headermask image

header image

Let\’s Put Press Releases Out of Their Misery

I’ve never liked press releases – even though, in my journalistic work, I’ve often relied on them for story leads and background. But I’ve never actually liked them. They’ve always felt slimy and fake to me. I’ve always thought there had to be a better way to convey that information, to make those kinds of connections.

True, some people are very attached to this vehicle. They generally sound like this.

I’m so glad that neither journalists nor PR folks need rely on (or resort to) press releases any longer.

Really, we don’t. I mean it. Here’s why we should let the press release die a merciful, quick death – by force if necessary…

NEWS IS BROADER THAN NEWS ORGANIZATIONS

With the advent of the internet and other decentralized communication systems (notably cell phones), it’s become apparent that traditional news organizations no longer hold a monopoly on defining “what’s news.” In fact, they never did – they just managed to swallow their own hype for as long as limited technology would support that peculiar delusion.

When news organizations appeared to dictate what is and is not newsworthy, all those who would be in the public eye would dutifully apply for admittance to that club. The press release was that application form. Like any bureaucratic tool, press releases were an artificial construction intended to either curry favor or to threaten – rather than communicate. Their stiff and stodgy format oozed pretension, pandering, and posturing.

In a word, press releases sound fake. That is entirely intentional. To my mind, there’s something patently screwy about that. Why should news (ostensibly a reflection and exploration of what’s happening in the real world) rely in any way upon something so obviously fake as a press release?

Most journalists I know (and I know a lot of journalists) loathe press releases – even well-written ones. Reading them is a mind-numbing chore.

First of all, the content of most of press releases is utterly useless. It never fails to amaze me when I see a press release heralding the appointment of a new VP of Sales. WHO CARES????

A BETTER WAY: THE PUBLIC CONVERSATION

Now that technology has put us all in touch with each other, and we no longer have to squeeze our conversations through artificially small gates watched by self-important gatekeepers, we can relax a bit and start talking like people – finally.

Any organization or individual can communicate far more effectively (with the target audience – not just the mainstream media) by participating in the public conversation.

TRY THIS: The next time you’re tempted to issue a press release: STOP!!!! Instead, post a web page or blog item that explains what’s new – and more importantly, why anyone should care. The “so what” should go right up front. Even more, you should indicate who should care about your news, and why.

Then make sure your announcement gets picked up by the blogwatching services like Technorati. (Blogging tools and feeds make this very easy). It’s more likely to get noticed there fast.

Then talk it up – in forums with your target audience, in appropriate, constructive comments to other blogs, etc. Include a direct link to your posting. If you’re honestly adding value and not just shilling, this is not spam. It’s part of the public conversation. (By the way, to do this well you need to actually read and pay attention to what other people are saying.)

Contacting the mainstream media should be the last step in this process. Instead of a boring press release, send a succinct e-mail to a specific journalist or editor. That’s right, make one-to-one contact with a real person. No more groveling applications to be invited to the club of the newsworthy! As always, make your point and include your link. Even better, include links to the existing buzz about your news, if any.

Which approach sounds more realistic, fun, and valuable? You tell me.

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

13 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

  1. The best use for press releases I ever saw was one guy who just graphed all the “announcing an agreement between company A and company B” mappings just around the time of the VC bubble burst in 2000/2001. The end effect is that the whole IT industry was revolving around a few “death stars” (Microsoft, Cisco, Intel and to a lesser extent, IBM), while the banking industry was sitting out in their own part of the galaxy signing up with each other.

    The data in the press releases was superfluous in the grand scheme of things. Two company names in the title was all that was useful…

    Ian W.

