Posted On: 11/24/2009
Why is PR writing so atrocious?
By Mark Ragan | Every once in a while I'll sit down with a jug of Jack Daniels and a bottle of Advil and dig through old press releases to see if PR agencies have learned how to write.
Of course you know the answer. Was it ever in doubt? Bad writing among PR agencies is the one thing in this world we can count on. Ice caps may melt. Sunnis and Shia may one day make peace. But PR agencies will continue to bill their hapless clients for thousands of press releases that no one on the planet could possibly comprehend.
PR writing is so horribly consistent that agencies even have a template for it. It goes something like this:
name of company, the leading solutions provider for the name of industry announces the appointment, purchase of, merger, etc of name of another company, the leading provider of name of product or service
The template also offers a column of buzzwords for these college grads to use when pumping out press releases. You simply highlight the word with your cursor, hit "enter" and the word is inserted into various spots throughout the release. The column includes all of the old standbys, including our friends "Thought Leadership" (in all caps of course); "connectivity," "global," "forward thinking," "vision," "strategic," and "influencers."
There is a reason for the template, of course. None of the kids hired by the agencies and billed out at $150 an hour have the slightest idea what they're writing about. They don't understand the product or the client. They have no background in the industry, and they never learned how to write in college.
Let's take a look at this press release from Ruder Finn to see if it follows the above template.
CHICAGO, Jan. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- Ruder Finn, Inc., a leading independent full-service global communications agency, today announced that it has been appointed global PR agency for Alterian, plc—the leading global enterprise marketing platform provider.
Of course the template is there in all of its glory, as it is with six out of 10 press releases I came across during my whiskey-aided research.
So here's my question: Why do corporations continue to hire these agencies? Why do they continue to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on releases that no reporter will ever read, no media outlet will ever pick up? Is there no one at the client office that sees what we see?
Please explain this to us. And while you're at it, we're collecting a list of new buzzwords to add to the template. We'd love to see your contributions.
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:15:10 AM by Tripp Frohlichstein First-why do corporations hire agencies? Some because the executives don't know better. What you correctly criticized in your article, to a person who does not understand communications, will appear as good PR.
Some agencies practice what I call "CEO PR." They convince the CEO they can "protect" him/her from the press. That's the CEO's primary concern.
Let it also be said that there are good agencies and writers out there too - and some companies hire those folks.
Secondly, as to the buzzwords-I wrote in a previous Ragan article but it continues-using the word "excited" in executive quotes in new releases. They are always excited (really?). A search on PR newswire just yesterday revealed 207 uses of the word "excited" in one day's releases. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:00:33 AM by Tim S. Speaking of annoying buzzwords - My new favorite is the word "enterprise" when used in an IT-ish phrase -
"Enterprise systems approach."
Are we talking Star Trek here? "Aye captain, the dylithium matrix needs to be realigned with an Enterprise systems approach!"
I now know what it's supposed to mean (I had to Wiki-P it), but the public (nor most people in your business) doesn't have a clue that "enterprise" is used as a buzzword/synonym for organization.
Argh! | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:10:04 AM by donmorberg Why call them press releases? Are they not for all media?
d | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:20:27 AM by Jeff
Three reasons:
1. Because writing is becoming a skill both in corporations and in media. 2. Because communications areas are streteched thin. So they use a template to get out the basic information without trying to pique the interest of editors or reporters. 3. Because for many the media release is the final piece. Posting it on their Web sites or on PR Newswire is the end result
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:41:54 AM by Anders V. I agree. Writing is becoming a skill not a basic requirment to work in communications. There is more emphasis on knowing the technology instead of being able to write well. So you just create a template and plug in the missing info. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:52:40 AM by Anonymous Most press releases are poorly written because they are created by committee. The result usually is a wordy, transition-free, prepositional-phrase laden, muddled mess. In my expereince, I've found that this is the case because administration won’t allow the writing and editing professionals do their job correctly. I feel this happens partly because they are married to their own writing styles (or lack there of) and they really are not that concerned with what their audiences think or can comprehend. Most non-professional writers write copy for their diaries, not their communities. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:59:52 AM by NB While writing of press releases may be uncreative for some, so is writing articles about how PR writing and press releases are poorly written or unnecessary. I swear Ragan puts this story in one of its 1,000 newsletters once a month. How about focusing more on how to improve things rather than writing, "Look at how horrible these so-called PR professionals are!" Or are you too busy making fun of another student's job letter to care? | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:00:37 AM by NW Following on from Jeff - too often the end result looks nothing like the first draft. A perfectly reasonable attempt is then mashed up by the product/technical people, made illiterate by the financial bods and sanitised into porridge by the legal eagles. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:04:36 AM by Rob Doughty Much of it is the LAWYERS!!!!
