Make It New

In college, I took a class on modern and contemporary American poetry. At some point over the semester, the unofficial slogan for the class became “make it new,” the Ezra Pound directive to the Modernists.

Questionable character though he was, I keep Pound’s advice close to my heart whenever something I’m writing—for work or for myself—seems a little stale. And I thought of Pound once again two weeks ago when I “attended” a day-long Vocus webinar on social media in marketing and communications. During his presentation, David Meerman Scott spent some time discussing “The Gobbledygook Manifesto,” for which, among other things, he polled several journalists to see what “buzz words” they’re tired of seeing in pitches and press releases. According to a slide Scott incorporated into his talk, the number one word, with over 51,000 votes, is “innovate.” (This would also include the derivatives, such as “innovation,” “innovator” or “innovative.”)

Well. Talk about a kick in the pants.

What about when your clients, like ours, are working on real, honest-to-goodness, innovation? What if your clients use “innovation” in their names or their boilerplate language? What if we can’t help but use “innovation” when we talk about them? Are we automatically going to reporters’ spam filters? Is there anything we can do?

Scott moved on to his next slide pretty soon thereafter, but I didn’t. I thought about that slide the rest of the day, and into the next, until it hit me: “make it new.” Don’t talk about innovation the way everyone else is; don’t use the word lightly. Say innovation, but mean it. Don’t just say that something is innovative, explain why. And if the story we’re telling is interesting, but not exactly innovative? Use a thesaurus. Rewrite the sentence. Something, anything, that keeps me from sending the same tired old language to reporters who are tired of receiving it.

I’m a writer by training, so I strongly believe that words carry weight. It was hard for me to realize that I might have been using the wrong ones. But this kick in the pants might have been exactly what I needed, not just to improve my writing but also to make the people I’m writing to take notice. And so, reporters of the world, take note: I’m going to try for a little more Modernism, a little less cliché, and a whole lot of clarity. I’m going to take the communications tools we use every day … and I’m going to do my best to make them new.

Negating the Power of Instant Publishing

Flickr user Deepa

One of the things that I love about running a web-friendly campaign, or securing a mention in an online publication, is the potential for the story to go viral. Not every story goes viral; not every story should. But if you have something really important, or really fun, or really timely to share, it’s nice to know that there’s an entire global community with the capacity to Tweet, Facebook or otherwise redistribute the original.

Beyond the benefits of the web to media campaigns, though, is the unparalleled capacity for breaking news—from traditional news outlets that also publish their content online—to travel faster than it ever had before. Google and Yahoo, for instance, both feature constantly updated “news” sections that excerpt the day’s top stories; if you want the full read, both sites will redirect you to the original source. This aggregation system helps news consumers find all the information they could possibly need in one place, and then click through to learn more. In a hat-tip to the 21st century, news aggregators understand the average internet user’s attention span and seeks to facilitate their information quest, rather than complicate their news browsing by making them scroll past or skim over stories of less interest. Google News takes this even further by providing multiple sources for many of the stories at the top of its homepage, in order to allow readers to consider multiple sources and and develop better informed opinions. At a time when print media is floundering, it’s inconceivable that anyone would oppose technology that directs traffic to traditional journalism.

Or is it?

Last week, the FTC drafted a proposal for social media changes that would theoretically help to defend traditional journalism. Included in this document is the proposal that “hot news”—new or breaking stories—be “protected” from Google News, Yahoo News, and other aggregators that publish excerpts of news stories that originated with traditional outlets. The only way excerpts, even short ones, from these news stories could run on outside sites would be with express permission from the source—permission that in some cases can take hours, or even days, to obtain. Instead of an important news story going viral because of its accessibility, it would risk being buried by less important, less protected material. Google, naturally, opposes the FTC’s proposal, and I agree with them. I don’t want any harm to befall traditional journalism; I just think the FTC should be more realistic about how “traditional” anything is in the age of social media.

In the communications industry, we’re all about telling the story to as many people as possible. Anything that helps spread the word is good by me.

Not Your Grandma’s Privacy

My grandma’s a cool lady.

A couple of months ago, after getting a new computer, my sister signed Grandma up for a Facebook account. And while she doesn’t post to Facebook much, I know she logs in on a regular basis, to see what her fifteen friends—nearly all of them family—are up to.

I know this even though she never comments on my page, she calls me when she sees something I’ve posted that she thinks is worth discussing … like she did last week, after I posted some information about the house I’m buying with my boyfriend.

