Why Your News Release Should Not Be Written Like One

As I sit here writing yet another news release, it occurred to me I have never really talked on this blog about why I write them the way I do.

The best outcome of a news release is when someone decides to do a story on a topic. But in today’s online world, chances are small anyone is going to pick-up the phone and interview whoever is quoted and do their own story. You can call them back - particularly if you know them - and maybe get a story out of it. But someone write a story on their own volition based upon most of the awful news releases that are written today - I don't think so.

But there’s a much greater chance that a blogger or reporter will use what the news release says – often close to verbatim – and put their name or no name on it and run it as is, as an article. Why?

Picture a 22 year-old junior reporter, straight out of college, with 10 stories to write that day, or who has a job as an aggregator who finds news by looking at other resources. If he or she gets a news release that is already written as an article, it can be repurposed as a story. Or a blogger can pick up your release and run it, if it's relevant to what he or she writes about.

News releases that are written as news releases can stay up a few hours or just a couple of days, if they go through wire service or other distribution. They are usually not highlighted. No matter where they are picked up, they are categorized as news releases and go to a special place on media web sites that is kind of a dead zone unless I’m looking for a story at that particular moment, that is exactly what you’re writing about, or I find it before it comes down and it's a source on a story I'm working on.

And what's one of the major purposes of a news release. To generate as much traffic as possible to a company's web site and create a bigger online presence than before.

Just write the darn story for them

So your best bet is to write the story for the blogger or reporter – keep it under 500 or at most 600 words. Now do reporters actually do this - depends on who they write for, what the rules are and how much time they have. But all except the ones at top notch media sometimes will and I have the track record to prove it.

Tie your news release to search terms that are popular at that moment – a holiday, current news item, hot topic, industry terms or best yet a celebrity, or big brand name, and media will find it quickly. Put that popular term in the headline if you can. That’s much better than something which says so and so was hired by so and so to do so and so. Sleeping.

So the releases that I’m writing tells the story of your news in a way that I know a reporter or even an algorithim will respond too. The problem with many PR people is they don't want to write a news release that moves away from the traditional format they were taught before Instagram. (If you don't know what that is you are definitely out of touch or don't have kids). 

I mean news releases filled with long, clunky thoughts, industry jargon, several lengthy quotes by all the people who matter, and missing anything that might possibly be perceived as negative or upset someone somewhere along the line.

Hello news release trash bin. 

Writers are not going to take the time to put up something that they have to edit and with quotes they can’t use.They want to go home before midnight like the rest of us.

The style of quote that is being used in many news releases is way too long, and has multiple points in it. The point of a quote is to amplify the thought that comes before it. Like a journalist would use one. That extra step – the editing and changing someone else's words requires permission. Even the laziest of reporters knows darn well they can't alter someone else's words. So they won't bother with your news release.

Finally headlines have got to attract the attention of a broad audience, even if your audience is fairly narrow. So for instance, a company that gets a new client or puts out a new product that doesn't change the world - what does really - no one other than a very few trade reporters will care. But if you can tie that news to a broader industry trend, or information on how this is going to change the way business is done, or bring new insight, that’s better. 

Is there a way you can make this greener, cheaper, better, smarter, or a major benefit to big players in your industry or world? Go for it. Just watch the use of big adjectives and tell me the story as a reporter would write it.

That's my rant for the day.

No Great, Great Aunt Bess You Cannot Be My Facebook Friend

When a 90-something relative tried to friend me on Facebook a few months back, I was shocked. I know a growing number of seniors are using the Internet and yes it’s a wonderful way for them to connect with and make friends from their own homes.

It’s one thing to be Facebook friends with my 16 year-old son, but letting a great, great aunt read some of the stuff my friends post. I don’t think so.

Well a new study from the Pew Internet Project shows that online communication among seniors is skyrocketing, and I’d better get used to it.  

As of April 2012, 53% of American adults aged 65 and older report using the Internet or email. For the first time half of all seniors are online. After several years of very little growth among this group, these gains are a definite and important trend for marketers to take note of.

Here’s some additional data:

Daily Internet Use – Among adults 65 and older, 70% of them use the Internet daily, compared to 82% use by other age groups. Once you get into the mid-70s age group, the number of Internet users falls off to 34%.

Cell Phone Usage – 7 out of 10 seniors own a cell phone, up from 57% in May of 2010.

Social media – One in 3 seniors who are online use social media such as LinkedIn and Facebook.

Email – 86% of seniors 65 plus use email, and about 48% use it on an average day.

To learn more go to: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Older-adults-and-internet-use/Summary-of-findings.aspx

Your Business Charity Does Not Begin in My Home

Do I ask your company to subsidize mine? Of course not. So why are so many business executives these days asking parents of college students to subsidize theirs?

