PR Web seems to be getting under bloggers’ skin lately, and I butted heads with them today over a press release. We worked it out, but the issues indicate that PR Web needs to make some changes.
In 2000, I wrote a much-quoted article entitled “The Traditional Press Release is Dead.” It said that electronic news distribution requires a new format for releases, one that can be read quickly from a computer screen.
In my opinion, the so-called Social Media Press Release is a bit of over-kill, too new-fangled and self-conscious for my taste. I think bloggers and MSM journalists can click a link to find lists and code on a web page if they are interested in running a story. The format I generally use is Who, What, Where, When, and How. But the style also has to fit the subject.
If you write about something funny or silly, it wouldn’t make a lot of sense to use a formal style or, for that matter, a social media release template.
So when I got a call from a PR Web rep telling me my release, because it wasn’t entirely written in third person, was “too much like an ad”, I was pretty surprised. I would not make up quotes from the president of GardenFun.com in a release about their Save-Your-Ass late Valentine’s gift shipping for procrastinating paramours. (The final release, which goes out Feb 13, is below)
Long story short, I compromised with PR Web, taking out some of the “your” and “our”, but not all of them. I wrote the release exactly as I think it might run in a blog post or in mainstream media. It’s a casual topic, and it’s a casual release.
The first several people I spoke to today at PR Web were of no help. They used the Neurenbourg philisophy: “I’m only following orders.” When I escalated my call to Denair Healy at Vocus, which owns PR Web, we had a rational conversation and it was clear that she is aware of the issues and wants to foster change at PR Web.
The bottom line: the immediacy and intimacy of online writing, particularly by bloggers, has led to a much more casual and much less impersonal style in mainstream media. Both corporations and MSM have had to adopt a less formal, more human, style of communicating, without hiding behind the third-party veil.
We want to know with whom we are speaking; we want what they say to sound like it came out of a human being’s mouth and not a lawyer’s pen; and we want to be able to talk back. That’s accountability, transparency, and life today.
I don’t expect that PR firms will lead the way. I despair of them ever even finding the path.
Google News has its own set of writing rules for what it will accept, and some of them are less than realistic too. PR Web and other press release distribution services are no doubt in a better position to negotiate with Google than lone bloggers, but I hope bloggers get a seat at the table when the conversation finally begins.
Northbridge, CA (PRWEB) February 13, 2008 — Forgot to order a gift for Valentine’s Day? You’re in serious hot water. No nookie for you. Order on Valentine’s Day, and GardenFun.com’s Save-Your-Ass late Valentine gift shipping guarantees that a whimsical Valentine gift will arrive on Feb. 15th. They’ll even lie for procrastinating paramours and say the late gift is their fault.
GardenFun.com will take the heat for the post-Valentine’s-Day-delivery. Procrastinators can choose from six different funny Valentine gift packages of GeekyBeek PuckerUps — the cutest little geeky desk, shelf or lawn ornaments ever.
GardenFun will call the recipient on Valentine’s Day to apologize profusely for the shipping delay. They’ll say the Valentine’s Gift was ordered early, but they screwed up, or it fell off the truck, or was delayed in transit, etc.
There are six different GeekyBeek PuckerUp last-minute Valentine gift packages to choose from, ranging from $44.99 to $129.99.
The Save-Your-Ass last-minute Valentine gift shipping offer disappears from GardenFun’s website at midnight on the 14th and they’ll deny that it ever existed.
GeekyBeek lovebirds are unique, creative, hand-painted Valentine’s gifts likelyto appeal equally to romantic lovers, geek girls or boys, co-workers, kids, teachers, family and friends. You can send a few or get the flock out.
Additional resources:
YouTube: GeekyBeeks Take Manhattan video
Flickr: GeekyBeek Flickr Group
### Posted by By B.L. Ochman
Bravo. I’ve had a terrible time since Vocus bought PRWeb.com with rude people on the phone telling me how a “press release” should be written according to their policies. It leaves very little to the imagination and turns what would otherwise be a creative and engaging release (humble ego aside) into a stringent form-fitting corset from the 1990s and certainly not Web 2.0. I say burn the release corset and let the creative press release make the news!
