I read all about the spat between Jack O'Dwyer and PR firms over his ranking of independent PR firms. I want to state up front that I do not, nor have I ever, worked for O'Dwyer or an independent PR firm. The statements in this blog post are strictly opinion.
First, I agree with O'Dwyer's gripe about the subscription fees. Paying $295 for one subscription read by 895 employees seems unfair to O'Dwyer. After all, he is missing out on 894 potential paying subscribers.
However, I took a look at O'Dwyer's newsletter subscription form. There is no language on the subscription form that states the subscription cannot be shared. From this chair it seems O'Dwyer made the subscription rules and now he doesn't want to have to play by them anymore. Further, I think it is absolutely wrong to penalize PR firms - who played by his subscription rules - by removing them from his rankings.
One PR firm pays and gets ranked while another refuses to pay and doesn't get ranked? How is this not payola? I also do not understand O'Dwyer's public rant about the lack of advertising support from organizations, such as the CPRF. I was a trade magazine editor for 10 years. The magazine had loyal advertisers who advertised only with us, those who advertised with us and our competitor and those who advertised strictly with our competitor. So the CPRF chooses not to spend money with O'Dwyer. It's the CPRF's choice, and no amount of complaining by O'Dwyer is going to win my sympathy (not that he wants it) about the lack of support from the CPRF.
O'Dwyer himself posted this statement on his blog: "This is far from just being a matter of money. Waggener Edstrom, with $119 million in revenues in 2008, 843 employees, and No. 2 on our rankings, has only one web/NL sub at $295. It refuses to pony up a nickel more. We just don't fit into their "marketing plan," a marketing executive told us. Several other large ranked firms have the same attitude. So we're booting Wagged and the others off the rankings. They're not "PR" firms. Rather than having any sense of community, they only have a sense of what's in it for them. They don't like independent media that can challenge them. They don’t live up to the term, 'public.'"
Tell me Mr. O'Dwyer, how is your choice to boot them off the rankings not a "what's in it for you" stance?" You also state that O'Dwyer rankings are epidemic on Google. That's wonderful. But I'd be more impressed (not that you care to impress me) if you can demonstrate how a firm's ranking in your directory was directly related to it winning new business.
To conclude I do want to say that I think O'Dwyers' idea of a subscription scale is fair: $2,000 for agencies with $2 million in fees, $3,000 for those with $5-$10 million in fees, and $5,000 for those with $10 million and more (as told by PRNewser). O'Dwyer produces a product which requires materials, time and money. I agree he should be fairly compensated for the product he produces. However, I think it is unfair for O'Dwyer to change the subscription rules mid-game and blackmail firms who refuse to play by the new rules.
You don't buy a car only to get a call from the salesperson a year later saying "Oh, we are increasing the price of your car because you let so many other people use it."
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
Back to doing what I do best
As you can see from the date of my last blog post, it has been a VERY LONG time since I last posted something to my blog. Without going into a long-winded explanation of details all I will say is that my time was quite filled by completing studies for my MBA and searching for a new job.
At the end of 2008 I became separated from my former employer. Let's just say the job market was as difficult as the news details. At one point I read a story that stated in 2007 before the financial meltdown there was 1.7 workers available for every job opening. By 2009 the number of available job workers had jumped to over six. I completed my MBA studies and graduated in August (with a 3.8 grade average, thank you very much).
This year has gotten off to a much better start for me. I recently became the media relations manager for the Institute for Business & Home Safety (www.disastersafety.org) which
conducts research on how to design and build home and commercial structures to better withstand damage from natural disasters. The position is perfect for me because it fits my skill set very well and it's a great cause with which to be involved.
On my first day I wrote a press release and distributed it the next day. I'm happy to say it picked up a decent amount of news coverage including a radio interview on the leading news radio show in DC. The release also grabbed its fair share of print, too.
