want and most media outlets will run your ad untouched. With media marketing, you rely on journalists to interpret your story.

Advertising allows you to place an ad any day or, if you like, every day. For a premium, you can often assure which page or section will carry your ad. With media marketing not only is timing unsure, but it’s impossible to project when an article will appear — if at all — or whether a broadcast will air. Worse still, even if you obtain coverage, you can’t be sure what will be presented; you have no control over the length, content, style, placement or context of whatever is being printed or broadcast.

When comparing advertising to media marketing the distinctions above seem to give a significant edge to advertising. But there’s another value to consider: The nature of communication.

Adversarial Communication

Advertising is an adversarial form of contact. Somebody is trying to sell something and no matter how well presented, advertising is advertising. Even so-called “institutional” advertisements, the messages that tell us to drive safer, drink less or give more to charity are adversarial in the sense that advertisers seek to enhance their names by associating with a particular public concern. If institutional efforts are meant as purely munificent gestures, then surely there is no reason why such ads can’t be anonymous.

Media marketing is not an adversarial form of communication precisely because it’s filtered through independent journalists and their editors or news directors. The public reads, watches and listens with the expectation that working journalists have gathered the news for us. If they write or broadcast information about a particular subject we assume there must be some news value in the topic. News articles and broadcasts are not perceived as places where goods and services are sold or as forums where coverage can be bought, and therefore information which appears in the news is not regarded as adversarial communication.

Suppose a bank spends $10,000 advertising a new certificate of deposit (CD) in a local business section and receives 150 responses. Suppose also that a columnist writes about the CD and the result is 800 queries.

Is it possible the firm’s ads are merely ineffective? Sure. Another reason, however, is that people resist salesmanship. The very act of selling, in and of itself, causes us to raise our defenses. But since news articles, blogs and broadcasts are not commonly perceived as marketing tools, the public has no reason to be defensive and therefore a major barrier to acceptance is removed.

Advertising tells the world how you want to be regarded, but when you’re the subject of press attention, it’s the media making an evaluation. With positive editorial coverage from an independent media outlet, you gain the implicit, undeniable sanction and approval of the publication or program that carries your story, an entitlement that cannot be fully valued in the same way that we price column inches or minutes of air time. And, it should be said, it’s an entitlement that can’t be bought.

Technorati Tags: ads, adversarial, attention, marketing, media, time, unfiltered

Think about it this way.

In the coming year several hundred thousand people will become licensed as real estate agents, the number of insurance brokers will proliferate and banking will become far more competitive. We’ll continue to churn out CPAs and financial planners at a rapid rate and another 30,000 or 40,000 law students will graduate.

The number of competitors in virtually every business and profession is increasing, but while we have more people vying for clients and customers we do not necessarily have more business to divide. We have reached a point where many fields are saturated with well-trained, highly-qualified professionals and the result is a buyer’s market of sorts, an environment where those who buy services are insufficient to support the growing army of professionals who covet their business.

Today it is not enough to have credentials and a quality product. Image and perception often spell the difference between success and failure in many fields and the practical reality is that those who communicate best have a stunning advantage over would-be competitors. Here’s why.

The Advantages of Public Relations

First, promotional skills are essential in many fields where products and services are often indistinguishable.

In the eternal search for market distinction, individuals and businesses try to stand out in the midst of competitive clutter. Because a large number of substantially similar choices are available in most fields, it’s difficult for consumers, users, buyers or clients to objectively select one competitor and not another. Since the alternatives are basically alike, there are no “wrong” choices and therefore decisions are often made on the basis of familiarity and name recognition, major by-products of media attention.

If we need insurance and the cost of one whole life policy is much like another, which policy do we choose? All brokers will tell us that they have the best deal and surely such policies seem largely identical.

In many fields product distinctions are unclear and one result is that we’re encouraged to have brand loyalty, not because we particularly benefit, but because brand names are often the only way the products of one firm can be distinguished from those of another.

