Though P.R. has been practiced professionally for nearly a century,
the field is truly new — for a variety of reasons. In just the last few
years, P.R., at its best, has become vastly more sophisticated, strategic,
and technological. The top professionals not only shape and communicate
messages but also help set the strategies of the companies, agencies,
and other institutions for which they work. They deal not only with
the media but also with their company’s or client’s many constituencies:
customers, employees, shareholders, communities, governments.
They
seek to convey messages not only from the company to the public but
also from the public to the company. And in all this, they increasingly
use not only phone, fax, and photocopy machines but also e-mail and
the Internet, which enable them to target their messages to specific clusters
of people based on their shared interests.
Let me thank Robert Dilenschneider, the creator and editor of
this action-oriented book, for inviting me to write the introduction. Bob
is at once a highly successful P.R. professional, a sought-after mentor
to many other P.R. practitioners around the world, and a thoughtful
and big-hearted person. I reckon that any project that Bob masterminds
will draw a serious and influential audience and will provoke us to
think. Besides, I’m happy and honored to share some thoughts with
you — fellow
communicators — particularly at this time of change and
challenge.
You in public relations and we in journalism play different roles
and have an arm’s-length relationship, but we hold much in common.
Both of us are in the information business — gathering, analyzing, and
disseminating information. Both of us have stories we yearn to tell.
Both of us often have to work under severe deadline pressure, with lessthan-
complete information, sometimes in the midst of crisis. Both of us
are committed to the truth.
But, beyond that, there is no “one-size-fits-all,” stereotypical P.R.
person or journalist. Consider your own situation: You may be a nurse
who has just inherited P.R. duties at a hospital, or an officer of a P.R.
agency, or the head of P.R. at a Fortune 500 company or a smaller entrepreneurial
firm. The journalist with whom you deal may be a reporter,
writer, editor, or broadcaster; he or she may work for a magazine,
newspaper,
wire service, TV or radio station, or network. More importantly,
both the P.R. person and the journalist may be professional,
responsible,
informed. and genuinely searching for the truth — or not.
So I would advise P.R. professionals to avoid the easy temptation
of thinking of “the media” as a single, cohesive, and often adversarial
force. Rather, I’d urge you to consider us as individual journalists working
for quite distinct institutions, often with different missions.
viii
The media are diverse. Put simply, Fortune is vastly different
from the sensation-seeking 7 o’clock local TV news, and you’re much
more likely to get a fairer shake from the former than the latter.
That leads to my first message: Distinguish among the various
elements that comprise the press.
We should not speak of “the media” or “the press” without recognizing
their many disparate parts.
Though P.R. has been practiced professionally for nearly a century,
the field is truly new — for a variety of reasons. In just the last few
years, P.R., at its best, has become vastly more sophisticated, strategic,
and technological. The top professionals not only shape and communicate
messages but also help set the strategies of the companies, agencies,
and other institutions for which they work. They deal not only with
the media but also with their company’s or client’s many constituencies:
customers, employees, shareholders, communities, governments.
They
seek to convey messages not only from the company to the public but
also from the public to the company. And in all this, they increasingly
use not only phone, fax, and photocopy machines but also e-mail and
the Internet, which enable them to target their messages to specific clusters
of people based on their shared interests.
Let me thank Robert Dilenschneider, the creator and editor of
this action-oriented book, for inviting me to write the introduction. Bob
is at once a highly successful P.R. professional, a sought-after mentor
to many other P.R. practitioners around the world, and a thoughtful
and big-hearted person. I reckon that any project that Bob masterminds
will draw a serious and influential audience and will provoke us to
think. Besides, I’m happy and honored to share some thoughts with
you — fellow
communicators — particularly at this time of change and
challenge.
You in public relations and we in journalism play different roles
and have an arm’s-length relationship, but we hold much in common.
Both of us are in the information business — gathering, analyzing, and
disseminating information. Both of us have stories we yearn to tell.
Both of us often have to work under severe deadline pressure, with lessthan-
complete information, sometimes in the midst of crisis. Both of us
are committed to the truth.
But, beyond that, there is no “one-size-fits-all,” stereotypical P.R.
person or journalist. Consider your own situation: You may be a nurse
who has just inherited P.R. duties at a hospital, or an officer of a P.R.
agency, or the head of P.R. at a Fortune 500 company or a smaller entrepreneurial
firm. The journalist with whom you deal may be a reporter,
writer, editor, or broadcaster; he or she may work for a magazine,
newspaper,
wire service, TV or radio station, or network. More importantly,
both the P.R. person and the journalist may be professional,
responsible,
informed. and genuinely searching for the truth — or not.
So I would advise P.R. professionals to avoid the easy temptation
of thinking of “the media” as a single, cohesive, and often adversarial
force. Rather, I’d urge you to consider us as individual journalists working
for quite distinct institutions, often with different missions.
viii
The media are diverse. Put simply, Fortune is vastly different
from the sensation-seeking 7 o’clock local TV news, and you’re much
more likely to get a fairer shake from the former than the latter.
That leads to my first message: Distinguish among the various
elements that comprise the press.
We should not speak of “the media” or “the press” without recognizing
their many disparate parts.