Maybe in the rush to capture SEO dominance, these approaches
provide some limited value, but I fail tosee how they help establish real
relationships with the media or with readers. Stories written by robots can’t
have the flair, opinion or color that a real person would include. Just look at
the latest piece from your favorite columnist or reporter to prove it’s true. And I get that some items that a company
might consider news will hold zero interest for reporters so the “news” is
written in a story format and published as companies look to connect directly
with readers. But all news?
As a person that spends a lot of time with reporters and
analysts, and with the companies that want to help reach customers through
their stories, I find that both have interesting viewpoints that make for a
good read. Without the experience, opinions, impressions of both, you’re only
getting one side of the story.
What I think is getting lost in today’s SEO-driven media
market is the “personal” or “professional” aspect in PR – the “other P” so to
speak. The inherent value in PR is having a personal relationship (the “R”) with
reporters and execs that enable the PR person, as the bridge, to help both
entities get what they want – a meaningful story about a
company/product/person/trend that a magazine’s readers want to read. Those
relationships -- forged over a long period of time and grown through trust -- can
never be reproduced by any machine or replaced by a website blog post.
No comments:
Post a Comment