Hi BL –
It’s strange to me that a company like PRWeb is still reviewing press releases the way they are, now that they’ve become a bigger player in the press release distribution market. PRNewswire and BusinessWire don’t review your releases for grammar or other editorial content. They just let you post it and it goes out. (Ok, they review it for formatting purposes, but I’ve seen plenty of releases go out over PRN and BW without proper grammar and spelling mistakes.)
I think if PRWeb wants to play with the big kids, they’ve got to act like it and not argue with the publicists/companies who are paying for their service. There’s no reason to negotiate the language of your release. That’s how you wrote it (or how the company/client wants it written – and probably approved the copy), and that’s the end of it.
Your thoughts?
BL – First off, I want to say, do not despair: Some PR firms have found the “path” and I count myself in their company. I support your comments about PR WEB. As of this time last year, I quit using PRWeb altogether for the reasons you stated. I went elsewhere to send out my 40-50 releases a year. Too many calls about my press releases being “too much of an ad.” No room for even a smidge of humor, I was told. “That is not accepted journalistic style,” I would frequently hear. Funny thing is, every time I’d get my hands spanked over a “you” “their” or “we” – or worse – I would proceed directly to the PR Web home page and soak up examples of press releases that passed muster. And, every time, what I’d find was a heaping handful of truly inappropriate press releases – especially among those mega-star models purchased with PR Web’s costly bells and whistles. Could there be a double standard at work here, I would ask myself? Thanks for sticking up for the good guys.
It’s an interesting rub that wire services serve two audiences: those sending press releases and those receiving them.
Appeasing one may alienate the other.
Distributing releases without QA for example, attracts overzealous SEOs looking to use the wire service as a link building tactic, negatively affecting overall quality. Recipients then begin to no longer trust the wire service.
There should be a channel for more creative formatting and conversational language on wire services for those that want it that way (sending and receiving).
I fear there is another element at play here: a dearth of good writers.
The various levels of “help” with standards are likely a rules-based solution to keep the quality of the service above a level where editors will even bother.
Hi B.L.,
Thank you for blogging about your experience at PRWeb since it points out the challenge in serving both news makers and news readers. Our primary business is to market everyone’s news and to do that we need to appease the varied audiences we serve. As Lee adeptly points out, it is a challenge.
There are no two people who will agree about what makes for a ‘proper‘ press release (as indicated by the previous commenters). But over the years we have developed editorial guidelines which are serving the great majority of both news makers and news readers well.
You have done many releases with PRWeb over the years and it appears this is the first encounter you’ve had with our guidelines. I think that says something as well.
I am happy you were able to achieve a negotiated position and saddened it required an escalation of your issue to accomplish it.
We will always be looking for ways to improve our ability to serve a wider group and your feedback helps.
Thanks again.
I love the folks at PRWeb. I was a guest on one of their webinars recently and I have recommended their service to many people who read my newsletter.
But what they’re doing with those ridiculous press release rules borders on censorship. (I didn’t know about this until I read it here.)
If they’re going to complain about releases that sound too salesy, they ought to also be complaining about releases they distribute that are more potent than sleeping pills.
Or releases that include boilerplate that sounds pompous. Or releases loaded with so many acronyms that they resemble bowls of alphabet soup.
BL, you’re one of my favorite press release writers of all time. It’s time PRWeb disbanded the Press Release Police.
Joe – sorry to say this, but your response sounds like corporate crap. I don’t know if I want to send out another release on PR Web. I have to see what your competitors have to offer and will report here on what I find.
Joan – thank you for the kind words about my writing: much appreciated, especially coming from someone I respect as a PR authority.
You hit the nail on the head. How can PR Web approve all the dreadful releases they routinely run and then decide that another is not to their standards.
They are not the ones who should be the press release police.
As I told Denair, the proof is in the pudding. We’ll see whether my release gets any pickup or if it helps GardenFun’s SEO for “last-minute Valentine gift shipping”, which, doh, is the main reason I wrote it.
BL – Joe really messed up in his reply.
YOU didn’t have an “encounter” with their guidelines… their guidelines had an encounter with YOU.
Emphasis is mine, to reflect that no set of rules-based guidelines will ever match the mastery of great writing. He needs to apologize and talk about how they will be tweaking their system, instead of back-handedly calling your release a stinker.
BL — Perhaps PR Web should consider having their staff take Joan Stewart’s (The Publicity Hound)free online tutorial, “89 Ways To Write Powerful Press Releases,” and also read Marcia Yudkin’s ebook, “99 Press Releases That Work.” With this new-age knowledge under their belt, the problem would take care of itself.
