The 5 stupidest PR tactics

The 5 Stupidest PR Tactics That Almost Every Company Tries

Want to make sure that the resources you spend on public relations (both time and money) are spent effectively?

Then avoid, or at least very carefully weigh the downsides, as you consider the following commonly-used PR tactics.

(Note: some of these are going to strike a nerve. There are many publicists and PR professionals who have created job security for themselves by constantly executing these very tactics. And there will be many who will point to one specific time that they've used this tactic with unquestionable success. But this raises the question - what about all of the other times?)

I invite us all to consider the ultimate aim of any marketing-related resource expenditure. Isn't it to increase sales? Therefore, I believe the true measure of any resource expenditure, including PR, is whether or not it increased sales, and more importantly, whether that same amount of resources, if spent on some other tactic, (perhaps even outside of the PR arena) would have increased sales to an even higher level, both short and long term.

Based on this, I present my list of

The Five Stupidest PR Tactics:

1. Big Events

Publicists love big events. Events are a great way for them to charge off a ton of hours coordinating, arranging and staffing an event. And, unlike other PR activities, events have a clear feeling of success - the CEO can walk around, see the milling crowds all happily nibbling on $10 per serving jumbo shrimp, get slapped on the back by all of the other corporate execs as they congratulate themselves on a successful turnout, and feel "now here's a PR expenditure that finally delivered."

But did it?

The key isn't in the attendance, it's in the press coverage afterwards, and more importantly, in the sales that did or didn't result from the activity.

Frankly, it's very rare to see increased sales from a big event.

For example, the Six Flags theme parks, are running a commercial where an old guy does some amazing dancing to upbeat music. It's a pretty good ad that's probably creating increased park attendance. But in Chicago they recently held an event where they did an old guy look / dance-alike contest.

And they actually got picked up on at least one Chicago station's 10:00 news.

But here's the key question, will they get additional park traffic because of the event? (And be sure to separate the event effects from the advertising effects.) I believe the answer will be no, or at least not enough to pay for the several tens of thousands of dollars in resources that went into that event.

The one possible exception to this argument is events surrounding new product launches. But this raises the question - if the product was really that good, wouldn't it have gotten close to the same level of press without the event?

2. Sponsorships

Sponsorships strike to the heart of many managers - it's a great way to give back to the community, to get your name out there, and to (sometimes) get a tax write off for the company.

But again, does it result in increased sales?

Remember, simple exposure of your brand name does nothing unless it's connected with powerful positioning that sets you apart from your competition.

Your name alone, plastered among 42 others on the sign nobody looks at as they walk into an event does nothing to tell people why your widget is better than the other guys.

If you want to sponsor local events because they're a way to build support for your company in your community, go ahead and do so.

But call it a charitable activity and charge it to that budget. Don't kid yourself that any increased sales are going to result.

3. Sending out undifferentiated media releases

In watching the press release wires, I am constantly amazed at the drivel that most companies send out disguised as media releases.

The media wants news. Who cares that so and so just got promoted, that you have new graphics on your website, or that your widget that's been out there for 12 years is now available in shocking pink.

Give them news!

Then your releases will get printed!

Don't waste your time or money with the other stuff.

4. Sending media releases to the world

For some reason there's an attitude out there that if you can send a media release to 30 outlets, that sending it to 3,000 is a better idea.

It might be

If - it's really truly news

If - it's news on a national / international level

If - it adds value to the world rather than just struts your stuff.

If not, save your money, send it out to your pre-qualified, highly-targeted list, and use that money for something that will actually sell product!

5. Creating expensive media kits then distributing them to the world

Here's the way mail is read in the newsroom - open, glance, dump in trash.

So why send a $40 media kit? And why send it to anyone that isn't looking for news on your story right now?

Give them what they need, which can usually be done for maybe a dollar or two, and you'll get the same impact as with the big, fancy media kit that's going right into the trash.

So that it - the five stupidest things most companies do to waste their PR budget.

How many have you done?

How many will you do in the future?

Author: Don Crowther | Jul 14, 04 | Permalink | 9 comments
Category: @ Don Crowther | Topic 3 Making PR Work

Comments

As someone who works in a newsroom, Don is right. Open, glance, dump in the trash is all we have time for. Only occasionally will cutesy stuff last past the trash bin, but then it ends up sitting on top of someone's computer or tossed around the newsroom. Rarely does it generate more than chit-chat. Give me a story I can send a reporter on with a good e-mail message any day. Give me the news, give me the point. (the latter is how does it affect my readers).