“I’m concerned about your Facebook. What if the sellers see your post and don’t sell you the house? And what’s with this comment on the link from someone who says he’s put in an offer over list price?”

“It’s a joke, Grandma.”

“But what if the sellers see it, think they can do better, and don’t accept your offer?”

“They won’t see it, Grandma.”

And so it went, until, finally, I had to remind my grandmother that hey, Facebook is part of my job so she should trust me on this issue. My Facebook profile is on more or less complete lockdown. I stopped short of making myself entirely unfindable (because that’s kind of annoying), but if you search for me on Facebook and we’re not friends, this is all you see:

It’s enough to let you know if you’ve tracked down the right Jill Ivey: a photo of me, my current city, and (for those people from high school trying to get back in touch), my hometown … but nothing else. So Grandma’s fears were unfounded. The sellers of our home-to-be had no way of being in on the conversation happening on my wall.

My privacy is important to me. With every change to Facebook’s privacy policy, I’ve been sure to learn what’s changed and how it affects my account, then update my settings accordingly. But this blog post isn’t about Facebook’s ever-changing, somewhat controversial, now-theoretically-streamlined, privacy policy, which Kira covered recently. This is a post about personal responsibility and common sense.

Stories about people not getting into college/not getting a job/experiencing some other calamity because of their Facebook posts are commonplace now … and yet they keep springing up. Some people, it seems, just don’t know when it’s time to back away from the computer and think before hitting “publish.” This isn’t as important if you’ve set your privacy dial to eleven, like I have. But if your profile is less locked down, anything that will be visible to people outside of your immediate circle of friends—seen by clients, coworkers, or complete strangers—whether it’s a post about your upcoming vacation or photos of your weekend shenanigans, needs to be subjected to some special consideration.

I’ll call it the Grandma test. How would your Grandma feel if she was looking at your profile? Would she call you like mine did, concerned about what other people would think if they saw your latest post? If the answer is yes, then don’t hit publish—or if you do, make sure you understand just how many people are going to see your post.

Back when Grandma was my age, people kept their private lives private and were thoughtful about those parts of themselves they chose to share with the world. And what’s wrong with doing things a little old school now and then?

And Now for Something Completely Different

Here’s something that surprises people who might think of me as more of the writerly type: I actually have a bit of a science background. As an undergraduate, I minored in psychology and filled as many requirements as I could with classes in cognitive neuroscience. I also spent a summer working in a sleep lab at the university hospital, screwing up my own circadian rhythms while monitoring the behavioral and intellectual effects of too much or too little sleep, with or without various prescription medication. As disinterested as I was in my high school science classes, in college I developed a fascination teetering on obsession concerning the science of the brain.

Maybe that’s why, when I started working at ELISE, I was so excited to have the opportunity to work with Games for Health. To be fair, GFH isn’t just focused on cognitive health—games showcased every year run the gamut from fitness oriented exergames to games that help doctors learn new surgical techniques—but as someone who has no gift for playing video games, I was most attracted to the benefits that playing these games can have on neurological development. It’s like a light went off when I was researching some of the people who would be attending that first Games for Health Conference I worked on: “Yes! I get it! Why can’t video games be used for brain development?”

A few days ago, after receiving information about GFH that included mention of an autism-focused panel at this year’s conference, a reporter wrote the ELISE team to get clarification: he knows that gaming is compelling to autism patients, especially children and teens, but how can it be beneficial? Suddenly, the cobwebs that had formed over my cog neuro studies were swept away, and I set to putting together a little page-long mini research paper on the subject. Because I am a big nerd.

The gist of my research project, which we sent back to said reporter, is this: many, but not all patients on the autism spectrum have what’s called a right-brain delay, which, among other things, makes them especially attentive to small, precise or repetitive tasks—like video games. And because these particular autistic patients naturally gravitate toward gaming, video games can be modified or developed that can actually have a therapeutic value to the patients while also appealing to them. Gaming systems like the Wii, for example, encourage movement mimicry, and use a very simple interface (with a minimum of buttons), which both makes the system easy to use and encourages the player to focus on physical tasks that require balance and motor skills. Similarly, a special game called EASe Off-Road has been developed specifically for autistic children with hypersensitivity to sound. The game employs sound-based therapy by training autistic children to develop the visual systems responsible for balance and body awareness and encourages concentration.

