Public relations and bloggers - more alike than unalike
public relations May 12th. 2008, 6:00amGeoff Livingston and Jason Falls have both posted some pretty passionate responses to the latest major poke in the eye at the public relations industry. Gina Trapani of Lifehacker has begun a public blacklist of PR folks who’ve not followed her “rules of engagement” for contacting her, similar to Chris Anderson’s public blacklist from a few months ago.
Credit: IrisDragon.
Neither Geoff or Jason are very supportive of Gina’s list and offer their own insights into the PR profession while pointing out that bloggers aren’t always perfect either.
Now, I’m neither a writer or blogger as accomplished as Trapani or Anderson. Moreover, my only experience with public relations is:
- when I was responsible for public relations for my local Toastmasters club
- anything I do related to my social media presence
So, as I write, I write as an outsider. I’ve had some pleasant interactions with both Jason (in person) and Geoff (online) and, of course, I’ve enjoyed a lot of Lifehacker content and have had some positive interaction with at least one person involved with Lifehacker. I like Wired.com and The Long Tail, too.
I guess I’m trying to say that I’m relatively unbiased. Or biased towards both sets of stakeholders.
The comments that I left at Geoff’s blog summarize my thoughts on this topic:
I’m of two minds about this situation where PR firms are being publicly blacklisted:
a) On one hand, the behavior of some people working in the PR industry may resemble that of the telemarketer, except E-Mail is the medium instead of the phone call. With all due respect to all those people who are trying to make a living as telemarketers, virtually no one wants to speak to a telemarketer and, taken in the aggregate, they disrupt one’s life with little chance of finding a receptive listener. A similar thing happens with the mass E-Mail campaigns used by some PR people, or so I understand. Eventually disruptions will produce a negative response.
b) On the other hand, many beginning bloggers and journalists have probably been in the same situation as both the telemarketer and the faceless PR employee: no one knows you, no one cares about you, and no one has time to talk to you, let alone read your blog. I’ve been there and it took months of work to start to build a network of contacts. You can become quite desperate to make contacts and you may try mass-marketing techniques because you’re willing to try anything. And you’ll make mistakes, like not checking to see how a blogger, professional or entrepreneur prefers to be contacted, or spamming a bit as your frustration and impatience wear thin when you don’t get a response.
I’ve tried to be balanced so far. However, I do tip in one direction with my next comment:
The sad thing, of course, is that some people forget how hard it was in the beginning after they’ve passed through that part of the Dip and become intolerant of the “noob”. Or maybe their impatience of the successful person is genuine when they feel that they aren’t being listened to. Nonetheless, there may be a hint of hypocricy in the behaviour of the journalist, professional, or entrepreneur who erects barriers to communication and, worse still, publicly flogs someone who screws up.
This position is somewhat consistent with my Role Model 3.0 post and follow-up to that post from a couple of weeks ago. On one hand, I argued that accessibility and two-way communication of some sort is a hallmark of the modern role model or thought leader. On the other, I acknowledged that these people have pressures on them that many of us don’t have to deal with, as was pointed out to me in a private conversation with a successful blogger (pun intended).
I tried to look at it again from another angle:
Just like in social media, would it not make sense to try to build contacts among the more accessible bloggers and journalists instead of trying to go directly to the Trapanis and Andersons of the world? In fairness to them, why would they want to talk to new sources if they’ve already built a somewhat trusted network of contacts, especially if the new source doesn’t respect the rules of engagement ?
However, I still come back to this:
- If you’re going to blog under your own name and identity and make public various ways that you can be contacted… it’s only a matter of time before they’re used, regardless if you have “rules of engagement”.
- If you make an extreme response to something, expect an extreme reaction.
- Remember that at one point in time, nobody online knew who you were, didn’t want to listen to you, and didn’t want to know you unless you had a previously established reputation offline. And that didn’t start out full-blown, either.
- Everyone practices public relations, marketing, sales, etc. whether it’s a role or a full-fledged job.
So, what do you think? Is PR a virus that must be destroyed? Are PR people “just folks”? Are bloggers and journalists “just folks”, too, or are we getting too big for our britches?
If you're new here, welcome! Please consider subscribing to my RSS feed to stay up to date with my latest posts and articles. Thanks for visiting!


May 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
The rules are changing. Many PR people think that blogs are just another marketing channel and treat them as such. They are stuck in the past. We are free to filter out unwanted information and it’s not our job to hold everybody’s hand. Sink or swim, baby!
If they were so great at PR, why are they having problems adjusting? The ones who truly have their finger on the pulse are already doing it differently. People get complacent and fall behind in every industry. We are all responsible for our own development. You can lead a horse to water, etc., etc.
May 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
@Michael - thing is, I did find the public outing and banning to be a bit much. And, as Jason Falls pointed out to me recently, PR firms do supply some relevant and needed information. The shotgun approach is what I don’t respect. And you are correct, a number of folks are indeed doing it differently.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Mark:
You make some outstanding points. I like the way you think. Great response.
Geoff
May 12th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Great post. I think it boils down to these points on the PR side - education about how to do this right (I know, will some ever learn?), not pushing these responsibilities to less-experienced staffers and realizing how a highly targeted “rifle” approach (quality) is so much better in the long run than an attempt at bunches of hits.
May 12th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
@Geoff - thank you (also for Tweeting the link to this post).
@Jeff - my thought is that there is some anxiety and desperation for results that leads PR folks, salespeople, and marketers to ignore the rules of engagement with a blogger/journalist/executive. In my own experience of trying to grow a blog readership AND guest posting/freelance article writing, it can be very tempting to use the shotgun approach to get traffic. I’ve tried it, too. It’s especially tempting when you don’t get any response. However, if you don’t follow the rules of engagement, you’re probably not going to get where you want to be either.
Having said that, the PR profession (and sales and marketing) needs to continue to educate, train, condition, and work on its own reputation to help avoid the extreme reactions of the likes of both Gina T. and Chris A., who were probably feeling their own frustrations and decided they’d had enough.
May 12th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
For me, it comes down to, consider the source (newbie? lazy? clueless? obnoxious? etc.) and base my reaction on that.
Education about plain simple netiquette is always a good thing.
Data points,
Barbara
May 12th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
@Barbara - data points?
May 12th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
[...] the recent PR firm blacklisting that’s been set up by both Gina Trapani and Chris Anderson (see yesterday’s blog for the context behind this post). I don’t believe in the concept of public blacklisting for [...]