Posted by: Andy Owens at July 14, 2004 02:20 PM

Don is right and his point ties to a serious question of message control. Note the tactics. They are all controlled messaging that a marketing manager loves to see. The idea of working with reporters by presenting facts simply, clearly and persuasively is too uncontrolled and difficult and takes too long. Let's do an event and a BIG press kit with three CD-ROMs.

Posted by: Jim Horton at July 14, 2004 02:45 PM

I once had an advertiser try to get me to put our joint client's media release on a different size paper to attract the attention of journalists by making ours standout. Unbelievable. His main argument during a heated exchange was "Trevor, journalists are people too". By which he seemed to mean 'morons that are easily impressed by colour and movement'. Its too easy for some people to focus on the package and forget the parcel. Its a pathway to disappointment. Unfortunately it can also impress some clients who like to see 'deliverables' and can be wary of intangibles like a good compelling idea.

Posted by: Trevor Cook at July 14, 2004 06:15 PM

On sponsorship - The real mistake here is seeing credibility as something you can buy rather than doing the hard slog of earning it. I think its only worthwhile if its long-term and involves a partnership with a NFP that 'fits' somehow with your business and therefore seems logical to your stakeholders. You should also involve your employees, much of the benefit of community involvement can arise from giving your employees a greater sense of the intrinsic worth of the company (and help them feel good about working for the company). A UK survey found that 60% of employees felt their jobs were pointless, no social purpose whatsoever. Bad for productivity.
If sponsorship is part of a broader stakeholder communications strategy it can be really valuable, but its easy to stuff it up.

Posted by: Trevor Cook at July 14, 2004 06:24 PM

I agree heartily about the $40-press-kit-and-funky paper-being-a-waste-of-time bit. Wholeheartedly.

However, when it comes to "sponsorships" and "Charity work"...I disagree. The question is - is there a tie-in with the orgnaisation you are sponsoring? Will the patrons of the charity notice your sponsorship anymore than others?

If the charity is planned well, then it can prove to be a long-term success: because the benefits of corporate social responsibility are subtle but long lasting. Besides, it is a great way to build credibility with important publics in the long run.

Posted by: Aditi at July 14, 2004 06:29 PM

I agree heartily about the $40-press-kit-and-funky paper-being-a-waste-of-time bit. Wholeheartedly.

Posted by: Aditi at July 14, 2004 06:29 PM

Keep in mind as you consider sponsorships that not all sponsorships are charitable. There are many commercial sponsorships (like naming rights, professional sports, sponsoring signage around the edge of the skating rink at skating events, NASCAR, etc.) that not only are dubious sales-generators, but cost lots more than charitable sponsorships.

Show me evidence that the fact that my sign was glimpsed on prime time TV 162 times at the US Olympic trials created more sales.

I just don't buy it.

Posted by: Don Crowther at July 14, 2004 11:20 PM

I worked for a large company who, at the time, sponsored a major golf tournament ever year. I went to the tourney one year to help out, the company, of course, had booths set up to sell our products and signs everywhere with the logo. I think like the banner ads on the top of a Web site, people become blind to those logo.

Think of a stadium that is now known as a "company" name stadium. Do you call it by the company name or do you still call it by its original name? To me, it's still Candlestick, Three Rivers, and Ballpark at Arlington.

Companies and sports advertising doesn't make me want to go buy their product. I'm there for the event. When I get home, tired, I am not reflecting on how cool its products are, but the plays of the day. By the time I'm rested, do you think I'm going to reflect on the advertiser?

Posted by: Meryl K. Evans at July 15, 2004 09:37 AM

Regarding "blanket" releases and media kits...major pet peeve is fellow PR folks who don't do their homework and routinely even send to me...thinking I'm media or that I can use the information about their new products or services. Postage is too expensive to make that mistake.

Posted by: Sue Markgraf at July 15, 2004 10:33 AM

About: The Global PR Blog Week 1.0 is an online event that will engage PR, marketing and business bloggers from around the globe in a discussion about blogging and communications. The event is scheduled for July 12 - 16, 2004.

Links: The New PR Wiki

Recent Entries: Looking forward to 2.0; Site Statistics and Trends; A participant’s final thoughts; Traditional PR is dead - Long Live DIY PR; Quiet is the new loud

Recent Comments: Rick Barry on A Very Brief Look at Blogging for the Uninitiated Executive; George Mc Quade on The Battle Over PR; Duncan Adams on Robert Scoble interviewed on Corporate Blogging; Kevin O'Keefe on How to launch a corporate blog for a professional services organization; William Luu on Site Statistics and Trends