BL,
Great article. If you are looking for an alternative site that does a great job with press releases, try http://www.fastpitchnetworking.com/pr.
The site also allows you to promote your blog as well.
I had a similar experience with PR Web two weeks ago. After years of sending out releases that were perfectly acceptable and getting 4 ratings, I’m told my latest was on editorial hold because of using too many “you” references, no timely reason to run it and suggesting it was sales-y. I too made changes to fit their dictates.
Fortunately most of the “you” references were in quotes, so they didn’t have to change. This is how the release came out:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/02/prweb663504.htm
What do you all think? Makes me think twice about continuing to use this service.
BL-
I just had the exact same experience with PR Web and got the same phone call. It was the first release I’d created in awhile, and was using a new strategy (to me, at least) of making one of my articles into a tips release, so I caved in quickly to get it out..;)
I had never before encountered this, and thought it was odd, so I’m glad to know I’m not the only one..;)
Donna
OK, gang. I think I’ve figured out what’s going on here.
Nobody at PRWeb has bothered to tell the Press Release Police (sales reps) that smart PR people no longer write press releases only for journalists.
I’m guessing it’s the JOURNALISTS they’re worried about offending with copy written in the second-person and, horrors, using humor that might make make them crack a smile at some point during their 14-hour day.
Note to the Press Release Police: Journalists frequently write in the second-person. And some of the best writers use humor liberally. One of them is Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Dave Barry.
Joan – that is exactly right, and that’s what I tried to tell the Press Release Police.
If bloggers have had any impact on journalism, it’s in our more personal voice; our not hiding behind the third person; our conversational style.
Why has this style of writing become so widespread? Because it rings true, unlike fake quotes and other “rules” of traditional press release writing.
I suppose I could have written “In deference to our customers who forgot to buy a Valentine gift,” said the president of GardenFun.com, Lior Noy, “we are pleased to add an additional shipping option.”
Sound corporate enough? Sound fake enough? Would you read farther? I know I wouldn’t.
Oops! There’s that bad “you” again, and the worse, “I.”
@Gail Rubin – They objected to that press release? It seems pretty traditional to me? What was the objection
And WTF? They said there was no timely reason to run it? Oy vey.
That’s a little like the dry cleaner telling me what I should wear instead of just cleaning my clothes.
Great comments…
Like every other form of modern media, the PR landscape is changing fast. With hundreds of e-zines and and social media outlets, there will be formats emerging for every one.
If PR Web doesn’t loosen up, there may be an opportunity for a PR Web 2.0…
Great comments…
Like every other form of modern media, the PR landscape is changing fast. With hundreds of e-zines and and social media outlets, there will be formats emerging for every one.
If PR Web doesn’t loosen up, there may be an opportunity for a PR Web 2.0…
First off, I work for one of those other services who JB alleges doesn’t read copy before sending it out. Rest assured, if you had sent in this blog entry to me, I would have changed “Neurenbourg” to the correct “Nuremberg.” Either way, an inappropriate analogy.
Your experience at PR Web highlights that you get what you pay for. And what happened to you shows that isn’t very much.
BL,
I just listened to Monday’s For Immediate Release with Hobson and Holtz and Dave Fleet sent in a comment eerily similar to yours about trouble with news services. Interesting that they both happened so close to each other. Anyone who’s interested should check out Dave’s experience and how it was resolved/evolved. http://tinyurl.com/2p558e
Funny post, by the way. Omg, wait, is TODAY Valentines DAY?!
A comment so nice, he made it thrice!
I agree with Joan Stewart, the Publicity Hound: PRWeb’s M.O. is to please the traditional journalist with their particular (outdated) standard if what’s “the right” way to write a press release. PR Web may not realize that the real value of their online press releases is to attract the end-user. Getting a journalist’s attention for an announcement, product or service is just a bonus (albiet a nice one if a journalist happens along).
@Sharon – Press releases are for the end user? Huh?
I wonder who you call the end user? In my view, media outlets are definitely still the “end user” of press releases.
but media has expanded to include millions of blogs, as well as e-zines, newsletters, social media like Facebook and MySpace, etc, as well as traditional media.
