Our RSS feeds
LATEST JOBS:
resize text: decrease text sizereset text size increase text size

Online Journalism News

PR emails are 'as bad a spam tool as adverts for Viagra': Charles Arthur on PR and journalism

charlesarthur Any long-time follower of Guardian technology editor, Charles Arthur, via his blog or Twitter ID will know he can have a slightly strained relationship with PRs at times.

"No, PR agency for ELSPA, I haven't time to send you an email detailing when, what and where on story involving ELSPA. Offer a human, dammit," he scathingly tweeted yesterday.

Earlier this week, PR consultant Craig McGill reported that Arthur is removing his email address from Gorkana's list and asking for PR pitches by Twitter instead.

The idea is PRs will publicly send their requests via an '@' message and Arthur will respond if he feels it is relevant.

"You have to remember that the relationship between journalists and PRs isn't quite as symmetrical as you might think," Arthur tells Journalism.co.uk.

"Journalists aren't paying the PRs' bills - it's the clients who are hiring the PRs, so the PRs have an interest in trying to reach as many journalists as they possibly can, get as many people to hear the message as they can, in the vague hope they get as wide a benefit for their client as they can. For the journalist, they have a much narrower focus, thinking about who their readers are.

"PRs are to journalists, what car manufacturers are to car suppliers," he says, an analogy he has written about on his blog.

"Both are reliant on the other: the manufacturers feel the pain if suppliers, for whatever reason, fail. The suppliers are driven mad if manufacturers deny them business," he writes in the post.

Arthur is fed up of the junk email that builds up from PRs who don't know what he does: "Why would someone include me on a mail out about something we've [The Guardian] never written about or we are ever going to write about?

"They [PRs] send out the email without thinking why they're sending it out. To them, it's a ritual almost. There's basically a disconnect between what their job is, which is to get coverage for their client, and what our job is."

In addition PR companies will frequently tell clients they can secure coverage at certain titles, because they have contacts there. But, says Arthur, if newspapers don't then write about it, 'clients buy into it and are disappointed'.

There are so few technology correspondents on Fleet Street, he says, it would not be difficult for PRs to target him in a more nuanced and educated way.

With the removal of his email from Gorkana's database he hopes to reduce the level of spam: "PRs were not looking past the fact they had 500 names they could email out to."

PR email has become 'as bad a spam tool as someone sending out adverts for Viagra, and I don't buy that either', he adds.

"There are some companies we're never going to write about and, to some extent, they have to just accept that," he says.

Arthur would much rather spend his time hunting for his own stories and while some journalists do over-use press releases for speed and space-filling, 'thinking is evolving on that', he says.

The Guardian is not overly reliant on PR, he claims, a situation made easier 'when you work for an organisation which puts a premium on generating your own stories and making the news agenda yourself'.

Arthur also doesn't attempt to cover everything on his 'patch':  "If I see a story on another newspaper site I don't feel the need to leap up and go and rewrite them.

"I often say: is this something that really deserves me spending my time on? Or should I be doing something that [fits in with] the Guardian's agenda, and what we're trying to achieve with our technology coverage?"

PRs or press offices are often just needed for a response, he says, citing the Guardian's Tax Gap investigation and a front page story he ran for last week's technology supplement, looking at the government's expenditure on a speech analysis system.

Through original journalism like this, Arthur says, more whistleblowers will come forward and the Guardian 'will get more stories this way'. The 'good old brown envelope works pretty well still' and 'most good stories don't come from PR,' he adds.

While the Twitter method means that PRs have to reveal details of their announcements publicly, 'if it's that good a story they'll find a way to get it to me,' Arthur says.

Tags (click tag to find related articles; click icon for feed):
guardian | journalism | pr | charles arthur | churnalism | journalists | craig mcgill | gorkana |

Sign up here for our free, daily email newsletter to get all the latest stories, jobs, tips and more.

Got a story? Email our news team: Laura Oliver; Judith Townend or telephone +44 (0)1273 384290. You can also follow us on Twitter: @journalismnews / @LauraOliver / @JTownend.

