It's really starting to drive me nuts. Most in our industry clearly recognize that media relations is just
one very important piece of any public relations campaign (typically it's the most important one). Yet, our so called industry experts or gurus still manage to reinforce little else when it really counts.
Last week I listened to a PR industry Webinar on measurement. These Webinars are always very interesting and provide a lot of valuable insights into a host of crisis, measurement and other communications approaches/needs. In many ways, this particular measurement Webinar was no different. The theme that was supposed to be discussed was how PR campaigns can be measured for BUSINESS OUTCOMES. The speakers are acknowledged measurement leaders in our industry and did provide a wealth of actionable approaches on metrics. My point of frustration was that the entire 90 minutes focused on how media can impact the bottom-line, not entire PR campaigns. When I emailed a question asking why they weren't discussing more holistic PR programs, the response wasn't fulfilling. The main expert said she was here to discuss media and only media.
What does it say when acknowledged leaders in our industry, including one of our top PR trades, reinforces all that we do is just media relations (even though they describe it as public relations)? I'd say that is problematic. In addition, the plain fact is that we need to be able to measure more then media to show clients how they can achieve a ROI from our programs.
Sorry to over simplify this, but public relations is leveraged by organizations to communicate their messages via objective, third party means. The media has always been our major medium by which to do this. But, in the digital era, the more strategic practitioners continue to leverage social media, third party partnerships, direct networking, analysts and other NGO groups, thought leadership and a host of other important approaches/ mediums to communicate messages that should be integrated to impact the BOTTOM LINE.
If we (as an industry) ever really want to be seen for all the expertise and value we do provide, then it's time we start discussing public relations as public relations and media as one key component of how we can make a difference.


Does your industry need a new name? Is the term "public relations" so associated with just media management that even industry professionals have a hard time going beyond that association?
Maybe you need to call yourselves "strategic communications" or "awareness management" or something.
Posted by: Steve Zweig | May 23, 2007 at 07:47 PM
Funny you mention that. Peppercom is not a public relations firm. We call ourselves strategic communications for that very reason. Our firm does a lot more then media relations.
The industry will never change because many firms are happy just doing media work. And, that's fine.
But, plenty of others are qualified to offer much more strategic value and we also wrestle with how our industry can achieve more respect at the C-level. That's the issue. We need to offer much more to ever obtain a validation from them.
Posted by: Ed Moed | May 24, 2007 at 09:10 AM
Public relations is a profession that will always be scrutinized. Critics out there love to examine it and tear it apart. Yet, anyone with any idea of what public relations really is, knows that media relations is only one small component out of many.
Certainly PR professionals know this. Undoubtedly, leaders in the industry know this. Thus, I agree with you Mr. Moed, when you say that it is quite wrong to say that all we do is media relations. There is much more to the job, and it's time we got recognition for that.
Posted by: Katherine Wehrley | May 25, 2007 at 02:18 AM
Thanks for your comments, Katherine.
One key focus of this blog was to point out that our industry (PR firms) does a lousy job of reinforcing everything you just wrote.
If we don't talk the talk ourselves, then we can never change the general stereotypes and perceptions.
Posted by: ed | May 25, 2007 at 06:53 AM