    1. Ian Waring on August 6th, 2005 at 6:23 am
  2. -Blogs or Webpages drown in an ocean of digital information. Clearly, you can try to get them on the radar of search engines, but even then only those who SPECIFICALLY requested your information will find it.
    -Therefore with this type of communication you reach people who are ALREADY interested and at some level of involvement. While this sounds -and is- attractive for some purposes, it also means that you will NOT reach people who are not currently interested or aware of your cause or product. Therefore it is an ADDITIONAL measure that may be able to replace press releases for some porposes under certain circumstances.
    -Under certain circumstances: Given that you can target your information which means knowing who will and in fact does receive it. Whereas traditional media offers a defined audience, there is no agreed-upon standard yet for measuring quantity and most of all QUALITY of an online audience.
    -Last but not least: It takes much more effort to engage in communication on forums, blogs or to design an entire Web site than it takes to write and send a press release. This effort will only be taken if the results are significantly better. As long as the results are utterly uncertain and most of all not well measurable, nobody will risk spending more time (thus money) on it.

    2. Jan Schoenmakers on July 27th, 2005 at 2:05 pm
  3. Gary,

    I am not formally trained in PR, and I’m not a journalist, so what do I really know. But I don’t think you’ve necessarily blown away Amy’s theory. Just because 73% of journalists go online daily for press releases doesn’t mean they do not loath them. It’s just that they’re going there because they have to find the news. They might still loath them, and they might just secretely wish that people would stop writing the dross that’s within them.

    When my business partner and I attempt to write press releases, I am bored to tears with them and even though we have a story to tell, and we believe in what we’re doing, they often come out sounding like a shill. This is partly because we’re two engineers trying to do PR, and secondly, because we’re modeling our press release based on what we’re seeing others doing (following the herd, which is not a good approach I suppose).

    So Gary, I think what Amy is saying is not that we shouldn’t try to communicate with the press and give them news, I think she’s railing on the typical press release format and content, which is dry and unremarkable.

    Evelyn Rodriguez has a related post called There are Many Ways to Tell Stories which talks about your typical boring journalistic style vs telling a story. I thought it was great.

    Thanks for the nice post Amy, and thank you to all that have commented to carry on the discussion. You’ve all helped me learn a little more today.

    3. Mark Sicignano on July 23rd, 2005 at 11:03 am
  4. Come on, people — where’s the creative thinking so allegedly abundant in the PR profession? I challenge you to think creatively and constructively about this.

    - Amy Gahran

    4. Amy Gahran on July 22nd, 2005 at 8:53 am
  5. This is all very interesting stuff, however I have to point out that Amy
    is a typical journalist who “generalizes” issues and people get confused
    because of it. And unfortunately the sheep of society listen and get led
    down the garden path with false information. Just because she never liked
    press releases doesn’t mean that ALL reporters don’t like them. I can see
    her opinion about a press release announcing a new VP. I agree, who cares?
    But it doesn’t mean that all press releases are as mundane. What about
    new product press releases? Lots of scientific and technology publications
    love press releases, otherwise how would they find out about new products?
    Sorry, but I don’t fully agree with Amy and her “generalizations”. Oh, and b
    by the way, here are some interesting statistics from PR Web. 98% of journalists go online daily
    92% for article research
    81% to do searching
    76% to find new sources, experts
    73% to find press releases
    Kinda blows Amy’s theory of “Most journalists I know (and I know a lot of journalists) loathe press releases

    5. Gary on July 22nd, 2005 at 2:38 am
  6. Amy,

    As a former journalist and current communications director on the PR side, I agree with the idea that press releases are an inefficient method of communicating and I agree that, at times, a more streamlined process (the use of fact sheets)would do the job quite well. I do find it peculiar, however, that you would say WHO CARES! about the VP of Sales announcement. Several people care actually, including the new VP of Sales, his family and friends, his co-workers, colleagues and contacts. The essence of community journalism lies in its ability to provide news about our neighbors. It is no different than the growth of blogging. Who was initially interested in your writings and musings? Unfortunately, a press release is still a fairly efficient way to get that news out. So for now, it is still a tool that helps perform a very important function. Finding better lines of communication in the future is a topic for another discussion. Thanks for listening.

    6. Tom Connors on July 19th, 2005 at 10:25 am
  7. IMO Kevin is on the right track. We need to distinguish between form and content. There’s nothing wrong with the form of the press release. A good press release conveys the facts in a standard format that makes it easier for the reporter to do her job. Unfortunately, the press release form has been hijacked by people who don’t understand the difference between news and marketing brochures. Hence, so many AWFUL press releases. I think the job of a reporter would be much harder without the press release. Faced with material presented in multiple formats, picking out the facts (or lack thereof) would be harder not easier.

