It took me a few minutes to figure out what was happening, but all signs point to this:

I just received my first product pitch from a PR flack.

Not for this blog of course, but for my Her Nashville Chic Geek column. Now that I’m on the receiving end of the PR effort I realize just how natural it is to pick these things apart like so many folks do.

Here’s what I learned and appreciate upon first reading:

1. The pitchess has read at least one of my columns and/or has an understanding of my passion (tech and productivity for busy women)
2. She did my homework for me and listed the ways her tech product helps busy moms be more productive
3. She gets that geeky folk like to play with geeky things and has offered to let me put my itty bitty hands on a tester

Because the PR pro communicated these things, I will be emailing her back and asking some questions. Honestly, I’m curious because her device, though intriguing, has received less than glowing reviews. (Well, that and I’m a HUGE fan of the competitor’s product)

I also want to know how she found Her Nashville; she’s not from around here so how did my local column get on her radar?

As a PR pro, have you been on the receiving end of a pitch? Did you pick it apart? Were you impressed?

Apparently, I’m supposed to cringe at the word “flack” as used to describe PR professionals like me. But, um, instead I kinda named my website after the term. Sorry!

From the PR News blog:

Technically, most dictionaries will refer to flack as a press agent/spokesperson. But we all know it’s not the preferred name for a spokesperson, for a communicator, for a PR executive. Yet it’s used all the time.  Whether behind your back or to your face…

…it’s a sad story — or a sad state of affairs — any time bona fide PR professionals (and I am assuming the PR dept at AIG is legit) are referred to as “flacks.”

Okay, true. It’s not my preferred name, but the use of the term flack is not the least bit offensive to me. Furthermore, I’ve had many a journalist and PR pro ask me what the word means, as they have never before heard it used to describe a communicator or spokesperson.

Now, I do agree with the blogger on several points. The NY Post was being less than professional and showing complete bias by recently referring to a spokesperson as a “flak.” I would roll my eyes if I was quoted that way, especially if it was spelled incorrectly like that.

But the bottom line is this:

The NY Post’s printed flack attack only speaks to the complete lack of trust the reporter has in that spokesperson. This is not something that can be prevented by one good response to a question. A solid media/flack relationship develops over time and boils down to how much respect you’ve earned (and keep) as a PR professional.

It’s that deteriorated media relationship, not word choice, that is so troublesome.

PRWeek is having a best PR blog contest. I only subscribe to about five of these but PR Squared gets my vote and also offers up a list of the competitors, which is cool since I haven’t heard of half of these and am looking forward to testing them out:

Pit bulls and Labradors
Digital Influence Mapping Project
Livingston Buzz
PR Squared
Neville Hobson
The Daily Lark
Communication Overtones
6 a.m.
Drew Kerr’s PR Rock and Roll
Micro Persuasion
What Do You Stand For?
A view on PR from Silicon Valley
Murphy’s LawIntakeA shel of my former self
Pop PR jots
Beyond the Hype
Influential Marketing Blog
The Flack
THINKing
Phil’s Blogservations
PR Measurement Blog
Measuring Up
Sage Circle
PR Blog News
Glass House
Bitemarks Down the Avenue
Voce Nation
Bad Pitch Blog
Your PR Guy