Week 8 PR blog

With much of the literature “portraying journalist-practitioner relations as adversarial, and with journalists denigrating practitioners professional behaviours and status,” how to contact journalists can leave PR practitioners in somewhat of a quandary argues Sallot & Johnson (2006, p. 83). By being familiar with media processes, practitioners are more able to frame their stories and consequently for them to be placed within the news media- which in turn influences public opinion and the public agenda. Sallot & Johnson (2006) studied journalists in order to research how journalists assess the quality of practitioners’ framing in their information subsidies for news media, and the modes of contact journalists preferred practitioners to use.
The study found that journalists “complained of practitioners’ lack of news sense and values, accuracy, timeliness, and style of presentation” (i.e. the inverted pyramid); with one journalist suggesting that practitioners “know the nature of the beat, know the style of the journalist, know how they [sic] write and what interests them, and the result will be mutually beneficial relationships”. Other complaints included lack of the use of local angles; subsidies that were “overly self-serving”; poor quality writing and inaccuracies. However Practitioners representing non-profit organizations were seen as less self-serving with many journalists who make use of subsidies that benefit non-profits “feeling good” for “helping the cause”.
Of more concern are the Sixty-nine percent who charged practitioners were lacking ethics. “Common complaints concerned practitioners who lie, withhold “truth” and cover up, and try to win coverage for their clients”. Some journalists considered practitioners with prior experience as journalists to be more skilled and ethical.
With some journalists liking and others disliking the following: e-mail with attachments; press kits; links toWeb sites; CD-ROMs; PR Newswire; promotional items; samples of products; photos; VNRs; file footage; and free CDs and DVDs, concert tickets and lunches; and others preferring practitioners to ask exactly which mode they personally preferred, meaning that media practitioners Sallot & Johnson (2006) argue, “have their work cut out for them”. That said “practitioners who tailor delivery of their subsidies to individual journalists’ preferences vastly improve their media relationships and chances of success” (Sallot & Johnstone, 2006).

Tymson, Lazar & Lazar (2006) suggest that with hundreds of press releases issued daily, it is important that the media release is newsworthy, well written, appropriately targeted and professionally presented. The points that I have taken from this weeks readings is that while approaching journalists is sometimes uncomfortable, PR practitioners, by preparing media releases well and by observing the comments made by journalists as regards what they are seeking, in this way are acting professionally and it is hoped they will be treated accordingly – by acting professionally and ethically practitioners are aiming to be the best that they can be.

Week 8 Pr Blog taken from
Sallot, M. & Johnson, A. (2006). To contact …or not?: Investigating journalists’ assessments of public relations subsidies and contact preferences. Public Relations Review. 32 (1) 83-86.
Tymson, C Lazar, P. & Lazar, R. (Eds.). (2006). ‘Writing a media release, The new Australian and New Zealand public relations manual (5th ed.). Manly: Tymson Communications.