△ MENU/TOP △

Holtz Communications + Technology

Shel Holtz
Communicating at the Intersection of Business and Technology
SearchClose Icon

The news industry’s turmoil increases the complexity of PR

stack of newspapersThere has been a lot of news about news lately and on the surface, none of it bodes well for the traditional newspaper business, regardless of whether you’re talking about paper newspapers or their online cousins. It does, however, reveal opportunities for people working in PR.

It should come as no surprise that readership of newspapers—both print and online—continues to decline. A Harris poll released just yesterday finds that only two out of five Americans read a newspaper every day, while 72% read a newspaper at least weekly. Ten percent never read a newspaper.

I’m not convinced that last number is all that different than it was, say, 30 years ago. I remember the number of people I encountered when I was in journalism school who didn’t read newspapers—and this was back in the days of the manual typewriter. But the size of the traditional news audience is shrinking. In a presentation delivered at Yale, Pew Internet and American Life Project Director Lee Rainie pointed out that 19% of Americans get no daily news at all, up from about 14% a decade ago. What’s more, Rainie pointed out, the people who do consume news daily spend eight fewer minutes with the news than they used to.

If this isn’t dire enough, the population of newspaper reader is aging; the younger you are, the less likely you are to read a newspaper every day. Nearly two-thirds of those 55 and over make daily newspaper reading a habit. (That might explain my own morning routine.)

All of this—and a host of other statistics that seem to predict the ultimate demise of the traditional news business—leads a lot of communicators to wonder if there’s any value in maintaining a traditional media relations function.

But shrinkage isn’t the same as death. There’s no indication that the trend will continue until there are no newspaper readers.

Remaining newspaper readers still matter

Consider this: While less than a quarter of people 18 to 34 read a daily newspaper, that’s not a number to be trifled with. The 18-24-year-old demographic accounts for about 25% of the U.S. population, or about 77 million people. When you have 19 million young people reading newspapers every day, you’d be foolish to ignore the channel when trying to reach that market, especially when you consider that many of them are likely influencers.

Remember, most of the content reported via social media is not original reporting. Bloggers, Twitterers and others are repurposing content that comes primarily from newspapers. The news that so many people get through these other channels originates in newspapers and is reported through social media by people who read newspapers. Having your story told in a newspaper increases the likelihood that it will be seen by people who rely on alternative sources for their news. Just today, PostRank reported that 80% of all audience engagement is offsite. That means even bloggers’ content is being read on Facebook, Digg, and other venues other than the blog where it was originally produced. It isn’t just newspapers that are in this boat.

In a study that focused on the news delivered over a weeklong period in one major city—Baltimore—the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism found that, far and away, newspapers were responsible for reporting new information. Examining six key story lines, Pew determined that 95% of new information came from a combination of traditional media (newspapers, television and niche media, with newspapers leading the pack) while “new media”—including social media—reported the least new information.

The Pew study also found that the press was responsible for triggering only 15% of the news they covered. The rest came from other sources. If you’ve been thinking the downturn in the news business has signaled the end of any need for traditional media relations, think again. Yes, 10% of people who have social networking profiles get news through those sites. But those sites didn’t originate the news. By and large newspapers did.

This means the the role of the newspaper is shifting. They remain the primary source of first reporting, but now serve as the inadvertent distributor of news to secondary channels through which an increasing number of people get their news.

A study I’d like to see would determine if social media content creators are among the remaining newspaper readers. I’d be willing to bet real money that they are.

Authoritative sources still matter

It’s equally important to have channels that let you get your organization’s news directly to its audiences. While media relations will be important for the foreseeable future, you’re competing for a shrinking amount of news space. The Baltimore Sun, for example, produced 32% fewer news stories in the period of the Pew study than it did 10 years earlier and 73% fewer than it did in 1991.