They try to control every word and it is a constant battle with them to turn out writing that is good. They squeeze all the readable stuff into corporate speak. UGH!!!! | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:12:42 AM by Deb W I agree with the comments. Most young PR practitioners do not have the slightest idea on how to formulate a newsworthy release to generate media interest. It's disheartening to read that standard template B.S. on PR Newswire or on the company's website.
Whatever happened to writing creatively? Where is the substance in PR writing? Most important, who is teaching/guiding our future PR practitioners that it's o.k. to write this half-a$$ crap?
BTW, here is another standard press release phrase: "the CEO/President/Company is pleased to announce..."
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:50:47 AM by Uriah Av-Ron I agree with your comments, Mark, but some clients like to issue press releases like these because they appear in Google Alerts and various other online sources. They know that a journalist isn't going to read them, but it creates another opportunity to Tweet, post on Facebook, etc. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:52:44 AM by Tess Companies choose to use the standard press release template because they think they work...and because many other companies are still stuck in the rut of doing "old school" pr instead of embracing more modern channels of communicationsocial media. These companies are afraid to give over control of their content and image to the public sphere. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:54:09 AM by Kate To touch on Rob Doughty's Comment - many agencies creativity is held back by the corporate structure and policies of their clients.
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:00:31 PM by Mike Sad to say, this was noticeable YEARS ago. A little curious as to why it's finally being brought up at the end of 2009. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:01:04 PM by Ken High marks for Mark. Call me a has-been, but it once was standard procedure for individuals entering the PR field to have had some experience in a news room giving them some actual experience writing a news story. What happened?
The template described is the accepted standard because many so-called PR professionals haven't a clue about what really constitutes a news story.
Still others are forced into using the template because, as noted above, it is what their inexperienced executive managers believes should be done.
NB laments the recurrence of focus on poor writing. I say press on, Mark.
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:03:25 PM by Anonymous I'd love to hear your comment on what you would LIKE to see. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:35:04 PM by Joe Carleo, APR -Advanced Language and Media Svcs I agree that some releases are very poorly written, but is that because a: the ranks of journalists are thinning at an incredibly fast rate so your chance of pickup s b: PR staff is also charged wth blogging, creating web videos, keeping the web site updated, doing media training and a whole host of related things c: releases are written with SEO in mind so you sometimes get crappy writing. d: colleges who don't insist on proper business writing classes or e: the difficulty of tracking release X with business result y. My recommendation is to see which ones apply to you and get started on fixing them. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:40:11 PM by ericjhenderson  Full on angst. But, I ain't mad at ya. That writing is becoming a specialized skill is the mark of a generalized and willful dumbing down. The one thing left out of the analysis, though, is a look at what the market will bear. The market will easily bear (and reward?) illiteracy even as it may reward solid writing. Illiteracy works, makes money. The trick is to place good writing where it will be appreciated. As far as the release goes, it seems to be just a medium for obtaining a quick and wide web footprint by keyword pickup. As Jeff noted, many companies write it knowing that they are their own "press" destination, eschewing any type of targeting or well-thought follow-up with an actual reporter or blogger. The good news may be how easy it should be to stand out if, in fact, we're scribbling in a dung heap. But, asking people to write today reveals an unfortunately deeper problem, and the web has only laid it bare. Read some comments under a YouTube video, or ...googling for sport, try the phrase "sneak peak" used without irony. It's a brave noo werld we livin. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:41:45 PM by Anonymous From Anonymous #1: I would like to see executives and administrators give the professional writers on their staffs some editorial control and create brief, interesting releases that are written with audiences in mind. Sometimes, though - a new hire is just a new hire and there isn't anything about it that will jump off the page especially to the ever-shrinking editorial staffs that are filling space that is left with advertisers' needs in mind... | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:48:06 PM by Liz Nielsen "on a going forward basis"
"utilize"
"cascading of messages" | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:31:29 PM by Tom Gable Gable PR conducts ongoing studies on the use of jargon in news releases. More than half of the releases issued over Business Wire and PR Newswire are from leaders. In surveys of media on words they hate most, the list includes solutions, leading edge, best of breed, end-to-end and seamless. Here are links to a couple of different blogs we posted on the phenomenon.