This blog, like many other popular blogs, has more daily readers than many of the top 1,000 newspapers in America. Last time I checked, there were less than 500 papers with 100,000 daily readers.
This may be news to PR Web, but there are many more than 500 blogs with more readers than that. So writing to new media may be not only more lucrative, but also more far-reaching.
And that’s something PR firms and corporations need to wake up to – not just PR Web.
MSM has begun to sound stuffy and stiff, not to mention that it often is hours, if not days, weeks or months behind the actual news that appears online first.
If PR Web wants to serve only MSM, they’re perfect.
If they want to serve the much larger universe outside traditional media, they need to open their “standards.”
You are so right about the Social Media Press Release format being too much.
Both this and the changes over the years at PRweb are the normal, not usually intentional growth curve…
1. Breakthrough idea
2. Success builds an organization
3. Organization makes rules
Breakthrough idea require breaking rules.
PR firms like newspapers and the classical advertising firms are still in the 80’s and 90’s and sadly have not awakened to the fact that we are well into the 21st century. They fail to understand that we communicate differently and that call for a different style of writing and the acceptance of the fact that even the language is changing.
Wake up guy/girls. It’s a different world we live in.
BL,
Thanks for a great piece, and I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the comments (above) from PRWeb’s Joe Beaulaurier. “Corporate crap” indeed. As you touch on, THE big issue for PRWeb is the market system at work.
So, Joe, I have a newsflash for you, and you don’t need a press release to understand it: The more obstacles you put in front of people to posting their releases as THEY see fit, the more likely they are to take their business elsewhere. It’s pretty simple. All your rules and policies, and your “challenge in serving both news makers and news readers” mean little to the buying public. That and $3.59 or so will get you a Starbucks…
PB
So it’s not just me having problems with PR Web.
I’ve only written a handful of releases in my life, but felt like a waiter was refusing to let me order what I wanted off the menu!
I abandoned PRWeb two years ago and, I think, for a couple of very good reasons.
Editorial policies aside (a problem I experienced occasionally myself) everyone might want to attend to the elephant in the room. If you compare PRWeb’s “readership” statistics with the subject website’s referral logs, you will discover that their stats obviously bear little resemblance to actual readership, e.g., 100,000+ “reads” and only 31 visitors to the subject site. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the “reads” they report aren’t reads at all. Even the worst copy would generate more traffic than that.
More to the point, if you divide the number of visitors driven to your site or your clients’ sites into the exorbitant fee you pay to get one’s day’s exposure on their home page, and a month’s inclusion in Google and Yahoo News and you’ll find the results dismal to say the least. One can get the same level of exposure for less than $20 any day of the week. Even banner ads are more cost effective.
PRWeb’s search engine optimization (SEO) services are also totally bogus. You’ll never find one of their releases residing on the first page of Google’s natural search results for any keyword or keyword phrase apart from an obscure brand or company name. What value optimization if the only people seeing the release in Google’s natural search results are people who are already familiar with the company and its products/services?
As for the so called “big boys”, PRNewswire and Marketwire, I suggest you take a look at their Alexa traffic ratings over the past three years. You’ll see that their popularity as well as PRWeb’s has really plummeted the past two years.
To do that just enter their URL addresses at the top of the following page in the “Get Traffic Details” window http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_500 and then click on the 3yr chart.
I’m fascinated by what a press release is under Web 2.0? It has to be interesting and newsworthy, surely, as in the old days. And it can’t be just an ad, can it?
The big difference now, as I see it, is that the press release has its own life – it does not depend on the patronage of journalists any longer and can engage with the reader directly.
@ ochman
Interesting point you raise. I don’t think that is the end-user. Take a look (or loop) closer, where does the information finally ends? Edited or unedited?
Yes, that is not your end-user ;-)
As a full time internet marketing industrialist using PR web I totally agree with your points regarding PR Web. Isn’t it funny how in business we would typically believe to gain the trust and long term custom of a client we would want to extend our friendly and courteous manner right? Wrong, not if you work for a company where the customer needs you more than they need a customer. Well that’s what it looks like.
I am convinced that the PR Web system works and works well without question but it would only do their company a service of good for them to take on a little customer care with all the internet marketing professionals online today using their service.
Was thinking of using PR Web – after reading this, my thoughts are of passing. Thought this was a casual way of communicating, if I needed that type of censorship – I’ld go back to school. TY