Category: General

Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:56:22 GMT

PR not getting more credible with the media
According to a new survey from Bennett & Company forty three percent of journalists do not believe PR is becoming more credible. Twenty eight percent think PR is becoming more credible. The findings are part of Bennett & Company’s latest annual media survey.

Other interesting findings: forty four percent of respondents rely on PR firms for 11-30 per cent of their story information and forty seven percent of media chose e-mail as their preferred communication mechanism.

More information on the survey is available here.

Fri, 16 Aug 2002 08:20:26 GMT

The media (still) don’t get the Internet

Deborah Branscum’s blog is back on-line following her move to Sweden and she points to Scott Rosenberg’s excellent piece in Salon on how the large media conglomerates are still struggling to understand the Internet and the changes it has introduced. There are some parallel lessons for the PR business. Rosenberg in the course of the piece reviews David Weinberger’s latest book which details the Internet’s change in human behaviour and John Motavalli’s look at how the Internet affected Time Warner and others.

There’s a great illustrative quote from AOL’s David Colburn to Time Warner’s CFO Richard Bressler, in response to Bressler’s question on what advertising pop-up’s were (in December 2000! post merger!) from Motavalli’s book: “Rich, why don’t you invest $21.95 in an AOL subscription and consider it due diligence.”

Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:02:48 GMT

Off Topic (a little): The Tech Bust (Again!)
I am sure that you, like me, had your fill of the doom and gloom of the current downturn and in particular the dotcom crash. However the Washington Post have an excellent four part feature on the aftermath of the tech burn-out in the vicinity of Washington DC. “Sixteen of the 40 technology companies in the Washington area that first sold stock to the public in the past five years are sold, in bankruptcy or out of business.”

Wed, 07 Aug 2002 07:30:59 GMT

No, we want you to invest in PR…we just don’t think it’s effective…

Thanks to Phil Gomes who picked this one up. Edelman, the well known (“world’s largest privately-held PR agency”) has decided to celebrate its 50th anniversary by getting suppliers to pony up cash for an advetorial in Ad Age.

Now I’m not a big fan of advetorial, I admit that, but this seems absolutely ridiculous. A PR firm with thousands of PR professionals, celebrating its 50th anniversary by paying for an ad in the advertising bible.

Anyone spot the irony? Can Edelman now tell clients, “oh you’re much better off getting editorial coverage than advetorial..what’s that? oh yes well we prefer advetorial ourselves but…”

This is all the more surprising given a fantastic piece of PR that Edelman executed a couple of year’s back when they held their global meeting in Canada and got the participants to come up with marketing ideas for the brand ‘Canada’. A fantastic story ran in the Canadian Financial Post.

Looks like Edelman thinks PR’s not worth the hassle. I’m sure their clients will be impressed.

Supplemental: On the front page of the Edelman website they have a link to a webcast on “Marketing in the Post-Advertising Era” – oh the irony of it!

Fri, 02 Aug 2002 11:36:37 GMT

ChannelEdge..Top marks for creativity…but where’s the meat?

I’m sure if you’ve been scanning the marketing press during the week you’ve probably come across the announcement of “ChannelEdge” the new joint venture between Ketchum and IDC.

ChannelEdge’s raison d’etre is:
” a strategic alliance formed in July 2002 between Ketchum and IDC to help technology companies define and deliver winning channel strategies and communications.”

From the outset this defintely gets kudos in terms of creativity, but the more I read about it the more questions it raised with me.

Question #1
What experience do the PR guys have in creating ‘channel strategy’? Looking at the biographies there is no question but that these PR folks are very successful, experienced and capable PR people, but back to the question, if I am paying for consultancy I am paying for expertise and experience. Not one of these PR people (according to their bios) have worked in a channel role or inside a firm with responsibility for the channel…..eh, so is this a channel PR program? Now in fairness the IDC analysts do have channel experience…but

Question #2
If Ketchum are offering channel communications (given they have no actual channel experience themselves) programs. Isn’t this a standard PR service? Why do they need to create a joint venture?

Question #3
What’s the relationship between Ketchum and IDC? Does it stretch beyond ChannelEdge? What are the lines of demarcation that allow IDC to be an ‘honest broker’ for non-Ketchum (or ChannelEdge) clients?

Maybe I am being cynical and even unreasonable, but look at ChannelEdge’s “proven three phase approach”:
1. Assess
2. Plan
3. Execute

It’s not really pushing back the barriers of channel marketing is it?

My initial take is that this is a clever marketing ploy to sell some channel-related PR services – and in that I say best to luck to them. If they are serious about offering strategic channel counsel however I would recommend they head-hunt an experienced channel executive (or marketer). Talking about co-op funds etc. is fine in practice but in reality it’s about more than a press release.

This is a high-profile example of the PR industry’s continued attempt to become more than PR. Can they carry it off?