You hear a lot of PR folks claim to have ‘relationships’ with certain journalists. I remember when I was at PR firms how often colleagues would drop names during new business pitches. “Walt Mossberg (WSJ), Steve Lohr (NYT) — yeah, we have GREAT relationships with them.” As if to say that they could just casually drop them a line and get a story written about anyone or anything.
The ‘relationship’ is often overstated by PR folks. What does that mean? The guy / gal wrote one story about one of your clients two years ago? You added them to your buddies list on AIM?
Here are the benefits that I’ve found in my journalist “relationships:”
- when you send the journalist an email, it gets opened / read
- if he / she isn’t interested in a pitch, there is often an explanation why it failed to intrigue
- the journalist frequently tells you about upcoming stories and asks if you know of any good fits
Those three things — having their trust / attention, getting their feedback, and getting the heads-up on opportunities — are obviously huge advantages.
What do you give them in return?
- heads up on news / rumors / etc. that may not even be related to any of your clients / interests
- you rarely miss any of their stories (i.e., you know exactly what they’re covering and what the likely next thread is in the discussion)
- you don’t waste their time with b.s. / fluffy stuff — ever
To me, this idea that having a supposed relationship somehow allows you to skip the burden of proof when getting stories placed is ridiculous. If anything, the relationship quickly goes out the window the minute you start offering duds to your supposed friend.
