You have a fabulous service, brand or product that you, your family and friends and a growing band of customers love — but why can’t you get the press to fall in love with your offering?
You may fall into one of these categories:
The feeling of overwhelm can be powerful. But as a business mentor told me at the very beginning of my entrepreneurial journey, you need to do some promotion on your company each and every day. If you aren’t going to do that, then no-one will (unless you pay a PR agent). So go and do what you do best — enthuse about your business to interested parties.
If you have already had some press coverage by being spotted at an event or via Twitter, you must ensure that you maximise this opportunity as much as possible. Firstly, thank the journalist for their piece — you never know when you may need to speak to them again.
The next step is to politely ask them for the PDF version of the news story. If you can’t get hold of this then buy the publication and include a scan of the piece in a dedicated Press section on your website. You could also add the newspaper or magazine logo to your home page to give you extra credibility. Then share the image or promote a link to the coverage across your social media platforms.
When you are in the thick of running your business, you often neglect to articulate your USP. It’s worth asking friends and customers to take part in a focus group to establish what makes your business special. These are the kind of questions you should be discussing:
Once you have done this brainstorming, I can guarantee you that some lovely golden nuggets will have appeared. Now use this information to write a simple sentence that describes what your company does. Don’t forget to include your golden nugget. This sentence will then work as your elevator pitch, whether you are selling, networking or pitching to a journalist.
Amanda Ruiz is known as the ultimate door opener. She is the founder of www.amandaruiz.co.uk, a marketing and PR agency.
It never ceases to amaze me in this digital age, just how many people fail to the make the most of their PR.
Say you write an article that appears in all its glory on, oh I don’t know, let’s say The Marketing Donut. Fantastic. That particular site gets thousands of visits per day and could potentially get your insightful, carefully written advice in front of a healthy slab of potential clients.
But what happens in a week or two when the link to your post has fallen off the Marketing Donut’s front page? Well, you’ll probably still get some visits to the post, but the main exposure generated by the article will have passed, and with it, the benefit it brought to your profile. Unless…
If you’re going all out on the public relations front, the chances are you have a website too. On that website you could create a media coverage page. On that page, you could post links to (or copies of) all of the coverage you have achieved. Why? Because media coverage can lend credibility to your brand, and if visitors to your site can browse through your mentions in the media, they are more likely to value your offering.
There are plenty of examples of how to lay out a media coverage area all over the web – just do a quick search to see everything from a simple to list of links to flashy animated affairs. The only vital thing to note is that you must get permission from the publication before placing a copy of the feature on your own site. This needs to be done even if you wrote the piece in the first place, and it’s good practice to include a link to the original source too.
Now, I’m off to clip this article about media coverage pages, and get it up on my media coverage page (with the editor’s permission, of course).
Interesting story of artistic rebellion on the BBC today - in this case, not against the machinery of the state, but against people who are against the machinery of the state and insist on sharing music - for free - via the Internet.
Our poor, destitute pop stars have stamped their collective feet and said, “Enough! No more depriving us of another few quid for our swollen coffers by sharing our music with your mates.” Poor loves.
Does anyone really care whether Pink Floyd’s Nick Mason, Lily Allen or whoever, misses out on a few grand here and there? How bad can file-sharing really be? Well, plenty of lesser-known artists are living on the breadline and depend on every penny they can earn to maintain their career - and they’re the ones who are hit the hardest. So this isn’t really about the big names at all.
I’m not even sure it’s a simple point of legal principle either. Technically, the musicians are right, of course. Intellectual property (IP) law is clear about these things - artists have an established right to be paid for the sale and distribution of the works they have created.
This doesn’t necessarily mean the performers or writers actually own the IP (in the case of musicians, often it’s the label or distributors), but, through custom, practice and performance contracts, they have a right to benefit from it. For people who already have millions, the impact of file-sharing is probably relatively marginal - certainly less than the impact of the contracts the labels impose on them, if Prince and George Michael are to be believed.
For up-and-coming artists, however, it could make the difference between being able to continue an artistic career or giving it up to work full-time in Sainsbury’s. Worst case scenario: our culture is deprived of great works that would have thrilled or inspired millions, because no-one’s prepared to pay for them.
The issue of ownership of artistic works is not one that can be easily defined by law, in my opinion. Who owns Penny Lane, for example? The Beatles, who wrote it? The estate of Michael Jackson, who bought the publishing rights? The old-timers’ band in Frinton who bash out a cover on the Hammond organ? The millions of people who have bought it, listened to it, been inspired to explore more of the Beatles’ work and from there delve into the music of other artists influenced by them - in other words, people whose lives have been culturally enriched by the song?
So, who owns the cultural artefacts that help shape our sensibilities and our feelings about the world? And who benefits from them the most? There’s a strong argument to say that we, the public, do. It’s a liberal, idealistic vision of art and its place in society. Many people think that art should be free. But if we subscribe entirely to this view, how does the artist live?
Until the 19th century, since when the commercial model of art has really taken hold, artists were often dependent on family wealth or a rich patron in order to live and write, paint or play. This model just doesn’t exist as much nowadays - and neither should it. Art is at least as much commerce as it is creativity these days - and we have, to some extent, our own collusion with the artists to thank for this. Think of the rapacious commercialism of Andy Warhol, for example: sure, he was making an interesting comment about the mass production methods of modern society; he was also absolutely raking it in. And we’ve lapped it up.
The point is that artists need money as much as the rest of us (let’s not get into the issue of greed). Whether we like it or not, art is commerce and probably always has been, because people have to live and eat - and we’ve all bought into this idea. This means artists are entitled to the same protection as any other producer. You wouldn’t steal a chair, would you? You may think your emotional response to a piece of art is unique and special and it probably is; but does that give you the right to steal a song?
So, you’ve agreed to sponsor an exciting initiative.
You can now expect a logo or mention on the sponsored party’s website, marketing materials and at the event, and you might even get a mention in press coverage. Fantastic exposure.
At this point, you might start seeking coverage in your own industry’s ‘trade publications’, but here’s a warning:
In most cases, the media simply don't view sponsorships themselves as newsworthy.
For example, if you’re a legal firm sponsoring a craft festival, the legal press is very unlikely to cover it. There’s simply no story there, and no amount of padding will change that.
In fact, unless you have hard evidence that the sponsorship generated such success for your business that others in your industry could learn from it, the media probably won’t touch it. Worse still, if you try to PR it anyway, you risk causing long-term damage.
Editors receive literally hundreds of press releases a day, and a weak story could have them reaching for the delete key for every future press release you put out – even ones that deserve attention.
If you want to bring your company's achievements into the spotlight, by all means engage a PR professional, but keep in mind that while a well thought out approach may take longer to get up and running, it will yield much better results in the long term.
Of course, with a crack team of creatives and an unlimited budget, it could be argued that anything is possible, but as a rule: no story = no PR.