This is a rant in case you haven't figured that out yet. Every day online, I see a new posting from companies offering unpaid student internships for the summer. It makes me crazy. It's so totally wrong.

I understand that business is still not what it should be. Businesses figure it's a fair trade to give college kids experience while they make money on their work. Well I'm here to tell you that there's another side to this story.

As the parent of an almost college student looking at annual tuition in the tens of thousands of dollars, I can tell you that the kids don't profit from this approach. The next generation of workers aka college kids, need to learn that when they work hard they get paid for it. That companies value their time and skills enough to compensate them. That when students give their time, it should be to causes they believe in where there are clear benefits for those less fortunate than they are, the environment, the world at large. Not some businesses' bottom line. 

That's how kids develop a value system that will carry them forward and make them productive, compassionate people. Of course there are parents who are willing to subsidize their kids getting business experience but that's because they can afford it. Most parents are not the one percent whose kids take "gap years" and can afford to work all summer long on mommy and/or dad's income. 

My kids will work before, during and after college. It's an economic necessity. And it's good for them to learn the value of work. How can this nation ever create "real jobs" if businesses are taking advantage of student time and saddling they and their parents with more debt? Yes the job market is still lousy and it's doable. But that doesn't make it right.

We're a small company and we always pay our interns. We don't pay them a lot because we can't, but we want them to care about the work they're doing, learn how to do it right, and make a contribution to our growth and theirs. Of course, we could find free interns, but we do it because we don't believe in taking advantage of students and their families. Period.

Besides what happens when your student interns work for free? You get trust fund babies who can afford to do unpaid internships. Not my magnet program son or any of his friends. The best and brightest end up working in a store or a restaurant or a camp or someplace that pays them wages. They have to earn money over the summer to help pay their way. 

They're the children of the 99 percent. And the other one percent of kids. They're on vacation.

Pay your interns because in the end you get what you pay for. And it's not my job to subsidize your company. I don't ask you to subsidize mine. 

Marketers: Are You A Better Writers than a 7th Grader?

How much is too much when it comes to trying to get someone's attention while marketing a product or service? I've been reading a series of blog posts by different authors and I found some perfect examples of trying to hype products and services that didn't need all the hype. And of course it was done with way too many adjectives.

Folks when you use big adjectives to describe BIG things, you sound like my 7th grade daughter when she doesn't feel like doing the work and makes stuff up. It's the I really, really, really liked this book affect. From the first sentence, the teacher knows she didn't read the book because she's trying to make it sound very, very important.

Then my 7th grader comes up with a couple of half thought out points and says them in as many different ways as she can think of, so it sounds impressive. And of course, by the time I'm done reading - and you give your audience more credit than it deserves if you think it's going to finish reading - they don't believe a word you said.

We live in the world of the Internet - superlatives aren't needed and when you're reading them on a screen sometimes they sound even more ridiculous than when they were on paper. I often come away thinking your product sucks because you're working so hard to make me believe it doesn't.

When it comes to marketing copy, just tell me a story and why I should take whatever action you want me to take, or even just care. Bullet items and use a header that will capture my attention. Concise, well written prose is better every time.

So are 7th graders better writers than most marketers? Probably not - but just to make my point here are some some of the most egregious phrases I have seen lately.

1. Creative entrepreneur - By definition an entrepreneur is a creative.Entrepreneur gets your point across just fine.

2. Legendary engineer - OK there could be a secondary point in there but an engineer can't be legendary unless you tell me why - and the writer didn't  I'm willing to bet that this one isn't legendary because you feel the need to tell me that he or she is.

3. Real-life neurologist - Really? Is there such a thing as a ghost neurologist? Or a fake one? Or to quote the Wizard of Oz's Dorothy not a neurologist at all? Gives you pause doesn't it?

4. World renowned experts - I love this one. It's not good enough to just be an expert which is really all you need, you have to be renowned (as in recognized as an expert by other experts?) and the whole wide world has to know that you are. Wow.

5. Impressive, world class products - Isn't world class enough? If it's world class shouldn't we already be impressed? And if we're not impressed why are you telling me I should be?

6. Hands-on, interactive - I see this term used all the time in educational materials and I don't get it. It's saying the exact same thing twice. If I'm putting my hands on it by definition it's interactive. If it's not interactive I'm not involved in it - right?

Thoughts?

E-Books Take Off But Don't Bring in New Readers

A study released by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, doesn't offer much hope for the future of print. Turns out e-reading is getting more and more popular especially with those over 50 (due in part to the fact that you can adjust the type to any size you want). Yet digital books are not bringing in new readers - they're taking business away from the book printers. Not a great bell weather for the future of print.