Perhaps my favorite example of video games helping to treat autism is Space Race, developed by researchers at the University of Missouri to help retrain the parts of the brain that improve focus and concentration using a neurofeedback system. According to a 2008 article about Space Race: “The result of the training is that pathways in the brain which may have been damaged, or just switched off from lack of use, can be repaired and reactivated”—essentially, the right side of the brain can eventually be turned on and used for cognitive processing and everyday tasks, all with the help of a relatively simple video game.

And really, how cool is that?

Learn more about video games for autism therapy, as well as games for medical education, health awareness and more at the 2010 Games for Health Conference, May 26-27 in Boston. Visit gamesforhealth.org for more information.

Social Media … Done Right

Image credit: Flickr user raphaelle_ridarch

Team ELISE spent five days last week in San Francisco for the NCIIA’s annual March Madness for the Mind showcase of student invention. As always, the event was a roaring success, and we met some really engaged collegiate entrepreneurs who we’re sure you’ll be hearing more from in the future.

But this year’s event still managed to be unique in many ways: it was the first time that March Madness for the Mind was held in San Francisco; the first year that an actual head-to-head element was added to the programming, in the form of an all-team video competition; and the first year that the NCIIA collaborated with Inventors Digest magazine to promote the event. In many ways, this looked like your standard media partnership: Inventors Digest featured NCIIA-supported inventors and NCIIA staffers in its pages (including a gorgeous cover story), and the NCIIA in turn made sure that Inventors Digest’s logo appeared on the March Madness for the Mind Web site and throughout the annual conference and at the public event. But the partnership took a turn into the experimental, incorporating an ambitious social media campaign surrounding the video competition.

At first, the social media integration was simple: NCIIA and Inventors Digest announced the partnership on their respective Web sites, then repeated the announcement, briefly, to their Facebook fans and Twitter followers. This enabled both organizations not only to get the word out about the video competition, but also to strengthen their connection through the use of hypertext—which is to say that every time Inventors Digest was mentioned on the NCIIA’s site, if even in passing, NCIIA provided a link back to Inventors Digest, and vice-versa. And a few weeks later, when Inventors Digest announced its own competition, to launch officially the day of March Madness for the Mind, the relationship between the two organizations was further solidified as it became the NCIIA’s turn to post about Inventors Digest’s activities.

Once the details of the partnership were solidified, ELISE created a social media release via PitchEngine that allowed us to streamline the process when we were actually doing the pitching: we could send a link to the release instead of needing to copy-paste or send an attachment; low-res photos were downloadable directly from the release’s slide show and high-res photos were linked at the bottom of the page; and compelling video could be viewed and linked to without any need to leave PitchEngine and visit YouTube. The release received several hundred views within the first days of being posted and began getting traction on its own: when doing our final round of short-lead pitching, we found that some bloggers had found the release on their own and were familiar with March Madness for the Mind before they heard from us. And at least one story about March Madness for the Mind appeared when an intrepid blogger stumbled across the release without receiving a pitch from our office at all.

The social media release was also dynamic, allowing for even the tiniest updates as they happened. So when the NCIIA/Inventors Digest video competition finally went live on the Inventors Digest Web site, we were able to seamlessly integrate the updated information into the release’s links section. We’d like to think that updating this link had at least a little something to do with the 109% Web traffic increase that Inventors Digest experienced during the run of the competition—but we’re well aware that, in reality, this highly successful component of the March Madness for the Mind social media campaign was only partly because of our stellar social media release.

Mostly, it was because the video competition went viral—and that’s the true mark of a successful social media campaign, because, as Peter Shankman will tell you, “viral” isn’t something you can force. If you have good content, internet users the whole world over will want to share it. You still need your communications team to help create this content and get it posted, but it’s up to the rest of the world to decide if it’s worth sharing.

And when they do? That’s how you know you ran your campaign right.

Tweet Well (Part 1)

Flickr user jez`

I have a love-hate relationship with Twitter.

I’m logged into it all day for ELISE, and find it to be a fantastic resource. I’ve connected with other PR pros, found out who’s talking about our clients and reached out to journalists we couldn’t track down through more conventional means. Even on days when we’re not sending tweets, we all take some time over the course of the day to make sure we’re not missing out on any big news. (How do you think we learned of Michael Jackson’s untimely demise or the earthquake in Haiti?) And services like HootSuite and TweetDeck, both of which I use daily, allow users to filter out some static by monitoring key words in which they’re especially interested.

