Creative Agency Secrets

Reading Adriana’s post on "Thin Air PR", thanks for the hint, Leo.  I was struck by the strength of feeling about the possible end of the business model whereby brands pay an agency to lobby the media on their behalf in order to generate column inches of written material.

What is public relations anyway?  The means by which brands try to get themselves talked about in the media.  And extended into events (experiential), lobbying MPs (public affairs), print media (media or press relations), public speaking (public relations).

Now let me digress into a real dead end…. what is the real definition of Public Relations?

Barrons says Form of communication that is primarily directed toward gaining public understanding and acceptance. It tends to deal with issues rather than specifically with products or services. Public relations uses publicity that does not necessitate payment in a wide variety of media and is often placed as news or items of public interest. Because public relations communications are placed in this manner, they offer a legitimacy that advertising does not have, since advertising is publicity that is paid for.
Management Help says
Public relations includes ongoing activities to ensure the overall company
has a strong public image. Public relations activities include
helping the public to understand the company and its products.
Often, public relations are conducted through the media, that
is, newspapers, television, magazines, etc.
The PRCA trade body says Public relations is about reputation - the result of what you do, what you say, and what others say about you.  Public
relations aims to earn understanding and support, and influence opinion
and behaviour. It is the planned and sustained effort to establish and
maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and
its publics.
[although I prefer the other PRCA - Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association]

So lots to validate the service and professionalise the relationship that a brand has with its audiences.

Cut through the polite-speak and it’s clear that when brands can have direct conversations with audiences in a meaningful environment, maybe the middle man gets cut.

As I said in reply to Adriana’s post, there are times when a middle-man is a valid, rational response to a business situation and using a PR agency is a great resource and worth paying for.  I wrote

BUT there is a time and a place for a rational use of an outsider to, in your phrase, send a proxy to the party. 

And that is when you don’t have the manpower yourself. There is a
nice way to use outsiders to help you plan your public profile and help
execute it through ‘events’ where audiences can experience the brand
first hand and announcements to the printed media e.g. stock exchange
statements, annual reports, product recalls.

Where the questions remain are in the areas of ‘lobbying’ where
brands use PR agencies to sell in a story and try and get journalists
to try their product and write about it.

The honest way to deal with this practice is for the printed article [for the journalist] to include a reference sources list that includes the name of the PR
agency. It creates an honesty measure and also provides a clear link
back to the source of the information.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 15th, 2007 at 12:17 pm and is filed under Change Management, Corporate change, PR, Web 2.0 for business. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.