Over the holidays I read The Fall of Advertising & The Rise of PR, by Al and Laura Ries. I don’t recommend you buy it and read it; it’s a much better library check out and scan type book.

For one thing, it was published in 2002, which makes reading it’s tales of Segway, Pets.com and The Red Tent pretty boring and stale.

Also, it’s clear the authors are terribly sad to see the age of advertising slip away and do not see a value in PR. I’m not even sure why PR is in the title, honestly. Here’s a gem from Chapter 9, page 85. Emphasis mine:

Perception is the name of the game, and advertising is perceived as the only way to create a better perception. Not true, but that the perception.

And that better alternative is publicity or, as its practitioners like to call it, PR, or public relations.

Whatever you all the function (publicity, PR, or public relations), the objective is the same. Tell your story indirectly through third-party outlets, primarily the media.

There are many disadvantages to PR. You can’t control the content, you can’t control the timing, and you can’t control the visual appearance of your message. You can’t even be sure that any of your messages will be delivered.

But the one advantage of PR makes up for all of its disadvantages. PR has credibility, advertising does not.

Gosh, too bad PR only has ONE advantage. How the heck would ANYONE hope to build up sincere media relationships that will one day help get your message out? If only there was a person one could turn to for media strategy and message control! (sigh).

Clearly, I’m still processing the tone and take-away message of this book. It has been on my read list for a while, which is why I’m sort of bitter about how disappointing the read was.

What about you? Have you read it? What lessons did you learn?

More importantly: Do you agree that PR offers no message control and only boasts ONE advantage, credibility?

My brain is sort of fried from the five consecutive hours (yeah, yeah. “Get a life.” I hear ya.) I’ve just spent watching the interweb PR geeks rant about the baby-slinging Motrin debacle (bless their PR firm’s heart) in tandem with a two hour PRSarahEvans teleseminar.

I’m worn completely out. I’ve got so many social media buzz words and random thoughts racing through my head I can’t hardly type a coherent sentence. Forgive me.

I really did enjoy the teleseminar though. It was a little more of a mutual love fest between hosts and guests than I anticipated, but I can live with that.

Besides the Motrin chatter, I took in some good points from Peter Shankman and Jason Kintzler about social media for social media’s sake. I’ve been an advocate of their startups, HARO and PitchEngine for a while now and it was great hear the actual voices of folks I’ve only “heard” via Twitter until now.

It was also nice to learn more about Sarah Evans, no, not the singer, the flack. Smart gal and very sincere about her passion for digital PR. She’s got a great thing going and I’m exciting to see what else she shares with her network.

Even though I didn’t take away anything life changing, I’m still glad I gave up a few hours of my Sunday night for some quality PR geek time. The next call is slated for Wednesday, December 10, at 8 p.m. CST. You in?

Oh, how I long to attend BlogHer next year!

Why? Here’s why:

1. From everything I’ve read, BlogHer really is the best of both worlds: It’s fun and social (lotta parties) and offers up a great deal of tangible info about blog writing, marketing, upkeep and – more importantly – identity. That’s not only good for me and FlackRabbit here, it’s also great for my clients. I really do want to be knowledgeable about the blogosphere, not simply be obsessed with it.

2. I heart blogs.

3. I have ovaries.

4. I am still not completely over the fact that the Nashville BlogHer stop was canceled this year. I was so looking forward to dipping my toe in the local lady-blogger pool.

5. I’m obsessed with Dooce and would love nothing more than to keep watch in the hotel lobby in hopes of catching a glimpse of Heather walking by so I could Twitter my elation along with a picture of her from a distance and giggle uncontrollably for the next three hours.

Here’s a little more info from their announcement post:

Yes, BlogHer ’09 will be at the The Chicago Sheraton and Towers from July 23-25, 2009. We will kick off on Thursday July 23rd with our 3rd annual BlogHer Business Conference, and will continue with the two-day 5th annual BlogHer Annual Conference on Friday and Saturday, July 24-25.

Are you going to BlogHer ’09?

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.

From Wikipedia — the definition of PR:

Public relations (PR) is the practice of managing the flow of information between an organization and its publics. Public relations – often referred to as PR – gains an organization or individual exposure to their audiences using topics of public interest and news items that do not require direct payment. Because public relations places exposure in credible third-party outlets, it offers a third-party legitimacy that advertising does not have.

Do you agree? Is this a good summary?

It continues:

The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) claimed in 1988: “Public relations helps an organization and its publics adapt mutually to each other.” According to the PRSA, the essential functions of public relations include research, planning, communications dialogue and evaluation.

And FYI, if the word “publics” makes you go “whaa?” It’s okay. I hate that word, too.

Well said!

Hat tip, Media Bistro/PRNewser

On the importance of candor, from Vegas firm Stern and Company‘s blog:

Whereas marketing and advertising groups must, by definition, be defenders of their specific products, the public relations department has no such mandated allegiance. Public relations should be the corporate conscience. An organization???s public relations professionals should enjoy enough autonomy to tell it to management ???like it is.??? If an idea doesn???t make sense, if a product is flawed, if the general institutional wisdom is wrong, it is the duty of the public relations professional to challenge the consensus. And, in absolute candor, if your company???s PR function isn???t saying ???no??? with great vigor from time to time, you???re probably not being well served and could well be headed for problems.

Who among us hasn’t thought (or maybe even said aloud), “this whole PR viewpoint/opinion thing, it’s what you are paying me for.  If you want a yes man, clearly I’m not the flack for you.”

A few months ago, my hubby shared with me via Google Reader a feed about PitchEngine, the free social media release (SMR) builder-program-thing created by a very smart flack out of Wyoming.

A social media release? Yes! Think of it as your traditional press release to non-traditional folks like Twitter-ers, Facebookers, Google and folks/bots who like to search Google.

Just like your traditional press release, the SMR includes a headline, description text and a boilerplate including company logo, description and contact information. Unlike that traditional release, your SMR includes photos, logos and links to online videos and relevant social media accounts like Twitter, Facebook, etc.

The finished product is a one-stop online shop for the interested reader and reporter. Read More…