PR people need to realize that the people relevant to their clients can be found, not behind a newspaper or magazine, but in social media venues. These people may be professional journalists, they may be industry enthusiasts or they may just be wandering through a topic.

The way a PR person finds them today is not by wandering down a purchased media list, but by reading the right social media content for their clients and reading it on a very regular basis. They are found by using topical search tools with some skill and imagination.

And then PR people are welcome to join the conversation and build a relationship before they try pitching a client for coverage. This does not take so long, because relationships form quite fast in social media. And if you are good at it, like Brian, Todd and Steve, the taint of PR hucksterism disappears.

You’re right: PR people do need to think FAR beyond media relations (or blogger relations for that matter). It’s about relations[hips], not media or blogger relations as they’re often construed. And you build relationships a lot of different ways.

Thanks for sharing your 2010 predictions. Always appreciate your thoughts on the industry.

To clarify, my point about PR and advertising lines blurring wasn’t about pay-for-play, editorial-in-disguise tactics. That’s another conversation entirely from where I was heading. My apologies if that wasn’t clear.

My point was that PR pros will need to start thinking more holistically about the opportunities available to connect with consumers and drive their client’s business, beyond the traditional pillars like media relations. For example, recommending mobile text alerts to supplement upcoming in-store events. Or recommending the client talk to their ad/media agency about placing online banner ads in the message boards where you’re focusing some of your social media efforts. Or recommending a direct mail postcard to a segment of the client’s database to tease an upcoming experiential event in the local park.

Regarding pay-for-play, I’m generally not a fan of it. I’ve only recommended it a few times in the past, specifically leveraging a service like NAPS to boost visibility in smaller/rural markets while focusing your media relations time and efforts on landing earned media in larger media markets.

Again, thanks for the predictions and for sharing your thoughts. Hope 2010 has incredible things in store for you.

All of that said, let’s be a little realistic and recognize that, with a few exceptions, most people’s morning newspapers are about 70% press release.

You’re right that it’s a scary trend, but I think ultimately it will be the readers who will make this live or die. If they find value in the content, then they’ll come back. If they don’t, they won’t. Those who do it “right” by listening to their readers and delivering what they want will be rewarded. Those that don’t, will die.

No, the regular reader may not be as savvy as us jaded PR folks, but they also have some pretty good BS detectors.

I used to work with Chuck. Nice post.

I agree strongly with the pay-for-play perspective. The worst part about this trend is that regular readers aren’t as cynical as PR pros. If a product name or company is embedded in an editorial-looking piece, the reader automatically assumes that the reporter found merit in the product and mentioned it on his/her own accord. Only after careful inspection can you find small print at the bottom of the article, something like, “Sponsored by X Company” (if that’s there at all).

Some have said that this trend will pass, as did trying to charge readers for online content. However, I think outlets will find significant revenue in this practice and it will only increase. In the tech industry, this practice has been rampant in the analyst community for quite some time. By becoming an analyst’s client, sometimes you are guaranteed a certain number of “mentions” in analyst articles and blog posts – even if the post is on Network Computing or InformationWeek.

For PR pros, this practice of selling the media outlet’s soul to the advertising devil will dilute true PR placements and eventually cause readers to be cynical of ANY organization mentioned in ANY article – even if what they’re doing is cool and newsworthy.

Tim