That’s when I love Twitter. But when I hate it, my animosity sometimes overshadows my love. It’s an animosity that I also feel for advertisers who run uninteresting Super Bowl commercials, bus passengers who talk too loudly on their cell phones and retailers who don’t honor competitors’ coupons: it’s a hatred of not understanding the power and reach of your chosen platform. Think about it:

• Super Bowl advertisers have a captive audience that wants to watch commercials almost as badly as they want to watch the game; if your commercial is boring, it could provide the 30 seconds your television audience needs to go open another beer.
• On the phone on a bus? Small metal spaces tend to make sound project, and now everyone knows about that nasty fungus you picked up at the gym.
• If you’re not honoring your competitors’ discounts, people will just go make that purchase—and the rest of their purchases—at your competitors’ stores, too.

So why would you provide bad information, share too much or ignore other people in your field, in your Twitter feed? These behaviors aren’t just bad practice; they’re downright rude. Not rude in the conventional sense—nasty or insulting—just rude in that they show utter disregard for the power and reach of Twitter as a platform and the engagement of people who use it.

There are approximately 75 million registered Twitter users worldwide. That’s a lot of content to sift through. People who provide good information or entertaining content or relevant news naturally get followers. People who send out pointless or self-promoting tweets, or who tweet out too much, too often, without showing that they’re listening to the conversations happening around (or about) them naturally lose followers. Being polite in your tweets by sharing carefully selected, useful or enjoyable information instead of flooding Twitter with a stream of posts nobody cares about will get you far.

And as to that content nobody cares about? You’ll have to tune in next time for some pointers on best practices for courtesy in the Twitterverse.

Is Overshare the New Norm?

Last fall, our awesome ELISE intern, Kira Loretto, wrote a thoughtful post about the potential harm social media can inflict on your career. People are beginning to learn this: don’t post photos of yourself engaging in illegal activity without making sure that nobody you don’t want to see them, can. Don’t set your Facebook status to read: “Don’t feel like going to work today. Calling in ’sick,’” if you’re friends with your boss.

But what about the things we post on-line that aren’t damaging … just annoying? In an article about Twitter for the New York Times last month, David Carr expressed the problem that many people have with social media platforms: nobody cares what you had for breakfast. Carr makes the argument that in spite of this, Twitter is a useful tool: you just have to be selective about who you follow.

Easier said than done. Aside from proving valuable resources for information, social media services like Facebook and Twitter allow us to stay connected to old friends and far-away family members like never before. How else would I be in touch with the German exchange students who spent a year at my high school, my cousin teaching math to girls in Qatar, my continent-crossing sister? By writing a letter? Surely, you’ve never seen my handwriting.

But my desire to stay connected to people in my life means that I can’t do as Carr suggested and be selective in my following and friending, only aligning myself (virtually) with people who provide solid, useful information. It means that I’m opening myself up to dozens, if not hundreds, of posts about what my friends had for breakfast. And more than that, it means that I’m on the receiving end of a terrific amount of overshare.

I’m not alone: countless Web sites and Internet memes have been devoted to people who “suck” at social media. Aside from enthusiastic self-promoters and “app” addicts, the one group that seems most universally hated is the oversharers.

Don’t know what I’m talking about? Let’s take a little peek at your Facebook newsfeed, shall we? Your perpetually pregnant childhood friend posting about how “the morning sickness is so much worse than last time: I spent the morning throwing up!”? Overshare. Your lovelorn sorority sister who, after a date, posts: “Finally, a great date! Dinner and a movie and then …”? Overshare. All of the people you know who share break-ups, make-ups, potty stories, bedroom stories, and drunken pontifications? Over. Share.

Think of it this way: you run into an old acquaintance on the street. You haven’t seen each other in five years. Do you talk about your most recent trip to the bathroom, or your most recent trip to Bermuda? Unless you’re both gastroenterologists, I think you know what the answer should be. Use that mindset when posting to Facebook or Twitter: if you wouldn’t say it in person, it doesn’t belong on-line.

So please, folks: leave the poopy diapers, the bar brawls, and the deep moments of self introspection off your status messages and Twitter updates. These are things you should share with a select few, not the unwashed masses. It might not affect your career, but it’s guaranteed to affect your relationships with your social media contacts.

Reflection

Image by Flickr user Imran…

We’ve written before about our location in Philadelphia. Despite the international scope of our work here at ELISE, Philly is home. So we were excited yesterday when it was announced that Philadelphia is a contender to host a World Cup game in 2018 or 2022, if the United States is given the games. (Seventeen other U.S. cities, coast to coast, would also host matches.) Hosting the World Cup would enable us—finally—to cast Philly in a positive light. And also, I really like soccer.

