LEWIS 360°

The new old press release

The press release is undergoing a dramatic makeover. But this is not a makeover of the reality-TV-show-overnight-transformation variety. It’s being done the hard way: the debate has been going on for years. Last week, Brian Solis moved it forward again with a detailed dissection of a social media release.

Brian’s post was titled: ‘Reviving the Traditional Press Release’. So I thought it might be a cry for a return to traditional values of storytelling. Certainly, he made a very valid point about the importance of having a storyboard in mind before the process of creating a release even begins. And his emphasis on quality is clear.

But, still, the debate is more centered on form than content. I agree wholeheartedly that the format of the press release must change. Our first social media release platform, LEWIS Wire, which we launched in July 2007, tackled just that issue. It attempted to make it possible for any press release to incorporate more social elements. It included hyperlinks, tags, SEO, embedded multimedia, bookmarks and a more navigable format. The result is a release that tells a more complete story.

Like LEWIS Wire, many of the platforms and templates available today prompt us to think about the visuals and resources that a reporter might need, or how a release will be shared. That’s a huge step forward. But it doesn’t get to the heart of the matter: the story itself. And that’s the real question: can any template achieve that?

I’m not sure it can. Whether or not you can tell a story is a matter of instinct. You have to know a story when you see it. That’s the fundamental skill in PR and, if we really want to change the perception of the press release, we have to ensure every PR professional can practice that skill.

You see, I remember my very first lesson in press release writing. It was focused on the concept of ‘So What?’. I pitched story after story to the relentless trainer, who responded ‘so what?’ to every one until I could boil it down to the few enticing, essential facts that really mattered. That, to many of us, is a ‘traditional press release’.

Unfortunately, over the years, that practice has become diluted. Now there is confusion between the ‘traditional press release’ and the ‘bad press release’. They are not one and the same. Unfortunately, there are many more examples of the latter than the former.

In an ideal world, the press release would combine the storytelling of a (good) traditional release and the contextual aspects of a Social Media Release. It would be enjoyable to read - with well-chosen words that inform and entertain. It would be supported with video, pictures, links, comments and all the resources necessary to place that story in a live context. And it would be easily shareable, findable and re-usable.

That’s not to say that the art of storytelling itself has not changed too. There are a number of ways in which it is different now:

• Language itself is changing. The Twitter pitch aside (although perhaps because of Twitter), brevity is more important than ever. This is a sociological, perhaps even physical, change. Our attention spans are simply shorter. New generations will use even shorter sentences than we do. Writers today must adapt accordingly.

• We must write for a ‘pull’ audience, not a ‘push’ audience. Yes, we can do this by providing a choice of links and visuals. But the words and sentences themselves must be more compelling than ever. Inserting SEO keywords is one way of reaching the ‘pull’ audience. But the skill of the new copywriter is balancing keyword optimization with storytelling.

• Local relevance, but global awareness. Yes, every story must be more tailored and targeted or it will fall on deaf ears. But we must also accept that any content can, and will, be seen by a global audience. Copywriters must understand the nuances and sensitivities of an international readerbase.

The fundamental skills of the copywriter are changing before our eyes. So, when we define the Social Media Release, we must ensure as much attention is paid to the quality of the words, as we do to everything else – if not more so. If we fail to do this, we risk our splendid new format becoming diluted by poor practice and haste.

This is not a revolutionary view. Pretty much everyone in this debate agrees that we have to eliminate the jargon-heavy, wordy releases that have crept into our profession. But, that is not a job for the few. It is the responsibility of every PR professional to push for these standards, day in, day out.

Swine flu: Was it media hype or were they just doing their job?

The media has badly misled the public over the threat of swine flu in order to gain more readers and cash in on nationwide panic. That is the headline finding of research* which suggests 91 per cent of us believe newspapers and television news channels have exaggerated the nature of the problem for their own financial gain.

Only two per cent of respondents believe the media was interested in establishing a balanced view of the truth behind the illness and the threat it really posed.

As for where scaremongering was the greatest, television news was blamed by 44 per cent of respondents, while 54 per cent suggested our newspapers had been most culpable. Only two per cent of respondents identified social networks such as Twitter, despite the media’s own concerns about the Twitter effect on the spread of panic.

In terms of individual outlets, Sky News fared worst and was chosen by 36 per cent of respondents as the source of the greatest hype around the illness. Second was The Sun newspaper (20.5 per cent) followed by The Daily Mail (18 per cent) and the BBC (13.5 per cent).

Furthermore, regarding experts brought forward to comment on swine flu, 80 per cent of respondents said they believe commentators were often chosen because they were willing to confirm the exaggerated level of threat, and not because of their qualification to speak on the subject.

Asked for their views on the issue, one respondent said the past few weeks “must have been scary for those who believe what they read”.

Another added: “It has given the press something other than the global economic crisis to write about. And now it's the MP’s expenses and there’s not a sniffle of swine flu in the news.”

Swine flu in the media: The highlights

• On 24 April Reuters broke the news that a new strain of flu had been identified in Mexico. The report cited unnamed experts who said the H1N1 strain “could spark a pandemic that could kill millions”.
• On 27 April the media was widely reporting the death toll from swine flu stood at 149 in Mexico from where it was predicted it would spread. And fear, if not the actual disease, was already spreading across the world “like a Mexican wave” according to The Times. Meanwhile, other papers featured individuals posed at airports wearing facemasks to protect them from the contagion and Sky News inconclusively questioned whether the government could deal with a pandemic.
• By 29 April The Guardian was reporting the “crisis” had “exploded” and the death toll stood at 159. The same day a headline in The Express claimed 40 per cent of the UK population – approximately 24 million people – may come down with the deadly disease. The Daily Star added that 750,000 of those victims could well perish.
• By 30 April the death toll in Mexico hit 176, according to The Daily Mail. This despite claims from the Mexican government that the actual figure was just eight.
• By 11 May, more than two weeks since the threat of pandemic was recognised, the death toll in Mexico had dropped dramatically to just 56, well below the expected number of seasonal influenza-related deaths.
• In the UK to date, nobody, let alone 750,000 people, has died from the illness. The few cases which have been confirmed, but which number significantly fewer than 24 million, have seen people suffer “mild cold-like symptoms”. But still the scare stories don’t go away.
• On 13 May The Sun reported ‘Swine flu to hit two billion’ – or a third of the world’s population.

(*Survey findings are based on 276 responses during the period 30 April - 12 May, 2009. Research was conducted by Will Sturgeon via http://www.surveymonkey.com.)