Here's some information from the study. Those who have taken the plunge into reading e-books are relatively avid readers of books in all formats: 

• 88% of those who read e-books in the past 12 months also read printed books.
• They read more books. 
• They read more frequently for pleasure, research, current events, and for work or school. They buy books rather than borrow them.
• They are more likely than others to say they prefer to purchase books in general, often starting their search online.

The demographics echo what we hear about avid readers as well. They are better educated, more affluent and more likely to love reading.

So what does all of this tell marketers? As we move more into digital in many phases of our lives, we have to for now, think in two worlds. Will print ever die? Hopefully not in my life time. 

If the Tech People Can't Measure Social Media ROI, Who Can?

If tech firms can't do it, where does that leave the rest of us?

While nearly half (49%) of technology executives say that their firm will increase their expenditure on social media in the next 12 months, over half (57%) say they are unable to accurately measure the impact of the investment. By contrast, only 23% say they can measure it, according to a Eurocom Worldwide study. 

Wow - if the tech people don't know the value of social media - then who does? I mean really, so much money is spent on this distribution channel and we have no idea what we're getting back. That's pretty incredible. 

A Plug for Online PR

The survey finds that 74% of respondents consider online PR to be very or quite important for their company’s search engine optimization (SEO) with 37% saying it is very important.

“The significant role of online PR in search engine optimization is often underrated but clearly not by technology firms,” commented Mads Christensen, Network Director, Eurocom Worldwide.

Respondents to the survey were also asked about the primary source of social media content and messaging for their company. The majority (78%) cite in-house sources with PR agencies the second most important source at 12%. Digital marketing agencies and advertising agencies combined account for the remaining 10%. 

The study also highlighted that one out of five technology firms has rejected a job applicant because of something he or she included on a social media profile. 

So remember, watch what you say and what you video. And tell your kids to do the same. And most important, remind them to use the privacy settings on Facebook. 

For more information go to: http://www.eurocompr.com/prfitem.asp?id=14921

Trying to Win a Communications Award? Advice from a Recent Judge

I judged a communications awards competition recently that was open to companies, non-profits, colleges and universities, etc. I’ve entered these before, and wondered how work I’m really proud of doesn’t even make it to the finals. Now I have some answers. Hopefully they'll help you as well.

The category we judged was print publications. First of all what we saw – especially in an age where visuals are everywhere and so important in getting attention – was just not very sophisticated.

Here were some common problems with the entries.

1. Didn't Answer the Questions

Many entries ignored certain questions or gave vague answers. That costs you. Those most avoided:

Results. At least 50% of the entries didn’t answer the results question at all and the ones who did weren’t very specific. If you don’t answer the question that shows you were successful, you are done. Also, if your measurements don't match your goals you get dinged on that.

Budget. I think there was only one entry that answered the budget question. Not all entries are created equal. So what if you don’t have glossy pictures, great stock, and beautiful design? If your budget is small we have more information to judge on. So tell us what your entry cost to produce.

2. Pay Attention to the Rules

Your application package. You have to follow the rules of the competition. If your entry form is only supposed to be two pages, don’t submit more than that. Yes you may have more to say, but you’re going to get disqualified.

Type size. We almost eliminated someone because their font was smaller than what was asked for. In the end we didn't because the entry did not score well anyway, but making a font smaller to fit more in, doesn't help you.


3. Your Narrative

Quite frankly, the narrative answering the questions and explaining the goals, objectives, etc. of the publication was in many cases far better than the actual work. A strong narrative helps you depending on how the competition scoring is set up, but if the category is publications judges are going to judge mostly by design. Remember that before you enter.

3. Your Design


All design is subjective but there were a few glaring problems we found over and over again.

Keep it simple. There’s a magazine on the newsstands and available digitally called Real Simple. That should be the mantra of every print and web designer. Far too many entries had really busy pages. We don’t need subheads, and pull quotes and captions and explanations of a headline and charts on one spread. It makes your head spin.Also it looks like design by committee, which it probably was.

One photo is better than ten. I used to work with an art director who was adamant about this. She hated collages. One great photo is far better than several and run it as large as you can. It will draw the reader in and make them want to read.

Don’t run your captions across photos. I don’t know if this is some new design style or what but a number of publications splashed their captions in dropped out type across photos. Why? It just ruins the picture.

Stock quality shouldn’t be nicer than your magazine. We saw some celebrity wedding invitation level stock in magazines that clearly didn’t need it. The printing alone probably ate a big chunk of cost. Design, stock, publication quality should all be equally weighted.

I could go on for awhile but I’ll spare you. We did not judge content, other than the way it was presented but one thing I noticed was a mix of number of columns, font overload, type that would have made Victorians happy, and again a sad lack of simplicity.

If you’re going to do a print publication, and I don’t want print to die, study the look and feel of digital and learn to work in formats that people under 40 can relate too.

Best of luck next time.