But not long after the good news, a tragedy to obliterate the warm fuzzies: a magnitude seven earthquake in Haiti, destroying most of Port-au-Prince and potentially causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Haitian residents. And the first thing I thought of when the news hit last night? Soccer.

A few months ago, a friend of Carrie’s mentioned a project he was working on to try to deliver the World Cup to Haiti. The ELISE team was interested and did a little bit of research on this endeavor, thinking it segued nicely with our work in poverty alleviation and education. While the efforts to bring soccer on a large scale to this small island nation remain up in the air, we became quite familiar with Haiti and its robust and often volatile history. For better or for worse, yesterday’s quake affected us just a little more because it didn’t happen halfway around the world in a country we’d never heard of, but in a place not too far from American shores that we felt we’d gotten to know, if only a little.

This isn’t a post about PR. It’s a post about solidarity. As some of our favorite columnists here at ELISE reflect on the tragedy that befell the people of Haiti yesterday, we’re sending thoughts to Port-au-Prince, too. Here’s hoping that in no time at all, the soccer—and the joy—will find its way to you.

P[hl]R

Image credit: Flickr user Matthew & Jenny

If you check out our Web site, you’ll see a quick note on ELISE communications’ location in Philadelphia. We love our Old City office; we love that we’re two blocks from Penn’s Landing, three blocks from the Liberty Bell and almost directly behind Betsy Ross’s house. We love seeing tour guides in colonial garb leading groups of schoolchildren through America’s most historic square mile and the sound of hooves as horse-drawn carriages carry tourists right past our front door.

But as much as we love Philadelphia, we’ve found that outside of South Jersey and the Five-County Area, we’re not in the majority opinion. This week, two major Philly-related events—the 2009 World Series and the Transit Workers Union strike—have once again cast Philly in a less-than-positive light. This isn’t good PR for the city, but it’s even worse PR for the people in the spotlight in these stories. So I thought this could be a good opportunity to look at the individual situations from a PR perspective and address how to make the situation more positive. Not by putting a “spin” on the situation that already exists, but by looking at next steps going forward.

Cole Hamels “Can’t Wait” for the Season to End
After the Phillies won the 2008 World Series (the first in nearly thirty years), Cole Hamels was named series MVP. Baseball fans from all over the Delaware Valley couldn’t wait to ride Hamels’ coattails back to another championship. And we very nearly made it there—but no thanks to our former ace. Hamels had an inconsistent season at best, and the Phillies 2009 NLCS victory seemed won more in spite of the pitcher than because of him. And after an inauspicious start in Game 3 of the World Series, in which Cole Hamels blew the Phillies 3-0 lead against the Yankees (final score was 8-5, Yankees), Hamels told the media: “I can’t wait for it to end. It’s been mentally draining,” sending Phillies “phans” and sports talk radio commentators into a tizzy. Although he clarified that, should the series go to the full seven games, he’d still work hard to deliver a win, the damage was done. Even Hamels’ teammates were allegedly upset by his remarks.

Analysis: There’s a song in Damn Yankees—a musical about baseball and a statement I agree with after the World Series—called “You’ve Gotta Have Heart.” Cole Hamels does, and he was wearing his on his sleeve at that press conference. Hamels has remarked that his words were taken out of context, but that’s a risk everyone takes when talking to the media. If ELISE was in his PR team’s shoes, now that the Series is over, I’d see to it that our client gets plenty of rest and gets to spend time with his wife and newborn son, who was born the same day Hamels threw a losing game in the NLDS series. And above all, I’d make sure everyone knows how excited our client is for the 2010 baseball season, and how hard he’s working to have a better year than the last. Hamels can still show he’s got heart—he just needs to prove that it’s in the right place.

TWU Local 234 Walks Out of Contract Negotiations and Goes on Strike; All Bus, Subway and Trolley Service within Philadelphia City Limits Suspended
Very few issues in Philadelphia can get more heated than our sports talks, but this is definitely one of them. Philly’s a very pro-union town, but few people outside of Local 234’s administration are backing the union on this one—even, I’ve heard, many union members themselves. The union first threatened to go on strike while the World Series was in Philadelphia, the Eagles were hosting the Giants and Pearl Jam was performing a four-night stand at the Wachovia Spectrum, but held off until Tuesday of this week—which was election day. Rumors and reports on the strike have abounded since, but one thing is clear: people are angry. Not at the city or SEPTA administrators for not working with the union, but at union leaders for being so out-of-touch with the current economic climate. Even Governor Rendell said that the union was crazy not to accept the deal they were offered just before the strike. TWU Local 234 President Willie Brown hasn’t helped himself any by referring to Mayor Nutter as “Little Caesar,” a statement that’s been met with both ridicule and confusion. As I write this post, Local 234 remains on strike, and the El station a block away remains shuttered. I’ve been driving to work since Tuesday. Although the latest reports indicate that the union is considering a revised offer, the general feeling in the Philly blogosphere and beyond seems to be that whatever the offer is, it’s more than the union deserves.

