The Killer Pitch? - When PR Agencies Can Do This - Look Out . . .

Good PR pros know there are two pitches to every pitch: the first is for the client's story; the second is for the reporter's story.

Tom, this is a really fascinating post. I think the ethical dilemmas are real and immediate because a lot of PR people do know how to drive traffic.

We've had our own agency blog for a couple of years and lots of people in the firm study the analytics.

It all comes back to reputation. If your firm or client has a good reputation then they are likely to have web properties with high traffic stats themselves.

One of the best ways of driving traffic is to start with a popular property. Ultimately I wouldn't be too concerned because in the main it is the organisations that have the better profiles that will drive the most traffic.

Enjoyed the post Tom.

Indirectly, this is already happening.

Smart agencies are using various tools to determine what topics are trending in the hot quadrant then building pitches that tie a client to that topic ... knowing media properties are looking for content on these very same topics.

In another scenario, we could find journalists doing a form of due diligence in scrutinizing which PR agencies consistently demonstrate the savvy and horsepower to extend the reach of a given client article.

A few months ago, we worked with the San Jose Mercury news on profiling a client. The day the Merc published the client feature triggered a second wave of activity on our part to interest other media properties in the client (via the Merc piece).

The net result- we extended the reach of the story from the Merc's modest circulation to roughly 56 million readers.

Obviously, we don't have access to the Merc's analytics but feel on safe ground assuming this activity drove a spike of additional traffic to the Merc.

Now, was the Merc reporter more responsive to our initial pitch because he knew our approach increased the likelihood of incremental traffic?

I'd say no but there remains the possibility of such a scenario.

Which brings us back to your point that using pageviews as a basis for setting compensation for reporters opens the door to abuse.

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the mention but more importantly, for continuing this dialogue. I am totally jazzed to explore this topic further. I am fascinated by it and think there's some healthy debate to be had. I don’t have as much time as I’d like right now in this comment but I hope to give it the attention it deserves during the upcoming Q&A that you and I discussed.

I’d like to think that PR executives do know how to drive traffic to news stories – in fact, a prominent business press reporter once told me on Twitter that I “really pack a punch” when I mention his articles (which I do often because I like good articles, not because I need something from him/them). But maybe in the grand scheme of the pressures that reporters are facing today, we really don’t know how. I know I’d like to learn! And I’d like to see our industry (PR) be more thoughtful about what reporters need to accomplish – and incorporate that into our pitch strategies. Helping reporters with their needs should always be integrated into your approach as a PR executive but too often, it’s completely forgotten.

I think the smartest PR executives will continue to drive their own online footprint so that reporters (and other constituents) might see some greater value in working with them – or at least respect, listen to them and trust that they’ve got good things to share.

Today, I don’t think reporters would appreciate the tit-for-tat “cover my client, I get you readers” – a) because they wouldn’t believe that we could and b) because it implies we can do something they cannot. However, they might appreciate the fact that a well-respected PR executive is consistently reading them and driving traffic to their articles, and that when the article happens to be about a client, that they’d be sure to share it even more places.

Ironically, before I saw your post today, I, too, mentioned you and the similar topic - in my reply to a naysayer on my 2010 PR Predictions article in Small Biz Trends: http://bit.ly/8u9jEN See my comment to “Darren,” who says I’m silly to talk about PR executives building their online reputation or becoming influencers in their own right. I said that if my connections, relationships and influence can help positively influence others or drive awareness (or directly drive customers) for my clients, that’s a good thing. I then pointed to your post from October: http://bit.ly/6ZeSRZ – regarding PR executives who have more online traffic than reporters do. You mentioned that PR executives “can't use their own access to large numbers of people to promote their clients.” Why not? I believe that more and more, we’re promoting directly to our clients’ customers and it’s okay that we do that as long as we’re transparent about it. I very often ask my community to check out our clients and their products, campaigns or offerings. But I am always sure to say that I’m talking about a client. The ethical issue is when PR executives don’t mention that they’re suggesting something to the community that they get paid to promote. (Same for media/bloggers.)

Still, while today we can publish our own content and promote directly, media and other influencers of course still matter and bring a credibility that we cannot. So the PR-journalist relationship continues to be an important one. I still think that PR has a respect gap to overcome when it comes to most journalists and your suggested tactic wouldn’t go over quite so well – yet. But maybe as we continue to show – often, through social media (blogs, Twitter, etc.) - that we really do have brains and personalities that aren’t so bad, and that we understand and think about reporters and their needs, we’ll forge new bonds that will build even stronger mutual respect for the influence that both parties bring to the table.

I look forward to continuing this discussion.

Thanks again,
Christine Perkett
PerkettPR

Very interesting point. Hadn't considered traffic as payment. I have tried to Slashdot or Digg articles that were written around a pitch I initially made. Sometimes it was successful. I have no on/off switch guaranteeing that I can, though. Too many variables. Like you mention, that keeps it clean. For now.

Thanks for all the interest in this topic. I've got some additional thoughts that I will post Tuesday morning...

I think Christine Perkett walks a healthy line in her comment above.

Quality content drives traffic, readers, and value for everyone concerned. When PR folks bring good quality, on-topic, sources to an excellent journalist then good results happen.

Beyond that, conflicts should be disclosed so the reader can tell the difference between legitimate journalism and implicit (undisclosed) pay-for-hire.

As a budding PR protégé, the best advice that has generated good results thus far for me has been:

Do your homework!

It does not take much to tailor a pitch or call to a specific journalist. It helps you understand the reporter and his or her view point, and helps you build a real and trusting working relationship. You may even make a friend!

Twitter:

1day1brand andrewfstewart

What is stopping SEO (firms) from already driving traffic to news stories?