« Watch pulverTV: Tuesday November 27th at 2PM EST / 1900 GMT / 2000 CET | Main | 28-Nov-07: Social Media Wednesday Links: »
November 27, 2007
Today’s unsolicited email: “Still looking for a PR firm/publicist?”
Today I received an email from someone whose name I knew from Vonage who in the subject of the email asked the question: “Still looking for a PR firm/publicist?”
Turns out I am almost always interested in being meeting PR firms that have experience in promoting people as brands.
So I opened the email. Which in turn lead me to writing this blog post about what I look for in PR firms.
Is it too much to ask someone who is soliciting me to do their homework and at least visit my blog and read some of my recent posts and try to get a feeling for the issues and topics I am focusing on these days? (Rule #1 whenever pitching someone – do your homework!)
So far during the past 12 years, I haven't found any PR firm that could not do for me something that I can do for myself. It doesn’t mean that it is something I had time to do myself or that it made sense for me to do on my own, but a lot of PR opportunities can be created by someone if they focus on it. The need for PR may always be present but who does the work – that’s the question. Turns out you do not always have to outsource your PR work.
These days I have zero tolerance for firms that bill clients on a monthly basis and take credit for the air outside. (Rule #2 when pitching Jeff – define the deliverables and be modest for what you take credit for.)
The next PR firm I hire will have to deliver on promises made from the start. Unless my account will have the attention of at least one of the owners, I have no interest in the firm. This comes from the experience of being an entry on a sheet of paper and being billed without the PR firm doing anything. And it happened at a time when I was consumed with many other things so I let it slide. I believe everyone matters and that in the world of PR, it is a personal service business and accounts should be treated as such. I refuse to knowingly allow myself to be reduced to a retainer and a monthly bill. (Rule #3 – Jeff will hold you accountable for promises made want to be treated as a person and want to know his account matters.)
My past experience working with PR firms has lead me to the point where I will no longer work with any interns assigned to my account, nor will I educate anyone on how I generate PR for myself. But I do ask that whoever does get assigned has an interest in the things I do, is capable of understanding what I’m talking about, and shows an appreciation for whatever it is that I’m trying to do at that time. (Rule #4 – The account manager should show interest in the work being promoted.)
Life is too short to deal with people who take credit for the work of others. Or take credit of chance stories that just happen. Or who repeat the same BS lines I've heard repeated over the years about why they focus on industry and trade press when I’m looking for coverage from the business and consumer media. (Rule #5 – Talk straight and don’t take credit for work that you didn’t do)
I look for a person who shoots straight and who can do the magic for me that I can't get done on my own.
Bottom line: I am looking for is someone who gets it, someone who has a great rolodex and someone who charges a reasonable fee for using their contacts. Most PR firms are good for one time thru their rolodex which translates into a 60-90 day shelf life. After that, unless that firm is that good, I'm outta there. I sign commitment letters with a 30 day out and I invoke the 30 day out the day after the contract is signed, making every PR contract a month-to-month experience. I see no other way in keeping the people I work with honest.
So I ask, if you are involved in PR, where does your firm fit when put up to this measurement? And if you hire PR firms, what rules do you look for when hiring a PR firm? How do you measure success?
---
Readers of my blog are invited to join me on both twitter and Facebook.
Tags: PR, Jeff Pulver
Share this post:
Digg |
del.icio.us |
Reddit |
Newsvine |
Google Bookmark |
Yahoo MyWeb |
StumbleUpon
Posted by jeff on November 27, 2007 08:37 AM | Permalink
Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos
Comments
As a practitioner who is an unrelenting critic of the worst practices of the PR trade, I agree with many of the things you said here, Jeff, especially that agencies state up front what they're going to achieve in return for a client's investment.
But I have to disagree with your contention that an agency is only as good as its rolodex. In fact, this belief that my ability to effectively engage with journalists relies wholly or largely on how good a relationship I have with them going in has long been the lead entry in what I call "Francis's Favourite PR Fictions." On our blog, www.inmedialog.com, I've addressed this directly, using -- and I trust you'll forgive me for it -- our long-standing interaction with your VON magazine and events as a compelling case in point.
