We Bring Technology to Market.

Engaging technology analysts as part of a PR program

• Posted by Jill Pyle
• November 22, 2007
• Leave a comment

By Jill Pyle

Lately, I’ve had the opportunity to work with several clients whose PR programs have an analyst relations component. It’s been a great experience getting to know the ins and outs of analyst relations and learning about the many ways it can create value for a client.

We reach out to technology analysts for the same reason we reach out to media: what they say and do has the potential to move markets and engaging with them can have a positive impact on our clients’ business objectives. Many purchasing decision-makers read the research reports issued by large analyst firms like Gartner, Forrester and IDC that put the companies that are included in these reports at top of mind when it comes time to buy.

Like purchasing decision-makers, the media are also known for approaching analysts to source expert opinions. Quotes from technology analysts often appear in the media. Some analysts also write byline articles, columns or blogs. It’s also common for analysts to give presentations and provide counsel to large organizations. In order to stay on top of advancements in their area of expertise, analysts regularly participate in briefings with technology vendors.

Typically, our clients’ first engagement with an analyst firm is an introductory phone briefing, where they have the opportunity to share information about their business, market, market drivers, technology solution and its applications. Introductory briefings can range from 30 to 60 minutes, usually starting with a presentation or demo and finishing up with some questions and answers.

Because we provide company and technology background information in advance of introductory briefings, our clients are often able to have high-value conversations with technology analysts and receive feedback on their value proposition, as well as an authoritative perspective on trends affecting their market. These are the kinds of briefings our clients really enjoy. Unfortunately, some briefings are void of feedback and end with a sales pitch to sponsor a research report.

Our objective when engaging with technology analysts is to seek out opportunities for our clients to be included in research reports that do not require sponsorship and articles that are published in outlets that reach their target customers. It is through engaging with a healthy mix of big-name and boutique analyst firms that we are able to find these kinds of opportunities for our clients.

Jill Pyle

Posted in:

• Marketing strategy
• Public and media relations
• Technology marketing

Wikis in the workplace

• Posted by inmedia
• November 21, 2007
• Leave a comment

eWeek just published an article about companies that are using wikis to share and manage knowledge. According to the article, “Wikis’ flexibility and versatility make the technology a potential solution for an array of business requirements. From bare-bones content collaboration to Web-based project management, wikis can adapt to the team requirements of many organizations.”

The article shares some best practices from companies that have successfully integrated wikis into their organizational culture. For more details, read Wikis While You Work. Also, be sure to check out our tips for using a wiki as an employee manual.

inmedia

Posted in:

• Social media

Best practices for collaborating on content development

• Posted by Linda Forrest
• November 21, 2007
• Leave a comment

By Linda Forrest

Media relations is a collaborative process. The client and the PR agency should clearly define objectives for the program at the outset and a plan should be formulated to reach those goals.

It’s important to consider that one of the predominant reasons for outsourcing the PR function is to gain efficiency. We can ease your workload so that you can better spend your time attending to your other business requirements. We are here to take the content development, pitching, media monitoring and other PR activities off of your plate. We work hard to learn our clients’ full story and best pursue the media coverage that your story deserves.

If this is your first time using an agency instead of doing PR in-house, a transition is to be expected. But soon enough, as our clients can attest, the process has been streamlined and results are achieved. Hopefully, the following few words on content development will help ease the transition.

Read More

Linda Forrest

Posted in:

• Public and media relations

Phone vs. email

• Posted by Danny Sullivan
• November 20, 2007
• Leave a comment

By Danny Sullivan

In keeping with the “versus” theme this week, I’ve decided to take a quick look at the challenges faced by technology PR folk when deciding which method of communication to employ when following up with the media on that all important news release. Do you try endlessly for that (ahem) wonderful moment of personal contact when you actually get to speak to your target editor, or do you opt for the less touchy feely but more efficient email?

Of course, if we were talking about general story pitching, then email would win hands down, but the breaking news story is a bit different and often requires a swift response before the story goes cold.

When I put it like that, the phone seems naturally the best option, allowing you to catch the editor or reporter for a moment and help them to understand the real news value behind the email header they were so quick to skip over this morning. Indeed, if you are a skilled technology PR practitioner, you should have no problem handling such a call. But beware those who choose to call a reporter to simply read aloud the opening lines of the news release – not a good idea.