Some smug new-media pundits may be basking in the warmth of the certain knowledge that blogs and other social channels have taken up the slack. But that’s not so. According to the Pew study—as I suggested above—social media has served mostly to notify readers of the mainstream article’s existence. Social media has a greater impact on the speed with which news breaks than on the overall number of new stories. Citizen journalism has its place to be sure (just look at the iReports CNN is including in its coverage of the Haitian earthquake), it’s not panning out as a replacement for professional journalism. Social media is finding a more comfortable niche in areas such as fundraising (again, look at the Haiti situation, where social media is responsible for raising awareness of the U.S. State Department and Red Cross relief efforts, generating millions of dollars in giving.)

The repetition of news items by social media content producers—from blog posts to tweets—satisfies the growing preference for news grazing, consuming bits of news all the time instead of all at once (whether that’s sitting at the breakfast table with a newspaper for half an hour or watching the nightly news). Fewer people get their news at all one regular time than get it from time to time, according to numbers Rainie cited during his Yale talk.

But this repurposing of news creates confusion. As the Project for Excellence in Journalism put it, “As news is posted faster, often with little enterprise reporting added, the official version of events is becoming more important. We found official press releases often appear word for word in first accounts of events, though often not noted as such.”

Blogger Adam Sherk beat me to the punch with the observation that the long-abused press release still has legs: “Companies can increase the likelihood of their press releases being used by bloggers and local news sources by giving them a more news-like tone and dialing down the marketing hype,” he writes. Press releases bearing the company’s official imprint can be authoritative statements of record in the absence of other sources people can trust.

Press releases still matter

That’s a significant change in the press release’s former role as a pitch to mainstream media. That role is dead, but as a channel for getting information directly to people—information they can cite—the press release has new life. (They also do a bang-up job of search engine optimization, when done right.)

You should also read Shannon Cherry’s post extolling the virtues of making your press releases available for subscription via an RSS feed, which contradicts the growing popular belief that RSS has outlived its usefulness. “Many reporters are using RSS feeds to get their releases, because they can customize what they are receiving for their target market,” Cherry writes. “Many of the press release posting sites only have one feed, so journalists avoid them due to all the clutter of releases not pertinent to them. They would certainly rather subscribe to news feeds, like your press release feed, that???s targeted.”

In other words, if you want your company’s or client’s story told, you need to make sure it’s everywhere. To get social media content creators to report it, you need to do your damnedest to get it into the papers. To get it in the papers, you need to maintain a solid media relations effort that accommodates reporters’ preferences (like RSS). You also need to go directly to influencers (through blogger outreach) and directly to the public (through a variety of techniques ranging from a strategic social media presence to tried-and-true SEO practices).

The news space has grown more complex. The sophistication of your efforts to earn coverage need to grow with it.

Comments
  • 1.Good points all around. I think looking closely at the front page of Digg or reddit confirms everything you've said about offline content.

    Rex | January 2010 | Orlando FL

  • 2.This is an excellent overview of the landscape today, and your point is a good one: many of our tried and true PR methods are not only still viable, but actually critical to our overall success. Despite some pundits' cries to the contrary, PR pros shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Traditional media still plays a key role and should be part of any outreach effort.

    Kellye Crane | January 2010

  • 3.Shared your post with DePaul journalism professor and longtime Chicago Tribune reporter Mike Conklin, who said: "The complexities of the news industries STRENGTHENS the role of the PR industry in ways that do not meet the eye. I can show many examples. Trust me on this...The deal is this: whether news organizations will admit it or not, as they lay off more and more reporters (but not proportionately as many editors), they depend on PR more and more for content. They also depend more on stringers and free lancers, whose ethics about enterprise generally are not as strong and are more willing to use PR sources."

    As for me, I still read the paper every day.

    Kris Gallagher | January 2010 | DePaul University

  • 4.Had not had the chance to catch up with my RSS before writing my post about trading accuracy for immediacy, which is becoming a bit of an issue with social news. Thank you for providing additional thinking and resources.