Posted by: Francis Moran at December 17, 2007 01:50 PM
Hmm, pick a fight with the PR egoists, er firms to generate buzz and attention....
Of course the problem is that that 80-95 percent of the PR firms in the world that NEED your advice aren't going to read your blog in the first place. (Aside from that quirky intern guy who surfs the internet way tooo much for his boss's time).
Now, if I only had a nickel for everyone who has pitched me a story/firm, by starting out with the phrase "...and Jeff Pulver is a friend of the company..."
Posted by: Doug Mohney at December 10, 2007 12:38 AM
Jeff,
Good post. To build a person into a brand is not a PR agency usual forte.
That's best handled by a publicist who works with authors, musicians, actors, painters, and then done in consort with associated properties (i.e. publisher, label, studio, gallery, etc.)
Think of the best actors/screen stars who have become brands in many ways. Paul Newman, Woody Allen, Oprah, etc. All have employed corporate and personal publicists. That's where to start.
Now, here's the side to know. Many work on a monthly fee, but they also get a percentage of your gross just like the agent or manager. Are you willing to part with ten percent of what they help make you? It's a different model. If you are then that could be the direction to go.
Andy
Posted by: Andy Abramson at December 1, 2007 01:31 PM
Jeff, great post, and of course I had to come read and jump in after you told me about it at the Boston breakfast today.
I agree with the commenters above that get nervous about being judged by a Rolodex. It's so easy to BS a good Rolodex, but I suspect your BS detectors are pretty sensitive. I'm not going to go on with the defensive PR industry reactions, which are pretty well-represented here.
What you have done is lay out exactly what you want in a PR agency relationship, including the need to prove it's necessary for you. Very few potential clients even do that, and that understanding can help prevent the "lousy client" relationships Leesa talks about (though I am about to go and read Leesa's post now, so bad me for not waiting). Do your requirements spell out a potential nightmare? Yup, but anyone now knows what to expect of you.
As for doing homework, well, we're supposed to do that when pitching clients to the media as well as pitching new business. Unfortunately, that rule is broken so often it seems beyond repair (obligatory Long Tail link here: http://tinyurl.com/35fw95).
Great post Jeff, and again, thanks for organizing and hosting the Boston social media meetups.
Posted by: Doug Haslam at November 28, 2007 12:52 PM
I think it would be difficult to find two types of business people with approaches further apart than Serial Entrepreneur and old school PR firm.
Posted by: John Wall at November 27, 2007 11:02 PM
I always hated being asked if I had experience or a Rolodex chock-full of contacts for a certain industry. Particularly in the trade press, those contacts turn over about every six-to-twelve months, so that Rolodex is of incredibly limited value. And I can learn an industry much faster than someone can learn to do effective PR.
PR, of course, is about a helluva lot more than media relations. But within the media relations corner of PR, a strong story will get me further with reporters and editors I don't know than someone with contacts can get with a weak story. By getting to know the journalist's body of work (or the blogger's, for that matter), a good prctitioner can tailor a pitch that will appeal to the reporter. The whole Rolodex thing is a myth that has become an expectation, but God knows where it started. A savvy client, though, won't ask for one.
Posted by: Shel Holtz at November 27, 2007 06:56 PM
Jeff -- good post. I blogged about it and gave some of my own tips on my BNET.com PR blog, Catching Flack.
I have to take issue with something Eric Schwartzman said above regarding lead generation. There's no shame in an agency doing lead gen. No one is well-enough connected that they couldn't use more contacts and solid business leads. It's HOW you do it that counts -- smile and dial with no background info or context, that's bad. A warm lead and a plausible reason for contacting the prospect? That's what you're supposed to do.
Posted by: Jon Greer at November 27, 2007 04:46 PM
Jeff, although I enjoy reading your blog, I can't agree with much of what you say here. We provide our very best work to clients who we trust and who trust us. As an 'owner' I'm not going to commit my time to someone who doesn't sound like they are very committed to PR. I'm also not clear what you mean by 'PR', it sounds like it's just promotion and media relations, which is only part of what a really top quality public relations consultancy is going to be doing for you.
If you're unwilling to "educate anyone on how I generate PR for myself" then it's a recipie for disaster as you simply can't provide added value and ROI without fully understanding what you already do. We can't provide the added 'magic' if you won't say what you can do on your own.
