You Can't Make This Stuff Up: Stage Two Consulting PRology

It's almost funny, but then again, are they serious or poking fun at the inanity of press releases? Another log on the fire of the PR Spam bruhaha come inadvertantly (?) from Stage Two consulting, which seems at face value, to be an actual recommendation about how to do it as best as they can figure it out. But by laying out the formulaic and bogus nature of the whole thing, they have created a satire of the whole system, even thought they consistently recommend avoiding cuteness and jargon:

[from Stage Two Consulting � Our Recommended Press Release Structure]

[...]

Quote
The simplest reason to have a quote is this: it will inevitably get copied-and-pasted into an article somewhere, and it saves the journalist from having to email you for a quote for their article. Your quote should sound like a human being said it, and not be jargony robot-English. Also, there’s no reason to deviate from the “standard quote” format of:

"I said something cool,” said FIRSTNAME LASTNAME, the TITLE of COMPANY. “I’m excited about that cool thing I said especially because it’s so cool.”

Focus on the business implications, and/or partnership details

This is a good time to explain why the story matters SOOO much. Either there’s a huge opportunity for the company to expand, or possibly a big deal with a big partner/customer is being announced (if so, make sure you’ve referenced this earlier!). Think about the business/industry implications of your announcement, and make them clearly comprehensible.

[optional] partner/3rd party Quote

IF you are working with a partner, give them their quote here. If not, but you have a *very well known* fan of the company, they can make a quote. It’s absolutely not necessary otherwise, and should fit very naturally - if not, don’t include something just to fill in space (shorter press releases are always better than longer ones).

And if the shorter the better, can we winnow it down to exclude the bogus quote from the CEO and the second quote from the famous fan of the company? Can we just drop this all? Can't we just cut to the most minimal?

Again, just as in the comments on my recent post on this topic, The Growing Backlash Against PR Spam, And The Rationale For MicroPR, PR professionals are approaching this discussion by justifying the way things are being done today in that 'industry', and suggesting minor tweaks. I have not yet seen anyone from the PR side of things actually address the greater issue: how should we be doing this, given everything we know today about communication on the web?

My recommendations about MicroPR are largely about conducting PR in an open fasion, in the context of systems like Twitter: Open public discourse, not one:one emails. Doesn't anyone in PR land see the difference? Let me spell it out:

1. I don't want PR people leveraging a personal relationship with me -- we met at some conference, and exchanged cards -- as a reason to pitch PR at me. I don't want my private social relationships filled with spam.
2. I suggest that open social engagement is fine, however. Pitch me in a public setting, where I can say 'your story blows' or 'sounds interesting, let's set up a demo'. Take the risk, earn the reward. Stuff sent to my inbox is private, but I am a public person. Let's do it in public.

Basically, I see it falling out into two camps: many PR people say, fine, let's twitpitch you, no problem. Others continue to argue for the old ways, which are, practically indistinguishable from spam.

But if the whole point is to generate public interest in the subject being discussed, why not go directly into the public sphere? Because PR people see themselves as these back room operators, moving around and doing their thing backstage. The 'audience' isn't supposed to know they are at work. Journalists haven't kicked off their stories by saying 'Joanna Wimplepuss of HyperPR sent me an email today, extolling the virtues of SuperSoftware 3.0., and asserting that John Fizzel said "This is so cool. It's way cool," although I never actually heard him say that.' Instead they have print the bogus quote, incorporate the bulleted lists and links from the press release. Everyone is acting in collusion to spread little teeny tiny white lies to the rest of us.

I am too gonzo for that. We need to be honest about who is trying to influence who to do what. And the simplest move is for the PR flacks to come out into the light of day and explicitly say "here's something I think is interesting from my client Blatz Software," and we'll evaluate it on it's own merits. The implication that I want the PR people to make it easier for me to crank out 700 words by midnight is old school, and worst of all, we are supposed to not talk about it, like the illegal aliens making lunch for us at the deli, or mowing our lawns. I want it all to be open and above board, and the PR pros to be just an additional voice in the conversation, instead of being treated like the deranged aunt that lives upstairs and that no one ever talks about. Come out into the light of day. We'll set up an amnesty program, and all the past misdeeds will be forgiven.

Comments

[Jeremy Toeman]

Stowe, why do you consider this "satire"? Just because *you* want to be pitched by Twitter and email does not mean it is the ONLY way to pitch a story. There are THOUSANDS of journalists who read press releases, and I think giving up on writing releases is not exactly prudent. In your case, we wouldn't send you a release, but seeing as how I deal with *MANY* journalists, I know full well some of them would PREFER it.

I think you are a little overly one-sided on your views of the journalist/marketing professional relationship. As I said numerous times - there is no "one size fits all" solution. I stand by my post on writing press releases, and hope it helps others who need guidance on such activities. Don't forget, there are also many startups out there who can't afford *ANY* marketing help, and for them, a press release on PRWeb might just be the most effective action they can take.

Any by the way, some of the items you quote were clearly done for the humor factor, if you truly believed I meant a CEO should be quoted as I described, please give it another glance. It was meant to be light-hearted. Funny how that has backfired in this case, eh?

If you would like to actually talk to me about how my firm does outreach, I think you'd be a little surprised. You can choose to just make a judgment like this, or get engaged and understand what we do. I think you'd be pleasantly surprised by it...

[Jason Kintzler]

I think somewhere along the way some PR Pros have melded social media and distribution as if the two were the synonymous. Like being 'social' means spamming to a list of contacts. PR pros should be utilizing the tools AFTER they have established a relationship and actually know who they are pitching and how they are comfortable being pitched. Personally, I think the twitpitch is spot on, at least for the time being. If I PR pro can't sum up what they're saying in a few words, they should be saying it. If they're pitching just to be pitching, I'm sure there's a trade pub somewhere that will put a press release up on a website.
A pitch should be personal. If it doesn't relate to the person you're pitching- then it's just marketing. Thanks for shaking it up.

[Todd Defren]

Stowe, honestly, we don't make the rules: as much as humanly possible, PR folks abide by whatever preferences we're *aware* of. In your case, we get it: twitpitch or don't bother. But I can assure you that many bloggers and journalists want "exclusives" on our clients' news: to see a "public pitch" would piss 'em off since their competitors also see it.

Just .02.

[Susan Getgood]

I've been talking about a new model for blogger relations for more than two years based on the simple concept that the blogger isn't simply an intermediary. He or she is your customer. Instead of asking the question, how can we get the blogger to write about our laundry soap or tech widget, companies, and their agencies should be asking, How can I help my customer? What information from us would be truly valuable and useful in their daily lives? What can we do for them? I guarantee you, it isn't that your juice has 25% less sugar than yesterday or you are now at version 2.4.5.x of your software.

We have to stop being product centric and start being customer centric. For real, not just lip service.

I like your term MicroPR, although would add that companies should be talking to their customers where they are. If on Twitter, and they, like you, want to be Twit-pitched, great. But if not -- if the place is Facebook or MySpace or some other community, that's where the company employees and PR reps should hang out. Get to know the people, their interests. Let the people get to know them. And then make them, not the company, not the product, the center of the story. However you pitch it, public or one:one.

"But that's so hard and takes so long," says traditional PR. Uhm, yes. But isn't talking with your customer worth a little time?