Ah. You've been reading I am happy to report. I've had just one response though. I would encourage more.
Here's a suggestion from Johann Tasker. A wooden spoon for the PR profession; now is that something to contemplate? But just to be balanced I guess we would have to balance it with the worst news report of the year.
Joe
Hi Joe -
Well done on your blog - they can be a really really effective way to communicate.
In response to your latest post, I too have often been struck by the poor (and often laughable) standard of many press releases.
It would be a good idea for the guild to consider initiating an "Inpenetrable Press Release of the Year Award" for the most incomprehensible/jargon-laden or just plain badly written press release.
It would be a good way of raising the standard of journalism and if approached in the right way I am sure nobody could possibly object. The winner could be announced alongside other award-winners at the annual guild dinner.
Much like the Bad Sex in Fiction Award or the Plain English Campaign's "Golden Bull" awards, I am sure it would be keenly contested.
Yours,
Johann Tasker
Exercising Clydesdale foals at the Clydesdale Winter Fair at Perth
Sitemeter
3 comments:
The most impenetrable press release of the year - what a brilliant idea. Perhaps we could have one for the most follow-up calls to a press release, too!
Joe, Johann
While many of your comments are justified, wouldn't it be better to celebrate the good press releases, rather than castigate the poor ones?
The agricultural industry is frustrated by poor communications. So much feedback from farmers bemoans the inability of scientists to convey their findings effectively. You wonder just how much worthy research lies on a shelf gathering dust because the research authority or commercial company involved hasn’t employed the right channel or people with the right skills to publicise it.
It requires a good technical ability, an understanding of farmers and the skill to turn data-generated dross into a gem of a story (and yes, you do need the balls to relay this to your client). You also need a passion for the industry and for getting a good story into the hands of the media. When it comes to knowledge transfer, there are PR consultancies that fit the bill, and those people who are using them recognise the difference they can make to ensuring worthy research is translated into fascinating, engaging editorial, and from there into practice.
Having said that, responsibility must lie at the door of desk editors to grasp what is interesting about a story, put their own slant on it and ensure it lifts from the page and adds value for the reader. Even a good PR consultancy shouldn’t do the whole job!
So a Guild award for quality PR material, rather than a wooden spoon for dross, would be a better solution, wouldn’t it?
Yours
Tom Allen-Stevens
Senior account manager, Mistral Group
Tom
Points taken.
You obviously are unaware that the Guild has an annual award for the best press releases. It is sponsored by Farmers Guardian and you will find details on the Guild's website at www.gaj.org.uk under AWARDS
Where the issue is and I think it is on one that journalists and PRs will never agree is on the quality of the material submitted. If a PR is employed it's your job to sell the story to the journalist. If the PR can't do that then frankly they shouldn't be working. Science is wonderful stuff when it can be understood, but we don't all have science degrees and neither do our readers so that collectively we can all understad it.
I would suggest that all PRs take a look at the garbage that crosses journalists' desks to see the problem that those of us on this side of the fence face. These are not one-off occurences; they happen with increasing frequency.
Then again there is the issue over whether or not a hack uses the PR copy verbatum or tries to get their own spin on it. I certainly like to think that I never take anything at face value. There is an odd occasion where something could be used as presented, but I doubt it happens very often.
Post a Comment