    May I also recommend a recent post by Rich Becker on an experiment he conducted about how releases impact perception http://tinyurl.com/y8avz82

    Interesting times.

    Valeria Maltoni | January 2010

  • 5.You're right on the money, Shel. In fact, more people read newspapers today than ever. It's just that they graze between websites rather than focus on one media brand.

    The problem newspapers have isn't relevance; it's a broken business model. Unfortunately, I don't see any hope of turning that ship around. The plunging cost of advertising is sabotaging the business.

    David Meerman Scott astutely points out in his "New Rules of Marketing & PR" that press releases can now go directly to the public using the same channels as news providers. When PR and marketers think and talk more like the media organizations they've traditionally courted, they can become trusted sources in the same mold as the mainstream media.

    Paul Gillin | January 2010 | Framingham, MA

  • 6.I've started investigating newscred.com (my "paper" is http://conmergence.newscred.com/) I already subscribe to NashvillePost.com and WSJ online. If newscred can work out the author tip jar for clicks and time on page I'd be glad to subscribe.

    Ed Dodds | January 2010 | Nashville, TN USA

  • 7.Yep. I completely agree. I'd add that with the shifting media landscape a well-placed mainstream media hit is even more important because it's much harder to get. Big conservative clients that I've worked with continue to demand that agencies focus on traditional media while testing social media. So, in Canada anyway, hits in the Globe and Mail still matter most.

    Trevor Campbell | January 2010 | Toronto

  • 8.I agree that the role of newspapers is shifting, but they will always have their place in society.

    I think it's similar to the role that RSS feeds played before Twitter came along. Before that, I sat down and read and scanned through an enormous amount of content, not all of it relevant. Then Twitter came along, and I had people that I followed choose the best content for me - the best of the best. (Although some blogs do this too).

    Our lives are becoming busier as more and more content is created, and I believe this is what web 3 will be all about - the selection of specifically relevant content.

    That being said, there is nothing better than spending time with the thick Saturday morning newspaper and an extended cup of tea :)

    Alana Faigen | January 2010 | Melbourne

  • 9.Hmmm, you and Adam Sherk both believe that ?Companies can increase the likelihood of their press releases being used by bloggers and local news sources by giving them a more news-like tone and dialing down the marketing hype.?

    I guess what's old is new - or news - again. The only thing that has changed is who is receiving the information. I worked for a B2B agency where it was preached every day to avoid the marketing speak and find the news. I'll carry that advice wherever I go because it will always hold true.

    Great piece, Shel. Thank you.

    Dan Brennan | January 2010

  • 10.Totally agree with everything you said, Shel.

    As we have discussed with our fellow SNCR Fellow Tom Foremski, the decline in resources at mainstream media is really an opportunity for corporate news gathering and content generation.

    Companies can no longer rely on the traditional channels to cover anything like routine (yet economically significant) corporate activities like local community news, contributions, corporate citizenship, etc. Companies have to do this themselves. That presents an enormous opportunity for operations like sixestate.com, Steve O'Keefe's news blogging service for companies, and frankly, for folks like me who produce audio and video content for companies about their expertise, thought leadership, or company events.

    I love newspapers, I will always refer to them as newspapers, but I will probably mostly read them online, so I do want them to survive. The big question is the business model.

    David Ledford, Executive Editor of the Gannett-owned Wilmington (DE) News Journal, who spoke at this month's PRSA/Delaware luncheon, points out that they produce 30-60 video reports a week, which is very nearly as many as the local Philadelphia TV stations produce. They got a million unique visitors to their site when we were blasted with back-to-back blizzards in February.
    But few of those people pay for the information they are expecting to find. Someone has to pay. And we need them to figure that out before they collapse.

    We desperately need them to survive to ensure that our political system and our society in general is subject to scrutiny. They need to be way more flexible and innovative. I am optimistic that they will figure it out.

    Steve Lubetkin | March 2010 | Cherry Hill, NJ

Comment Form

« Back