A 'great rolodex' is of extremely limited value without some strategic thought behind it, driven by a real partnership between client and consultant.
Posted by: Stuart Bruce at November 27, 2007 01:31 PM
Like you, I've had no luck with PR firms and I've worked with many in the past. They were all lousy experiences. So, I no longer bother. Plus, I get enough interest/business being #1 in Google for a coveted keyword, so I'm fine.
But, chances are, the problem isn't with the PR firm. The reason why the PR process doesn't work is because the client is lousy. You don't have trackbacks turned on, so here's the link to my blog post about how a lousy client, a lousy idea and lousy expectations can ruin the PR process - http://tinyurl.com/yqdj73
Posted by: Leesa Barnes at November 27, 2007 12:53 PM
Jeff,
I understand what you're saying but fear that a few bad experiences with public relations has left you with a very jaded and narrow view of the profession. We certainly have our share of bad actors in PR who don't help our cause but I'd caution you against painting the entire profession that that very broad brush you wield. I'm sure some of my fellow PR professionals will also join in but for the record, PR is not about "contacts" and a "60-90 day shelf life." To suggest that a PR practitioner's worth is measured by how bit a rolodex he/she swings reveals an extraordinarily limited and distorted definition of PR. (And besides, the best media contact in the world is not going to write a story on someone or something if there's no news value.) I regret your PR experience may have left you with this impression. There is so much more that a good PR person offers. I hope you soon have the kind of PR experience you and every other client deserves. But it won't come from putting your agency on a 30 day leash. It will come from finding the right agency and then trusting them to do their job while you do yours.
Posted by: Terry Fallis at November 27, 2007 12:20 PM
Sounds like you've been burned pretty bad in the past. Here's the deal. The good PR firms don't have time to blindly solicit new business, cause they're too busy servicing their existing clients, and keeping up with inbound leads. Beware any professional services provider who use interruption marketing to cull for leads, because they obviously aren't attracting enough business through refferals, aren't seen as thought leaders, and aren't sought out by others. Would you hire a physician based on paid media or spam? What about an attorney? On the flip side, if you're going to hire someone with real chops to deliver the goods, you're also going to want a provider that's solvent and stable. PR firms have service agreements so they can effectively allocate resources to deliver on client demands. No prudent agency manager can achieve that without so 90 to 120 days of predictable revenue. So if you want a PR firm that knows their stuff, they're going to busy already and they're not going to commit their resources to a flighty client who's not committed to at least 90 days of service, which more often than not, is the minimum amount of time it takes to deliver results.
Posted by: Eric Schwartzman at November 27, 2007 10:24 AM
Jeff, cool. There's obviously a lot of debate on the PR / blogger issue and it's revitalizing to see some effort being put in to educate PR folk.
[Note: I'm not in PR, but following all this actively. Great to see how blogging ties in with the various components of the web.]
Posted by: Henre at November 27, 2007 10:05 AM
Love it, Jeff.
Posted by: Aaron Brazell at November 27, 2007 10:03 AM
Henre,
The blog post was taken from the email I sent back to the person. So he knows my feelings...
Posted by: Jeff Pulver at November 27, 2007 10:01 AM
Jeff, would I be correct in assuming that you informed said person of this blog post? I find it futile to rant about something in a blog, but not educating the guilty party on it via return e-mail.
All in all it'll have close to zero effect, except maybe negatively influencing the PR person who in all likelihood is only following orders.
Very interesting points made though. Although I believe what you're looking for is a "perfect world" solution, don't you?
Posted by: Henre at November 27, 2007 09:49 AM
Straight shooting honesty. I love it.
The points you make are great ones. Especially the do your homework before pitching. Yes, it takes a little longer to read up and research the person, but the time you put into it will be rewarded by the person at least knowing that you took the time.
Nothing kills an e-mail pitch faster to me then when it is instantly apparent that they really don't have a clue who I am or why I should talk to them.
I'd love to hear how you respond to the obvious push back you must get for the 30 day clause. I love it, but I'd love to hear what you say back to them when they freak. *grin*
Posted by: C.C. Chapman at November 27, 2007 09:42 AM