Saltire had an entertaining piece last week about the emerging practice of pitching blogs, discussing how a NY-based PR firm has started including some journalists’ blogs in their media lists in hope of raising groundswell buzz for their pitches among the blogging community.
Pitching print journalists who happen to also maintain blogs is nothing new, of course, but in this case, it seems the agency in question chose to actually direct their pitch to the blog as the chosen outlet for the journalist’s writing, as opposed to pitching the journalist in the hopes of gaining more traditional “ink”.
Interesting tactic, if perhaps a little blunt.
Seems like the foreseeable response of your average blogger to this kind of overt, direct attempt to shop a story would either be to simply ignore it or to spend more time publicly pondering the method of approach, the fact of the pitch, than the substance behind it.
This, not incidentally, is precisely what Steve MacLaughlin at Saltire did. Sure, he links to the original story being pitched (as the agency presumably hoped) but then proceeds to dissect the notion of the pitch (in none too flattering terms).
Steve says, amongst other things: "Methinks the public relations folks don't quite understand the whole blogging thing..."
Which is probably right, in the majority of cases. But maybe the individuals behind this particular pitch are an exception. Regardless of the initial response at Saltire and elsewhere, they certainly achieved the desired end of driving the story in question. And it should be pointed out that the story they were attempting to drive attention for happens to be an article all about blogs and blogging (Business 2.0’s “Blog Nation” piece), so directing the pitch to other blogs has a certain inevitable logic to it.
The story got more or less play at other places, not all of it exactly what the client may have had in mind. I'm sure we'll see more instances of this in coming months. I was interviewed about this whole idea back in the middle of last year by the Media Relations Insider newsletter. If I can find a copy or link to the resulting article, I'll post it.
Seems like this is probably the appropriate time to out myself as an openly flack blogger. I’m a PR guy who happens to blog. Or a blogger who happens to work in PR – depending on your POV. I’ve never tried to hide this, but it occurs to me that I’ve not often mentioned it in the main body of the blog (although I talk about it on the Archive/About Me page).
There’s scads of journalist bloggers out there already, including some of the longest-serving bloggers on the block. Seems only natural for PR folk to be blogging too.
The flack is the natural symbiotic complement to the hack ;-) Makes sense that both sides of the relationship should gravitate towards the same environment. Blogging is conversation, in kind of a Cluetrain sense. If lots of journalists are participating in the conversation through their blogs, it feels right for engaged flacks to participate too.
If markets are conversations, marketers need to be where the conversations are happening - or something like that. I'm well aware that I'm torturing the logic here, and some purist will no doubt write and tell me I've deliberately misinterpreted Cluetrain to my own ends - but I'm sure there's a nugget of sense lurking in this thought somewhere.
The question really is: am I the first of the flackbloggers, or are there more out there like me? Come out, come out wherever you are...
Not that I’ve ever used my blog for PR ends, as such. I’ve resisted the urge to comment on or promote client initiatives in these posts – just wouldn’t seem like the most authentic thing to do, although I could have that way wrong. If one of my clients has something I think a particular journalist might be interested in, I’m more likely to just send the reporter a direct note or simply call them up.
No, the purpose of this blog is not to be a pitch vehicle. Don't think it would even work terribly well if that was the intent - not unless I could find some way to guarantee that the specific reporters I'm interested in reaching were avidly reading everything I post. Yet I'm still here for the conversation in one way or another, I guess.
Either way, I can't believe I’m the only PR guy in blogdom. There must be other flackbloggers in the world. And should it be flackbloggers? Or blogflackers? Or floggers?
*heh* “Floggers” I like it. Goes nicely with the common perception of flacks – we're always trying to pitch something – always trying to "flog" our stories (not necessarily how we really work, of course, but you get the point).
So. I’m not blogging: I’m flogging. Nicely weaves in the subtext of what this job has sometimes devolved into – “flogging a dead horse”. And then there’s also the many people I've met in PR who really ought to be flogged. Ooooh I could have seconds of fun with this...
