The article posed an interesting question:

If you were given the choice of selecting one of two similar newspaper stories and one of them had an interesting photo, which would you select?

I think most of us would select the story with the photo. In fact, the Poynter Institute has been conducting sophisticated reader research in this area since the early 90s. Their results have repeatedly found that ”short text, especially with visual elements, (my italics) is accessible and attractive to readers.” 

I’ve done small-scale reader experiments in my classroom, and invariably students say they look at the photos in a newspaper first. When I was a print reporter, there wasn’t a single story idea conversation with my editor that didn’t include the question “What about art?” Some of the stories I did weren’t even “stories” in the traditional sense. They were photo and graphic-centered pieces where the only text was a short intro and captions, some statistics or a list of some sort.

According to the Bignews.biz article:

The majority of press releases that are distributed online do not include photos. When a photo or an illustration is included with a press release it enhances the visibility of the release increasing the number of viewers as well as making it easier for people to find a release in search engines such as Google News and Google Images..

Art, and more importantly goodart, is something that can help build better relationships between journalists and PR folks. Everything in media these days is visual – from mug shots of sources to highly interactive Flash infographics.

My advice to PR people putting together any type of press material would be simply this: Don’t send it without some form of art. Hi-res, good-looking, newspaper-worthy art, even if it’s just a headshot of your CEO. It could greatly increase your chances of getting ink, and reporters will love you for it. At the very least, it could help you in the Google-sphere.

And, I’m willing to bet that if a reporter picks up your release sans photos, at some point you’ll be asked this question:

Do you have any art?

One of my dear, dear friends left the newspaper for a PR firm in town, and I’m ashamed to admit that when even he called me to pitch me an idea, I was annoyed.

To this day, I feel bad about it. But this — the complete and utter lack of any type of communication from the media – is why PR people hate journalists. 

For you journalists out there who may not know, I’d like to take you through the life of a PR person. (It’s probably something you should know anyway, since statistically quite a few of you will be joining the ranks before too long.)

At good PR firms, we have long brainstorming meetings with our clients and our co-workers to try and figure out the best way to promote a product, person or idea. We work with the client to make sure their efforts are newsworthy. We do lots of homework to figure out who the client’s audience is and what kind of media they consume. 

Once we have that figured out, we generate a “media list” of outlets we think would be most interseted in our story ideas, and honestly we always shoot high. Despite knowing logically that our client probably won’t get the cover of Time and the entire hour on Oprah, we secretly believe with all our hearts that this is actually possible.

We read many, many publications to figure out who the reporters are and what beats they cover, we do research to find out how those reporters prefer to be contacted – and we abide by those wishes. If a good PR person contacts you with a story idea, it’s likely because they’ve done a lot of research that points to you as someone who might really, truly be interested in what they have to say.

And then reality sits in. Email after email goes unreturned. Calls go straight to voicemail – too often to be coincidence. We sit and wonder — why didn’t (X reporter, producer, editor) call us back? What’s wrong with the story? Was the idea not good? Are they just not interested? Did they file it away for a rainy day? Did the email even go through?

This is no doubt an unequal partnership. The media is in control because they are the ones who choose whether or not to use a press release as the basis for a story. When they choose not to respond one way or the other, it can be a source of real anxiety for PR people. 

In the meantime, our bosses are coming by our cubicles asking “What happened with Forbes? The client asked about the Today show, any luck there?” and more often than not, we have to say “they never got back to me.” And somehow, that’s our fault. Then our bosses get anxious, and tell us to make follow-up phone calls. And then the reporters think we’re being pushy, which is also our fault.

(Yes, I’m going on a whiny, self-indulgent rant here, and I completely understand that there are some PR people out there who just don’t get it - they blast email press releases that are nothing but hard-sell product pitches with no news value. However, all I ever see online is journlaists complaining about PR people, so I thought it was time to stick up for the good ones!)

So for our friends in the media, here’s a novel concept for you: If you get a press release via email — respond to it! I know for a fact that you have time during the day, I have seen more solitaire games on screens (incuding mine) and smoke breaks in newsrooms than I can count.

If you’re waiting for a source to call back, go through your emails and voicemails and say “Sorry, not interested,” or “Not now, but maybe later.” Or, if you really have some time on your hands, you could provide some constructive feedback on what would make the release more likely to get your attention.

(Hey, speaking of sources – doesn’t it drive you nuts when you put out phone calls for a story and sources don’t call you back? Or when your editor is hovering, asking why you haven’t gotten a quote from this person or that person yet? That’s how we feel, times a zillion.)

You’d have no idea the amount of relief it would provide to the PR person on the other end, checking his or her email like a fiend, day and night, waiting and hoping to hear back. Even if you hate the story idea and are not in the least bit interested, at least the PR person knows and they can cross you off the list.

