Writing stories as a PR professional should be a doddle for an experienced journalist like me. Or so I thought, as I prepared for a short internship in the communications office at Cambridge University.
Having completed three weeks promoting and publicising the goings on at this 800-year-old centre of educational excellence I have a very different idea of what goes into the perfect press release and corporate web story.
While many of the traditional journalistic ideals hold true – news releases have to be accurate, free from libel or defamation and basically tell us something new and interesting – there are some key differences:
1 The angle of the story
I wrote a web piece at Cambridge about a professor who was given a science and technology award by a women’s lifestyle publication called Glamour Magazine.
It was a straight report about the woman being honoured with background about her academic achievements and the work of her university department. In short, a promotional piece highlighting the impressive research at Cambridge.
Now had I been writing for, say, the Cambridge Evening News, I might have angled the story more on the absurdity of this highly intellectual professor being given an award by a magazine which is mainly concerned with Cheryl Cole’s fashion sense and the latest scandal involving a Hollywood starlet.
The professor also told me she was unhappy the magazine had not directly contacted her because she would have liked to have used the award to help inspire more young women to study science at higher education level. Another great newspaper angle.
2 Allegiances
The journalist is supposed to be neutral. Whatever political, environmental or cultural views and opinions they might harbour they must not be introduced into stories.
They have a professional duty to write or broadcast the most interesting story.
Because PR professionals are concerned with portraying a company or organisation in the best possible light they can never be neutral.
There are obviously ethical considerations in terms of behaving legally and honestly but the basic aim is to protect and enhance reputation.
While I worked at Cambridge there was enormous media interest in unusual plans by the university to raise money for capital projects with a bond issue.
Dealings with journalists were limited to a straight press release containing basic details and quotes from the director of finance.
Newspapers and broadcasters were all looking for a different angle – to re-frame the story. In the end most outlets cited the current financial climate as the reason for considering a bond issue when in the past the university might have taken out a bank loan. The limiting of information from the communication office clearly helped frame the story the way Cambridge wanted.
3 Editorial control
A free press is essential in any democracy. And newspapers thrive on retaining editorial control. Occasionally a company or organisation which advertises in a newspaper might object to a news story which portrays it in a negative light. They may threaten to withdraw their adverts. But editors will always stand their ground and insist on retaining control of content.
Journalists will only be concerned that their story is accurate, that it does not offend the sensitivity of readers and that is not legally suspect.
In contrast, the communications officer has only limited editorial control. He or she must satisfy a number of other people before uploading it to the company website.
At Cambridge I wrote a piece about the Arts Society at the all-female Newnham College holding a special night to mark the 80th anniversary of a visit by acclaimed novelist Virginia Woolf.
I had to run my story past representatives of the Arts Society, who were keen to raise seemingly unnewsworthy items higher up the story and who insisted I use capital letters for job titles and nouns. I was essentially writing for them, however, so I had to forget the journalistic principles I used to live my life by in favour of following their wishes.
4 Balanced argument
All trainee newspaper reporters have it drummed into them that they must represent both sides of an argument.
If an old lady has tripped over a loose paving stone and injured herself, you must include quotes from the council as well as the unfortunate pensioner.
It is all part of appearing neutral – someone with no bias who can be trusted to report the news as it happens.
In public relations you cannot be neutral. As a result website stories and press releases will be distinctly one-sided.
When 30 employees are made redundant by a factory the corporate release will state that the company is being streamlined, as though those losing their jobs were surplus to requirements. Newspapers, of course, will focus on the fact that the business is struggling and the human cost of those people who are now unemployed.
My web stories and press releases for Cambridge University were all skewed in favour of the university’s interests. As they should have been. The institution has a strong brand throughout the world and the PR professionals I worked with are doing an important job to ensure it stays that way.
As a Public Relations MA student with a background in journalism myself, I have also come across these differences and completely agree with what you have stated.
ReplyDeleteThis has made it difficult in many cases to effectively carry out some of the tasks I was asked to do during my placement. In my first week of writing press releases, I was told that they were good grammatically and my overall style of writing was applauded, but I had problems focusing on the main angle of the story. I was constantly straying from the point and including unnecessary information that I thought would make the story more interesting.
I also had to learn quickly that magnification is very important because my allegiance is to the organisation. So instead of a sentence that reads: ‘With only twenty-one recruits signed up’, I needed to say ‘With a whopping two dozen recruits signed up’. That was because it was my job to enhance the organisation’s reputation, and saying ‘two dozen’ sounded much more positive.
Also, I most definitely agree that editorial control goes to the organisation you are working for. After the PR team that I was working for sent out a press release with a few unauthorised statements, they had to have all other releases approved by the organisation before being sent out to the media.
As it should be, I also found all stories and releases to be completely one-sided. They were also to be complete with plenty of reassuring quotes from directors and managers.
Overall, I found this writing style a little challenging, and not because I didn’t understand what to do, but because I am already trying to balance an academic style of writing with a journalism background, so incorporating this style just made everything a little more challenging.
Yes it has been an interesting exercise writing real-life press releases and PR web stories.
ReplyDeleteIt is something we could not have learned from lectures or academic books.
As you point out, Gemma, it is tricky going from academic writing to PR writing because they are two very different disciplines. Now we must revert to academic writing, at least for a few more months!
As a journalist, I also found the issue of objectivity a problem. It's difficult being so biased when you're used to dissecting press releases to find some sort of scandal.
ReplyDeleteIt is also difficult trying to change your writing style. As a journalist, you're always looking for the public interest angle, whereas press release writing is very informative and sometimes, less exciting to write.
I worked for Leicestershire Councils Public Relations department during the work experience period. Some of the press releases that we were receiving were just horrendous! It definitely helped having experience in writing, I think I would have really struggled otherwise.
I to have encountered this problem, after much practice. I realised that I am writing in the interest of the company or organisation that I am portraying, there is little room for objectivity. Perhaps this is the stick that journalists like to beat PR with, by contending that they are concerned with only their own interests and not being truthful or putting across the facts for the citizens. However, the recent John Terry case is hardly a good example in journalism, behaving like a lynch mob attepmting to destory someones career.
ReplyDeleteIn defence of journalists, John Terry hardly helped himself. He touted his services as a corporate ambassador and role model for young people. His advisors sent out promotional material to companies highlighting his award as dad of the year. Cheating on your wife with a succession of women hardly makes him a great role model. Once the information came to light the media were quite right to publicise the situation and expose his hypocrisy. If the media hadn't highlighted Terry's problems he would doubtless have continued having affairs and deceiving football fans into thinking he is a great role model and corporate ambassador which he clearly most certainly is not.
ReplyDelete