    7. Susan Getgood on July 15th, 2005 at 11:19 am
  8. I’ll stand on Deb’s side of the red rover line. Amy, you are missing the point and focusing on the basic format of a press release instead of the content. Bottom line is the content in the news release format needs to improve. Hopefully blogs will not irradicate the format, but rather provide competition/incentive that will help them improve. I have seen just as many fact sheets that stink.

    8. Kevin Dugan on July 14th, 2005 at 9:46 am
  9. Oh, and about Steve Rubel’s “fire” Deb mentioned, all I can say is: BURN, BABY, BURN!

    We need to focus more on the GOALS of communication, not cling blindly to forms.

    Just try sending a non-hype, succint fact sheet instead of a release next time a reporter requests a release. See what happens.

    Here’s the link to Steve’s posting.

    …I fully expect many people to object my call to action (on all sides) for putting press releases out of their misery once and for all. Almost every creature cries out in pain and fear when faced with significant change, or it’s own extinction. I can sympathize. But really, we’ll all be better off. Take the big evolutionary picture into account.

    - Amy Gahran

    9. Amy Gahran on July 14th, 2005 at 7:53 am
  10. Deb, I appreciate what you’re saying — and I think you’re wrong. As I mentioned above, journalists are used to asking for something called a “release” when what they really want is information.

    You can fax a fact sheet too. And create short permanent redirects so that it’s easier for reporters to type in links.

    The press release format and style totally sucks. Sure some journalists are accustomed to it. Lots of journalists are lazy, too. It takes active effort to put a bad, outdated practices based on outmoded assumptions out of its misery. Journalists need to open their minds and do their part, too.

    IMHO, of course.

    - Amy Gahran

    (Ni!)

    10. Amy Gahran on July 14th, 2005 at 7:46 am
  11. Yep, I agree, old habits die hard. Reporters are in the habit of using the term “release” — but actually what they want is a succinct summary of information. So try preparing a fact sheet rather than a release, and make sure it includes all the relevant links. Dispense with the hype, and go with participating in the public conversation. It’s more authentic, direct, and effective.

    - Amy Gahran

    11. Amy Gahran on July 14th, 2005 at 7:42 am
  12. See what happens? A post like this adds feul to Steve Rubel’s fire. Maybe press releases don’t work for you. Great! I can’t imagine why people would want anything the old fashioned way either.

    But where I sit, where many of my cohorts sit, journalists still have many different requirements for how exactly they’ll receive information. I still have journalists asking for faxes. This is the very reason that most of us are being very wise in saying that the press release is not dead. The method of communication depends on the journalist.

    But then, you make our very point. For you, one thing works. If we want to pitch to you, if we want you to write about a client, we’ll know you and have that relationship with you where we’ll know how best to approach you. That’s our job.

    Still, just as much as you may pronounce the press release dead because you and Steve Rubel don’t like it, it’s not. Because I can name plenty of journalists still asking for one, and they want it via fax. I don’t understand why they want it, I actually laugh at them, but they do. And thus, I comply.

    Please feel free to post your preferred method of communication, but please don’t feul the whole “press release is dead” thing. PR people will write them as long as journalists ask for them. And it still works. It might be sad, but it still works.

    In the meantime, I’ll continue to “look on the bright side of life” knowing I’m equipped to present information to journalists in the communication method of their choice. (And yes, I adore your use of “bring out your dead”.)

    Fellow Python fan,
    Deb

    12. Deb on July 14th, 2005 at 4:26 am
  13. Interesting, and — for the most part — I tend to agree. However, as change tends to come slowly,
    I would advise doing both and tracking who responds to what. When I’m working to get new out, I can’t
    tell you how many reporters say to me “can you send me the release?” It’s still currency to some
    degree. That said, a change is coming, and it’s coming quickly…in fact, I just put out a
    news release on the topic (kidding!).

    Thanks for the thoughts, and keep them coming.

    13. Doyle on July 13th, 2005 at 5:47 pm