This begs the question: If journalists are so dependent on press releases for stories, then why do they show such disdain for PR people? When I worked in public relations, nothing was worse than pitching what I thought was a good story idea to reporters, only to hear “no” at best and be completely ignored at worst, over and over again.

At times I felt like a telemarketer — “Hello, would you be interested in….No?…..OK, thanks for your time.” “Hello, would you be interested in…No?…OK, thanks for your time.” 

It was so disheartening that to this day, every time I peruse a PR job ad, I turn the page if I see the words “media relations.” I know it’s an integral part of the job, but it really left a bad taste in my mouth.

After a short while working as a reporter it finally hit me - many releases sent to me were missing two of a journalists’ most essential needs: stories that were LOCAL and NEWSWORTHY. On the features desk, we were constantly getting releases about events that were definitely cool, but hours away. Or, they were relatively good ideas but featured a client who was out of our readership. Or, they were just plain bad ideas.

I can’t tell you how many times I would present a potential feature idea about a place out of the readership area and my editor would say “So? Who’s going to drive all the way out there?” It maybe got a mention in our weekend entertainment calendar, but that was it. Or, he would say “That’s a great idea, but find local sources instead,” which is definitley not what a PR person wants to hear.

The powers that be were very specific about stories – they had to be relevant, interesting, timely, local and useful to readers. Newspapers everywhere are doing this.

At The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, there are no more national and regional reporters.

Newspapers in several states have adopted sites such as YourHub.com, which specialize in citizen journalism and hyperlocal stories that pertain only to a very small region.

The entire Gannett newspaper chain has turned its “newsrooms” into “information centers” that thrive on the Web-first, local newsgathering philosophy.

Hopefully, many PR people already understand this concept, but it’s a piece of advice I’d like to reiterate: If your client isn’t local and doesn’t have news (I mean real news – not a new product announcement), you aren’t likely to get any ink.

To increase your chances of coverage, whether it’s print or TV, do your homework. Make sure the story is within the readership/viewership area of your target outlet, that it’s either tied to a newsworthy event coming up, a holiday, a national news issue, anything.

Then, on top of all that, offer the editor ways they can turn the story into a multimedia piece for the Web – video clips, audio clips, interactive graphics – those ideas will get reporters to pay attention.

Enough of my ranting and raving. Hey reporters – what do you hate about PR people? The more we foster an open, frank discussion, the more we can fix the problem and move toward working together. All I ask is that you be nice, and if you have a problem, offer a solution.

Don’t worry PR folks, you’ll get your chance ot vent. Coming next time, “Why PR people hate journalists.”

To my mass media students, however, I constantly preach the “you need to know more than AP style” mantra. For the journalism students, I find myself integrating more broadcast and basic multimedia into my writing courses (Audacity and Soundslides) and then tell them to take courses in Flash, HTML and public speaking, at a minimum. In the PR classes, I encourage them to learn Web site design, become intimately familiar with the blogosphere, and break out of the “my client’s name must be mentioned in a newspaper for it to count” way of thinking.

This isn’t just the stuff of ivory tower studies, either. Back in April, Media General announced a big layoffs at the Tampa Tribune. As the very first sentence of this Trib blog post reads, the company plans to “shift more resources to delivering news online.” Then, later: “The Tribune also will redirect many newsroom employees to focus more time on delivering news and other content to the paper’s online partner, TBO.com, as part of a continuing evolution, ‘to take those walls down.’”

Call it what you will - selling our souls, going over to the dark side, getting a sizable raise – it seems to be a growing trend.  Steve Rubel has an intersting post on his blog, Micro Persuasion, about the hiring needs in journalism vs. public relations: by the year 2014, the demand for journalists will rise about 5 percent. In the meantime, demand for PR people will go up by as much as 26 percent.

If thse figures are correct, my friends and I are on to something. This leads me to ponder a few things: Are we evolving (devolving?) into a nation of information, as opposed to news? With initiatives such as citizen journalism on the rise, will the terms reporter and publicist become one and the same? How much did I pay for journalism school again?

When it’s done correctly, the relationship can be good for everyone. I used to put together an entertianment calendar, and I lived and died by press releases. The good ones made my life easy – instead of having to go surfing to find concert listings, for example, they were delievered right to my inbox, all the legwork complete (and correct).

The bad ones, however, just created more work, which didn’t make me want to answer the phone when that person’s number came up on caller ID. Now, as PR pro, I know that my chances of getting my clients “ink” increase greatly if I can give a journalist relevant, accurate information that will actually help them instead of cluttering their email.

See? Win-win. All we need is insight into how the other half lives.