Comments

If we're talking about bad PR, let's talk about bad journalism as well. Writing a story inspired by a blog post made by Charles on the 5th of February is hardly cutting-edge stuff, is it? Also, your headlines is confusing. It says "PR emails are 'as bad a spam tool as adverts for Vi4gra': Charles Arthur on PR and journalism" but your body text says "Email has become 'as bad a spam tool as someone sending out adverts for Vi4gra, and I don't buy that either', he adds." Which one is it? Because 'email' is a lot bigger than 'PR email' - but 'email' includes spam adverts for the aforementioned pharmaceutical product. More clarity please!
- 20/03/09

Thanks for your comment. Firstly: I'm reporting Charles Arthur's comments so it's not necessarily my opinion. In regards to clarity: I now have added in the word 'PR' in front of 'email' in the sentence you refer to, as he was talking specifically about the way many PRs use email. I hope that makes it clear. Lastly, it's a feature, not a news item and is categorised as such, in our features section. I think Arthur's quotes add something to Craig McGill's original piece, which was of interest, and people were discussing online. It was McGill's post of March 17 that inspired the piece, not Arthur's blog post of February 5, which was used as context as he had referred to it in the interview. If you've got another angle to offer, please do get in touch: judith at journalism.co.uk - it's certainly a topic I'd like to return to.
Judith Townend - 20/03/09

Cheerful Charlie could do with moaning less and collaborating more. He'd be the first to squeak if PR's put up barriers such as 'don't email me' or removing their contacts from databases. He might find might that it takes a while longer the next time he is looking for a response. ELSPA PR's request for him to detail his story is reasonable, Charlie's cantankerous response is predictable. No PR Officers could be so rude to or so vocal about bad journalists / journalism, good thing Twitter's @PRWHiner can.
- 20/03/09

You're quite right on a number of points - I responded in annoyance at what I saw as 'yet another PR bashing exercise' and I apologise. Thanks for clarifying the email thing. I think there's a few angles to raise here though - online articles are to some extent, preaching to the converted. If you're a PR reading this article, I doubt you're part of the problem. Secondly, it's a bit unfair, as if you are in PR, you can't really respond to an article like this for fear of being seen to criticise journalists, which might just put you out of a job! However, that's more of a comment on the issues raised by the article, rather than a response to the article itself.
- 20/03/09

Thanks. It would be good to look at the relationship from a PR perspective too at some point - the issue of keeping quiet to keep in work is interesting and also the point that differentiations can be made between different types of PR methods (although Arthur wasn't saying everyone spams: 'if it's that good a story they'll find a way to get it to me,' he said). I did put it to Charles Arthur that that many journalists are overly-reliant on PR when it suits them, and that's when he said he thinks the Guardian journalists aren't. Of course, others might disagree. As a media reporter I get to see that newspapers and broadcasters also use and invest in PR and press offices to promote and protect themselves, so that's another issue to look at in the future. Please do get in touch with your thoughts - and I'll respect your anonymity if you wish.
Judith Townend - 22/03/09

It is pure laziness on the side of the PR industry. The same press release sent to The Guardian will also be sent to the Lytham St Annes Express. Nothing is tailored by the PR industry to the newspaper it is targeted at. Part of the problem, I assume, is that PR clients want to see and approve the release before it is sent out. They - or the PR company - simply don't want to have to put the work into hitting different markets. Journalists want an easy life. Send them something that is relevant and they will most certainly use it.
Chris Dixon, Freelancer, Fylde Coast News Service - 22/03/09

You must be registered in order to post a comment. Click here to register or login below if you are already registered:

    

Forgotten your password? Please click here

Other recent news


Related news

Recent blog posts


Features



JOB OF THE WEEK

Communications officer

With a communications qualification, experience of working with partner organisations and dispersed groups of people and some knowledge of agriculture for the NFU's Campaign for the Farmed Environment ...more

Freelancers for hire

...see all

DISPLAY ADVERTISING

image

Target our journalism community of 17,200 subscribers and 140k+ visitors monthly. Call Chris on 01273 384291

Advertisements

How fast is your broadband?

Broadband Speed

Test your speed now

Click for
mobile broadband deals from Mobile Broadband Genie


Compare Broadband

Alternatively take a look at mobile broadband packages.