public relations 2.0

Public Relations 2.0How it differs from Public Relations 1.0

Public relations (PR) used to be fairly straightforward.

You hired a PR firm that had good relationships with journalists ....

...they listened to your story, drafted a pitch and “sold in” your story to a journalist.

Then the story of your company appeared in the media (also known as a “hit”)

.... which raised your profile. And everyone was very happy.

There was a choice between two types of PR firm:

The ones which practised PR 1.0

and the ones which practised PR 2.0

PR 1.0 firms were huge, well-established, multi-national PR firms...

... who didn’t really “get” blogging and Twitter.

Whereas PR 2.0 firms were much newer and determined to be “different” ...

...but sometimes they were so focused on blogs and Twitter...

...that the quantity of press cuttings became more important than the quality.

With the rise of blogs, PR firms are able to generate many more “hits” with far less effort

Most PR firms put interns or their most junior members of staff on “web raiding” duty....

...to post marketing messages online for the firm’s low-priority clients...

....while only their high-priority clients benefit from time-consuming media relations.

Public Relations has always been extremely labour intensive .

In order to increase the effectiveness of public relations, you just need to...

...increase the number of experienced PR professionals working on a specific activity.

This makes Public Relations a bit more complicated.

So which type of PR should you choose ?

Here are some differences and similarities between traditional and social media.

1. Traditional media coverage is much rarer than social media coverage ...

Coverage, in print magazines especially, is finite.

You can get anything from two to 52 issues per year.

So if your company gets a mention in one of these, it’s pretty impressive.

Whereas, the blogosphere is infinite ... and still growing.

So if your company gets a mention in the online social media ...

It can very easily get lost ...

There are also the “grey” areas where traditional and

social media meet

Blogs on news sites, live polls and user comments on websites

Which one would you prefer?

A very small mention in The Financial Times or the Wall Street Journal .....

... or a very big mention in somebody’s blog ?

After all, there are only so many newspapers and magazines

while there are endless numbers of blogs.

2. Social media tools are relatively cheap and available to everyone

which makes it easier for anyone to publish information about themselves ...

... Whereas traditional media requires a significant financial outlay to publish and distribute information.

3. Both social media and traditional media can reach a wide range of audiences

For example, a blog or a TV programme can reach millions or just a few people.

4. Traditional media can have a lead in time of weeks or even months...

... whereas social media can be virtually instantaneous

5. Unlike Public Relations 1.0, Public Relations 2.0 has no go-between to re-write your story for you

6. Traditional media is publically accountable for what it publishes...

...there are laws and codes of practice regarding publishing what is in the public interest and editorial independence

Social media is not accountable for what it publishes

And some bloggers have been found guilty of libel or slander resulting in fines or even prison

So which is better – PR 1.0 or PR 2.0?

It doesn’t really matter if you’re blogging, meeting someone in Second Life ...

... or briefing journalists in your local cafe ...

... if you’re reaching out to people and getting your story across, then it’s all good.

Sara PaineVerona PR and Marketing

T: + 44 (0)1474 361008E: sara@verona-pr.comwww.verona-pr.com