Give it to me straight

If you're a PR professional, you may disagree with me. And I'd love to hear your viewpoint.

Six months ago, a local acquaintance asked me to help promote his book on business leadership. Most news media I contacted were enthusiastic, interviewing him on air, including his book in a newspaper column, or running op-ed essays he'd written about business conduct.

By Holger.Ellgaard (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0
 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)],
 via Wikimedia Commons
Except one. An experienced news/public affairs broadcaster who initially expressed interest, asked to read a copy of the client's book, and then went silent. Didn't respond to emails or phone calls. Even when I asked co-workers at the broadcaster's station, who first said they'd been busy, and told me he'd get back to me.

Except he didn't. Nor did his producer. 

I hate giving up. But, after six months of unresponsiveness from the broadcaster, I decided to cease pursuing him. His head was elsewhere. I won't speculate where.

But any response -- even one declining to pursue the interview -- would have been professional. I've been at this PR game for more than a few years, and had turn-downs from media gatekeepers before. A simple "Sorry, we aren't interested in the book or the author" response, instead of silence, would have been okay. 

Instead, the broadcaster's lack of candor or communication over a six-month window resulted in a waste of time: his, my client's, and mine. Maybe that's fine for hiring managers who receive hundreds of resumes for a single opening, and simply can't respond to each applicant.

But broadcasters, like PR people, are in the communication business. The market in question isn't a crazy, hectic Top 20 media market; it's a small-to-medium size market where relationships matter. The broadcaster and I have worked together in the past. He should find 30 seconds to write or say, "Sorry, we can't use this in our show." Give it to me straight. 

If you have a different opinion, I welcome reading it in the comments section below. Thanks. 

Popular posts from this blog

Questioning the New York (Times) Athletic Club

Image
The New York Times dropped the axe on its legendary sports department in early July. Sports reporting we read in the Times henceforth will originate with The Athletic, a younger (and perhaps more agile) sportswriting website purchased by the NYT Corp.  You'll find a good assessment of the move here .  As a Times subscriber, I have automatic access to any sports reporting it produces. I won't call it "free access," however, because my ever-increasing monthly rate for a three-day Times subscription surely will include a tithe to cover the Athletic.  But ditching the Times ' sports desk and dispersing its fine sports journalists and photographers to other NYT jobs? That's a loss. Here's why: Conflict of interest: The Athletic allows its staff to report on sports gambling, while some are paid contractors of the sportsbook companies. Is there a Pete Rose-style conflict here? I'd expect so. The Times allowed no double-dipping within its sports staff. The s
Read more

Readers get the (drive) shaft in motorsports coverage

Image
In mid-August, the U.S.'s premier auto racing sport will compete at a road racing course in Watkins Glen, NY. NASCAR's brutish Cup series cars will race in this rural community Aug. 20.  May 2023, Charlotte Motor Speedway. (c) DKassnoff, 2023. But, don't expect  The New York Times  to cover NASCAR before then. The newspaper's sports section -- now outsourced to The Athletic, its sportsbook subsidiary -- hasn't covered NASCAR since July 2. That's when NASCAR's drivers competed on the rain-soaked streets of Chicago. The Times provided no coverage of their July 30 race in Richmond, VA, or any NASCAR race since early July. The Times  has focused its motorsports coverage on Formula 1 racing. These are the expensive, open-wheeled, high performance racing teams once called Grand Prix. This class of racing is controlled by another media company: John Malone's Liberty Media, which purchased Formula 1 in 2017 and returned it to profitability. Visit the Times '
Read more

Your hand's already in my pocket

Image
I use an ad blocker, and probably you do, too. Every day, even on websites where I pay a monthly subscription fee, I see a pop-up that say: "We Notice You Are Using an Ad Blocker." And they ask me to turn it off. I don't. I'm already paying for that news website's reporting. Their hands are already in my pocket. And, truth is, I don't mind digital ads that are somewhat relevant to my tastes. Show me an ad for a guitar deal or Ford car parts, and I'll probably read it. Screen shot, unnamed Gannett publication, Sept. 2018 But I don't care about Patrick Swayze's secret son. Or what forgotten 1970s actress Loni Anderson looks like today. (I was more of a Howard Hesseman /Dr. Johnny Fever fan, anyway.) When newspapers relied on print ad revenue, I'd glance at those ads -- and sometimes, I'd bite -- because those ads were for local or regional merchants. They wanted to build a relationship with me.  They didn't try
Read more