Blindfold 100 people, have them ride in cars of similar size and cost, and the probability of their matching an auto’s comforts and ride with specific brand names is just about zero. The story is much the same with adhesive bandages, writing paper, photocopies, washing machines, paper tissues, gasoline, eyeglass lenses, canned corn and tires, to cite a few examples. Indeed, it’s entirely common for one factory to produce identical products which are then marketed under different — and sometimes competing — labels.

The world of services is even more perplexing. Professions have a way of homogenizing their practitioners. The person who finishes at the top of his or her class in medical school and the individual with the lowest passing grades are both known by the same title after graduation: Doctor. For the public, it’s tough to tell who’s best, who’s the most competent or why one should be selected over another.

If there are 100 lawyers in town and you need a will, which attorney do you choose? They all went to law school. They all graduated and passed a standardized bar exam. So who do you select? The one nearby? The one with the fanciest furniture — and perhaps the highest fee? The one your neighbor used?

As hard as it may be for service users to make distinctions among service providers, it’s also difficult for providers themselves to demonstrate differences. In the modern sense, there is little marketing experience in many fields, in part because licensure laws traditionally-banned advertising as “undignified” or “unprofessional.”

Now marketing is increasingly widespread in every field and profession, prices in many specialties have declined but to a surprising degree at least one old problem remains: How do you find the best lawyer, broker, banker, doctor or dentist?

New Clutter Versus Old Clutter

What has really happened is that we’ve replaced one form of clutter with another. Before it was hard to choose professionals because there were few objective standards by which they could be judged. Now it’s hard to judge professionals because advertising tells us not who is best, but who is available.

Given few objective clues, a consumer may well opt to buy from the car manufacturer who wins the most races and gets the most name recognition, rather than the firm which quietly concentrates on building a better vehicle. The broker quoted in the real estate pages will receive more referrals than the broker who makes little effort to market his or her services. The attorney who writes a weekly legal affairs column will stand out, not necessarily because he is — or is not — the world’s leading legal authority in a given specialty, but because his name is familiar.

Second, we increasingly define importance by the extent of media coverage received. If it’s not in the media it isn’t important. Conversely, receiving media coverage creates importance.

Suppose we have two candidates for political office. Barringer is athletic, telegenic, speaks well and has faithfully memorized 26 position papers prepared by his advisers. Springer, his primary opponent, is 90 pounds overweight, wears suits long out of style and has an entire campaign based on two flyers typed at home.

Who gets the most attention? Barringer. Why? Because he’s a media-oriented candidate. His ideas on a variety of subjects, or at least his adviser’s ideas, have been carefully prepared and written out. Every night another 20-second bite from his stump speech is used on TV. Barringer is seen as the “stronger” candidate because he gets more exposure and, in circular fashion, because he gets more exposure he is the stronger candidate. If Springer ever won, his victory would be described as a “major upset,” not because he beat a candidate who is objectively better, but because he defeated someone with greater media access.

Third, the Internet is wonderful but it has added to the issue of clutter. You can get a great website build for little money and it will look and feel pretty much like the site owned by the biggest company in town. This is “good” in the sense that now everyone has a chance to get their story out, but not-so-good in the sense that it’s hard to tell which company is better. It may be the company with the better website, or maybe not.

Fourth, to gain media attention, size and money are important, but not as important as creativity and packaging. Media marketing is among the most democratic activities we have. Anyone can play, you don’t need a huge inheritance or a powerful job to gain press attention (though such assets may help).

What Journalists Want

What journalists want are story concepts to interest their readers, visitors, viewers and listeners. If you’ve got such an idea, if you know how to package it, the probability of getting coverage is excellent. If you haven’t got a workable idea, then money, power and position are worth little. Wastepaper baskets and email accounts in newsrooms around the country are filled with releases from the nation’s largest firms and most prestigious institutions, organizations which — despite their size and dollars — failed to understand the media’s essential needs.

Some may read these words and argue that while promotion is important, you don’t need journalists to appear in print or on the air. Why bother with media marketing when you can buy as much space and time as you want, or at least as much as you can afford? The answer, as we shall now explain, is that advertising and editorial coverage involve markedly different values.

Technorati Tags: access, clutter, competition, jouranlists, marketing, media, websites