But, despite the fact that a phone call can be an effective contact method, it is becoming more and more difficult to raise busy news editors in this way. It’s understandable – there is a huge amount of technology news breaking every day, and those responsible for identifying and covering the key stories are very often swamped in a deluge of PR. This can sometimes lead to a simple reaction: ignore the phone.

In this case, you might try all day and never reach your desired contact. Increasingly, I am finding that a carefully worded (and brief) follow-up email to key targets can often be a very effective way to generate a quick response. This allows the harassed individual in the newsroom to read your email in a rare moment of downtime and, if you have chosen the right words, it will hopefully strike a chord and result in that ultimate reaction we all seek: interest.

At the end of the day, as you generate relationships with specific media contacts, you’ll get to know what kinds of communications methods work, and which don’t. Both phone and email are great tools in the hands of people who use them effectively.

Danny Sullivan

Posted in:

• Public and media relations

The hacks vs. flacks war

• Posted by Francis Moran
• November 19, 2007
• Leave a comment

By Francis Moran

It is with no small amount of trepidation that I leap into the latest eruption of a long-standing conflict that, invisible to most, has waged between journalists and PR practitioners ever since ink first spilled on paper. But when the New York Times itself is driven to comment on how things have turned ugly in this war, you know this has gone from bitch session to serious business.

The latest round was sparked by a blog post by Wired magazine executive editor Chris Anderson complaining about the hundreds of emails he receives every day from PR folk pitching him stories in which he has absolutely no interest. Anderson kicked the volume up to personal insult level when he went on to list more than 300 individual email addresses of practitioners he accused of being guilty of this practice, swearing that his magazine would block those addresses for all time. Some of the world’s largest agencies were on his list, as were many of our more direct competitors. We were relieved, but not unexpectedly so, to find that we were wholly absent.

The blogosphere raged with swift, loud, passionate reaction. Although there were clear exceptions, the PR industry tended to react defensively while the media industry cheered Anderson for outing these bad apples.

inmedia is unequivocally with Anderson, the majority of reporters and a distressingly small number of our fellow practitioners on this one. Sending a pitch to a reporter who does not write about your client’s stuff and so has no interest in what you’re pitching is bad for the client, bad for the PR industry, a waste of time and resources, and, most of all, betrays a profound ignorance of how the media function and how the PR industry interacts with that function to create value on both sides of the divide.

My colleague, Linda Forrest, weighed in on Friday with the unhappy implications this all-too-common practice has for the PR industry. Let me offer my view on why it’s so common. As a reporter for 10 years and a PR practitioner for another 20, I’ve been on both the transmit and receive ends of too many pitches not to understand why the good ones work so well and why there are so many bad ones out there.

Like many other things, PR is perceived to be a numbers game; throw enough darts and some of them are bound to hit the board. And with too many PR practitioners and their clients unable to measure the value of the function except in terms of the level of effort expended, then more must be better, right? Add in the ease with which today’s technology puts massive lists of journalists at the disposal of practitioners, lists that can be converted into seemingly personalised email blasts with just a few key strokes, plus the tendency, at least on the agency side of the business, to drill the labour-intensive task of actually pitching the media down to the most junior resources, and you have a sure-fire recipe for what Anderson and every other reporter who’s ever been asked about it hates most about the PR profession — bad pitches.

Maybe we’re just fortunate in that most of our clients can’t afford very many darts, so we’re obliged to make the most of every single one we throw, putting a huge amount of effort into ensuring it is aimed as accurately as possible at the highest-scoring part of the right board. But I think it has more to do with our conviction that every story has a natural news value, and that the proper telling of the story to the proper set of media targets will allow us to capture its full value for our clients.

I said at the outset of this post that it was with trepidation that I ventured into these roiling and disturbed waters and my reason for saying so is that I know we can’t afford to be smug about our own record. My colleague Danny Sullivan relayed just Friday morning the very positive reaction he received from a reporter he was pitching that day, a woman who said he had restored her confidence in PR. This is a not uncommon reaction for us. At the same time, Linda reminded me of the wire service reporter who rages at her every time she follows up on an email pitch.

Bottom line: There are many good PR practitioners and many bad ones. Same’s true of reporters. The so-called “war” between the two professions is waged exclusively between the bad operators on one or both sides. And clients, who want more, are not blameless is this, either.

Francis Moran

Posted in:

• Public and media relations