One of the reasons the release was so successful in terms of pick up is that I stuck to the basic rules of media relations: a relevant topic + a well-written release + a good headline + appropriate targeting = pick up. I have followed this formula for more than 10 years and it has never let me down. I know it seems simple and practically elementary. But consider this - only one journalist wrote back to me and asked to be removed from my media list - and that was because she recently changed beats.
On the social media front, I posted links to the release on Twitter and Delicious. The Institute's LinkedIn and Facebook presence isn't as strong as it could be but I'm working it. I did join a number of relevant groups through my personal LinkedIn account. Eventually, I will create a LinkedIn and Facebook page for the Institute. I am not a social media "expert" but I'm not novice. I use a simplier is better approach when it comes to using social media for corporate communications.
Take the most recent release for example. It's posted on the Institute's web site, and I tweeted links to the release on Twitter, and I posted the link with tags on Delicious. I did the same thing with a Podcast of our CEO. The video is posted on our web site and I tweeted the link to the video and posted it with tags on Delicious.
Next on my plate is monitoring news about the Institute. For now I use Google Alerts and we have a monitoring tool as part of our Vocus media database subscription. Both seem to do pretty well. I just registered with HootSuite to monitor mentions of the Institute in the social media realm. This is a new venture for me and I welcome comments and suggestions about how to effectively monitor my organization in the social media space.
Well, that's all the catching up I can do for now. I just got another news release request dropped on my desk, and I was just informed I am going to take over editing of our member newsletter. All great stuff. Although at this rate the time between my blogs posts may be even bigger than last time. Let's hope not.
At the end of 2008 I became separated from my former employer. Let's just say the job market was as difficult as the news details. At one point I read a story that stated in 2007 before the financial meltdown there was 1.7 workers available for every job opening. By 2009 the number of available job workers had jumped to over six. I completed my MBA studies and graduated in August (with a 3.8 grade average, thank you very much).
This year has gotten off to a much better start for me. I recently became the media relations manager for the Institute for Business & Home Safety (www.disastersafety.org) which
conducts research on how to design and build home and commercial structures to better withstand damage from natural disasters. The position is perfect for me because it fits my skill set very well and it's a great cause with which to be involved.
On my first day I wrote a press release and distributed it the next day. I'm happy to say it picked up a decent amount of news coverage including a radio interview on the leading news radio show in DC. The release also grabbed its fair share of print, too.
One of the reasons the release was so successful in terms of pick up is that I stuck to the basic rules of media relations: a relevant topic + a well-written release + a good headline + appropriate targeting = pick up. I have followed this formula for more than 10 years and it has never let me down. I know it seems simple and practically elementary. But consider this - only one journalist wrote back to me and asked to be removed from my media list - and that was because she recently changed beats.
On the social media front, I posted links to the release on Twitter and Delicious. The Institute's LinkedIn and Facebook presence isn't as strong as it could be but I'm working it. I did join a number of relevant groups through my personal LinkedIn account. Eventually, I will create a LinkedIn and Facebook page for the Institute. I am not a social media "expert" but I'm not novice. I use a simplier is better approach when it comes to using social media for corporate communications.
Take the most recent release for example. It's posted on the Institute's web site, and I tweeted links to the release on Twitter, and I posted the link with tags on Delicious. I did the same thing with a Podcast of our CEO. The video is posted on our web site and I tweeted the link to the video and posted it with tags on Delicious.
Next on my plate is monitoring news about the Institute. For now I use Google Alerts and we have a monitoring tool as part of our Vocus media database subscription. Both seem to do pretty well. I just registered with HootSuite to monitor mentions of the Institute in the social media realm. This is a new venture for me and I welcome comments and suggestions about how to effectively monitor my organization in the social media space.
Well, that's all the catching up I can do for now. I just got another news release request dropped on my desk, and I was just informed I am going to take over editing of our member newsletter. All great stuff. Although at this rate the time between my blogs posts may be even bigger than last time. Let's hope not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