I’m a flogger - and proud of it!
Pitching print journalists who happen to also maintain blogs is nothing new, of course, but in this case, it seems the agency in question chose to actually direct their pitch to the blog as the chosen outlet for the journalist’s writing, as opposed to pitching the journalist in the hopes of gaining more traditional “ink”.
Interesting tactic, if perhaps a little blunt.
Seems like the foreseeable response of your average blogger to this kind of overt, direct attempt to shop a story would either be to simply ignore it or to spend more time publicly pondering the method of approach, the fact of the pitch, than the substance behind it.
This, not incidentally, is precisely what Steve MacLaughlin at Saltire did. Sure, he links to the original story being pitched (as the agency presumably hoped) but then proceeds to dissect the notion of the pitch (in none too flattering terms).
Steve says, amongst other things: "Methinks the public relations folks don't quite understand the whole blogging thing..."
Which is probably right, in the majority of cases. But maybe the individuals behind this particular pitch are an exception. Regardless of the initial response at Saltire and elsewhere, they certainly achieved the desired end of driving the story in question. And it should be pointed out that the story they were attempting to drive attention for happens to be an article all about blogs and blogging (Business 2.0’s “Blog Nation” piece), so directing the pitch to other blogs has a certain inevitable logic to it.
The story got more or less play at other places, not all of it exactly what the client may have had in mind. I'm sure we'll see more instances of this in coming months. I was interviewed about this whole idea back in the middle of last year by the Media Relations Insider newsletter. If I can find a copy or link to the resulting article, I'll post it.
Seems like this is probably the appropriate time to out myself as an openly flack blogger. I’m a PR guy who happens to blog. Or a blogger who happens to work in PR – depending on your POV. I’ve never tried to hide this, but it occurs to me that I’ve not often mentioned it in the main body of the blog (although I talk about it on the Archive/About Me page).
There’s scads of journalist bloggers out there already, including some of the longest-serving bloggers on the block. Seems only natural for PR folk to be blogging too.
The flack is the natural symbiotic complement to the hack ;-) Makes sense that both sides of the relationship should gravitate towards the same environment. Blogging is conversation, in kind of a Cluetrain sense. If lots of journalists are participating in the conversation through their blogs, it feels right for engaged flacks to participate too.
If markets are conversations, marketers need to be where the conversations are happening - or something like that. I'm well aware that I'm torturing the logic here, and some purist will no doubt write and tell me I've deliberately misinterpreted Cluetrain to my own ends - but I'm sure there's a nugget of sense lurking in this thought somewhere.
The question really is: am I the first of the flackbloggers, or are there more out there like me? Come out, come out wherever you are...
Not that I’ve ever used my blog for PR ends, as such. I’ve resisted the urge to comment on or promote client initiatives in these posts – just wouldn’t seem like the most authentic thing to do, although I could have that way wrong. If one of my clients has something I think a particular journalist might be interested in, I’m more likely to just send the reporter a direct note or simply call them up.
No, the purpose of this blog is not to be a pitch vehicle. Don't think it would even work terribly well if that was the intent - not unless I could find some way to guarantee that the specific reporters I'm interested in reaching were avidly reading everything I post. Yet I'm still here for the conversation in one way or another, I guess.
Either way, I can't believe I’m the only PR guy in blogdom. There must be other flackbloggers in the world. And should it be flackbloggers? Or blogflackers? Or floggers?
*heh* “Floggers” I like it. Goes nicely with the common perception of flacks – we're always trying to pitch something – always trying to "flog" our stories (not necessarily how we really work, of course, but you get the point).
So. I’m not blogging: I’m flogging. Nicely weaves in the subtext of what this job has sometimes devolved into – “flogging a dead horse”. And then there’s also the many people I've met in PR who really ought to be flogged. Ooooh I could have seconds of fun with this...
I’m a flogger - and proud of it!