http://www.gablepr.com/blog/2009/11/05/pr-releases-packed-with-leaders-providing-solutions/
http://www.gablepr.com/blog/2009/06/23/a-nation-of-leading-providers-and-solutions-pr-releases-full-of-it/
http://www.gablepr.com/blog/2009/04/17/pr-jargon-train-keeps-rolling-and-gaining-speed/ | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:47:35 PM by Pat Miller Most news releases start off reasonably well written...then after 10 people review them (legal, IR, accounting, exectutives, CEO), it turns to mush. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:54:50 PM by Bobbie Press releases have necessarily been limited to communicating facts about a person or entity because the editor needs to assesses the value of those facts to the audience of his/her publication. While that's no excuse for boring writing, a press release delivers information that can be judged on its merits moreso than on the skill of the writer. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:06:07 PM by Mark M. I think we communicators have to position this with management as a matter of customer focus. They usually understand this concept from a sales and service perspective. Well, editors and reporters are our customers for news releases. They can choose to use them, or not. So we need to adapt our product to this customer's desires and needs. If we can get buy-in on this approach, it becomes a fairly simple matter to prove just what it is that editors and reporters want and need. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:10:25 PM by Andy Marken While we enjoy your little tyraid against an agency any agency but have you ever looked at a trade show directory and the company listings? Every company is listed as the worldwide leader, industry's leading..., leading, etc. We have yet to see anyone put down...well we're # 3 but gawd we try. Or our products are pretty good but our support sucks and we only want to hear from you when you want to buy another product. This isn't a PR issue...it's a management issue. You've become immune to seeing the leadership in the front end. If you don't have a bunch of techie acronyms thrown in obviously you don't know our products. Oh sure throw them in because "everyone" knows that. There are a lot worse things you can say than the writing sucks. The majority of the people don't know the company, the products, how to use them or their competition/customers. If you don't know that how do you expect to write anything but what the engineer (or CEO/mkgt) hands to you? Of course the fact that newbies don't have a half-way decent founding in English (or the language of your choice) and journalism has nothing to do with it ...does it? You live by texting and tweets alone and see if you can write three paragraphs. | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:13:57 PM by Rebecca I worked in house for years and watched hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid for agency work that really wasn't very good.
Don't get me wrong ... there are some fabulous consultants out there, independent or in agencies, but all too often it seems many C-suite types listen to the advice of a highly-paid outsider, even a bad one, before asking for, or listening to, the input from the people on his or her team.
When it came to writing releases, often I had to rewrite the drafts we'd get from agencies. And we're talking a complete rework. The facts would be wrong. The grammar poor. There'd be spelling errors. It was boring. The list goes on and on. And we'd have paid thousands for it.
Having said all this, even if a PR firm had delivered a great release, without needing significant edits, the C-Suite would have got their hands on it, and mangled it anyway!
Encouraging to see (or maybe not) that I'm not the only person who has felt frustrated by this issue. I read most of the above comments, nodding my head and fondly recalling saving version 18 of yet another press release draft witnessing executives debating comma usage and word choice when they could have been, you know, running the business and being told that we've hired yet another global PR firm to help us tell our story more effectively.
I hope I am a better consultant today as a result of being on the receiving end of it all!
| | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:50:44 PM by Joy Capps I've enjoyed reading the original article and comments that followed. GablePR provided links to a number of comical posts about lame press releases.
Two thoughts come to me:
1) My PR Agency doesn't write my press releases, but I find them to be a valuable resource and part of my team. Perhaps people that use agency's should consider using them for strategic planning, pitching and opening doors in lieu of writing press releases.
2) While the thoughts here are dead on and sadly humorous, where are the examples of the RIGHT way to do it? | | | Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:50:10 PM by Keith Malone One of these reasons we continue to pursue this format is because our clients or bosses want a safe news release and believe that their new product or venture will, by its own force, draw news media attention.
They are terrified that they may not have full control over a story or - God(dess) forbid! - that the story we want to pitch may not have our client or company as the featured idea or angle, but will surely position them as an expert or key player in the larger story. They all want their NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, [ your local mainstream news media organization here] story and will not be deterred because they don't have time to sit down with us and understand what it really means to tell a story. Sometimes, telling a story about the product, person or idea may mean giving up some control or not being the center of attention. | | | Wednesday, November 25, 2009 7:20:14 AM by Sorry must remain anonymous My company uses this template and those in charge think it is a proper model. After all, everybody uses it. My boss understands perfectly that no news reporter is going to pick up our announcements. I'm not sure what the review committee expects, but I can count on them for revisions that are pure corporate speak.