Analysis: SEPTA struck for a week in 2005 and for over a month in 1998. Three strikes in eleven years isn’t a great track record, and it’s certainly not a way to get into the public’s good graces. If ELISE was handed the public relations responsibilities for the Transit Workers Union Local 234, there are a few things I’d suggest our client do to help with public opinion—beginning, first and foremost, with asking that they consider an essential services clause in their contract. Such clauses are already in the Philadelphia Police Department and Philadelphia Fire Departments’ contracts, and basically prohibit or put restrictions on the ability of a union to strike because the job done by the union is necessary to the functioning of the city it services. This would be a good-faith gesture on the part of the Union, making it clear that they respect the citizens of Philadelphia enough not to leave them stranded again. Additionally, I’d propose that the union suggest SEPTA give free rides within city limits every weekend for a month. It would be a good way to get press to cover Local 234 in a positive way, and it would help make up for some of the cost and inconvenience of the strike to the public. Finally, I would also strongly encourage Local 234 President Willie Brown not to seek re-election when his term expires in a few months’ time. He already understands that he’s the “most-hated man in Philadelphia,” and it’s hard to overcome an obstacle like that. New leadership would give the TWU a fresh start, and if the new president worked to build bridges with Philadelphians rather than burn them, then perhaps he or she would find a more sympathetic public the next time the union’s contract is up for renewal.

What about you, ELISE friends and PR pros? If you were doing PR for one of Philly’s more controversial denizens, how would you make sure that things go from bad to good, instead of from bad to worse? Leave us a comment and let us know your strategy!

In Defense of Us

A few weeks ago, I ran into a friend of mine at happy hour. Conversation in our group turned to work, and when I mentioned that I really enjoy what I do, she turned to me and said: “Wow, really? I’m not used to hearing that from PR people.”

My friend is a freelance journalist, so I know she talks to PR people pretty often. But I was surprised by how many of my peers she perceives as unhappy in their profession. Surprised, that is, until I started thinking about what makes people unhappy at work. Sometimes, it’s because you don’t get along with your coworkers. Sometimes, you think you’re being underpaid. And sometimes, it’s because you’re really bad at your job. And it’s always amazed me, when I’m on my friend’s side of things and receiving pitches instead of sending them, just how genuinely bad some PR “professionals” are at what they do.

These are the people who give the whole public relations industry a bad rap. They’re the people who make journalists feel compelled to put warnings up on Cision stating: “John Doe is a reporter. He does not accept unsolicited pitches from PR flacks.” (Unfortunately, that’s not much of an exaggeration.) They’re the people that justify the existence of the Bad Pitch Blog and drive editors to call them out on Twitter. They pitch off-topic, don’t do their research, don’t bother to customize with so much as a “Dear John.” Frankly, they’re an embarrassment. And if they don’t like their jobs—well, they only have themselves to blame.

I like to think I’m good at my job. I certainly take the responsibility of it very seriously—and I know I’m not alone. There are good PR pros out there, if you know where to look. I’m lucky to work with a group of them here at ELISE.

We do a tremendous amount of research before we send pitches. Media lists, even when compiled from a list of journalists with whom we’ve already been in touch, take us days to put together because we’re checking up on every person we contact. Not to stalk them—just to get a feeling for what sort of story they’d want to write. We use our research and create custom pitches that show the people we’re talking why we think they’d be interested in what we have to say. The extra effort is appreciated; our response rate is consistently high, and we get enviable results for our clients. More than a few journalists have even complimented us on our approach—and even if they’re not interested in that particular story, they remember us the next time around.

It’s feedback like that, affirmation that we’re good at what we do, that gives me the confidence to tell a journalist friend, in all honesty, that I love my job. As PR pros, we sometimes have much to prove about the necessity of our field. But if more PR pros would pitch responsibly, our value would be undeniable.