What's in a name or a number? Welcome to PR 5.0…

There appears to be a growing number of PR people on the InterWeb with ADD.

Rather than just discuss the changes taking place to PR in terms of new tools (e.g. blogs and podcasts) or practices (e.g. conversation) they have to give it a new moniker – normally a number. Why?

Use what works, watch what’s interesting and discard what’s irrelevant.


Now I see that PR Week is now pushing PR 3.0….. urrrghhhh.

Sorry I had to take a break there, I could feel the pressure growing in my brain and my chest tightening.

While PR 3.0 is a first, PR 2.0 is now commonplace and in fact the 2.0 crowd are now correcting the 3.0 crowd.

Now if we are going to use version numbers surely we should be doing this on something based on history.

For example:

PR 1.0 – Handing out coins to kids in the slums

PR 1.5 – Ivy Ledbetter Lee/Edward Bernays

PR 2.0 – Press releases

PR 3.0 – Radio

PR 4.0 – Television

PR 4.5 – Tabloid culture

PR 5.0 – The InterWeb


PR 2.0 Panel @W2E

I’m not clear what the presentation is dealing with 🙂

What does it matter? What matters is our audience, our clients, our people, our tools (online and offline) etc. etc..

The number doesn’t matter, nor does the hype.

I know I post on this subject with boring regularity. This is probably Post 555.1 on the matter – but it’s OK, no one is listening…