When I became the marketing specialist, I made some attempts to bring a real voice to quotes or tell a story. My attempts were met with disbelief and disapproval. Today I have a better understanding of the company's purpose. It is not to get media attention. It is to impress other companies and those within the industry. Industry leaders can be quite impressed by the company we keep. Although mainstream news reporters rarely write about our industry, it is covered in depth by a trade journal. That's the eye my bosses want to catch, and sometimes do catch.
Let's say by some miracle a mainstream news reporter did a story about our company. It would not mean that much to my bosses. I would not be surprised if they would rather avoid such coverage, because it would be so totally out of their control.
We no longer call these documents "press releases." They are "news." (Remember, to my bosses, an alliance with another company IS big newsat least within the industry.) If we send our "news" to a newswire, the main reason is to aid in search engine optimization.
Not all these awful press releases are written by recent college grads. I am a journalism school graduate and former newspaper reporter. I can write (at least I've been told I can), and I definitely understand our product. So why use that template? I must admit I'd rather not, but there are some battles not worth taking on. Even if I could convince my own company to try another approach, the partner company would never go for it.
Last, I'd like to say that we have a college grad interning in our office. She's bright and seems to have some decent writing skills. If she tried to bring a fresh voice to our "news," it would go nowhere. Bottom line: these releases are about posturing and power. Until a new generation moves into a leadership role, the template will be status quo, at least at my company. The next generation will no doubt develop its own status quo, and I'm not expecting that its basis will be good writing.
It would be helpful to have some examples if there are any companies that have broken out of the mold . . . | | | Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:51:35 AM by Lou Mark, you seem a bit overwrought in this column/perspective. Perhaps you should've used the template:
Ragan.com a website for news, ideas and conversations for communicators announced today that it will henceforth only fire broadsides at PR agencies and their corporate partners rather than offer intelligent, meaningful and constructive criticism. | | | Wednesday, November 25, 2009 4:18:50 PM by writa The problems you describe are not limited to the p.r. field. Bad writing is everywhere. There are multiple causes, but it boils down mostly to the fact that young people today were brought up on television. As a rule, they do not read books or newspapers, so they are unfamiliar with basic grammar, have poor vocabularies and don't know how to tell a story. I teach business writing at several corporations and I start each class by telling students the most important rule I will give you is to read: read a newspaper everyday, a book every week. Reading, writing and speaking are all inter-related. Reading not only improves your writing, but it makes you a better conversationalist as well. The other thing is that few people care or know better. I just received some press information that referred to Walter Reade Army Hospital. Walter Reade is a movie theater chain. Walter Reed is th army hospital. I bet that went through at least a dozen levels of approval, yet it got out there. | | | Wednesday, November 25, 2009 8:58:58 PM by Joe Dirt Right on, NB....
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:59:52 AM by NB
While writing of press releases may be uncreative for some, so is writing articles about how PR writing and press releases are poorly written or unnecessary. I swear Ragan puts this story in one of its 1,000 newsletters once a month. How about focusing more on how to improve things rather than writing, "Look at how horrible these so-called PR professionals are!" Or are you too busy making fun of another student's job letter to care? | | | Monday, November 30, 2009 4:48:44 PM by EB "Organic." To me it means spreading on the fertilizerpretty thick. Come to think of it, that may be an accurate buzzword.
To what NB said, I agree. It's easy to criticize. That happens a lot in the articles here. But they never seem to show us how they'd do it if they were the king of the forest. That's actually, the news we could use. | | | Friday, December 04, 2009 6:04:26 PM by Johnny Rojo They write such [censored]-poor releases because they:
1. Have nothing to say
2. Have no idea of story
3. Are self-importantly full of themselves
My background is in direct response, and I long ago learned that you must write to people about things they want to hear, which may not be the things you want to tell them. To do that, you have to understand who your readers, prospects, and customers are.
It also helps if you can write with a little style. | | | Saturday, December 05, 2009 3:22:12 AM by Sorry must remain anonymous So, Mr. Ragan, are you satisfied with the explanations provided? Any advice? | | | Monday, December 07, 2009 4:09:15 PM by PRHack At least, the template contains proper spelling and grammar. Have you ever seen a client written release? | | | Monday, January 11, 2010 9:40:26 PM by Rob Mark I don't understand your problem with all this Mark.
I happen to enjoy "leveraging our synergies." | | |
RELATED STORIES
RELATED PRODUCTS
|
|
RSS
STORE
CART
