Three months after our first blog post on journalists’ pet peeves, we felt there were many more “mini lessons” to be shared.
The team also started developing the habit of bookmarking tweets every time they came across a pet peeve from a journalist about something a PR or company representative had done that was upsetting, inconsiderate or plain ridiculous.
The result? We’re going to be providing more regular updates that will hopefully help anyone working in PR to better understand how journalists operate.
Check out our second batch of journalist pet peeves on Twitter:
You work for your client. But the mentality should also be that you work for the journalist too. You need to help them do what they need.
It’s probably a good idea to confirm the gender of the journalist if you are unsure from the name alone.
This tweet reveals an ethical issue within the PR and journalistic community. Unfortunately, some journalists do take money in exchange for articles. Lesson: real journalists will never be bribed. If you are looking for an advert(orial), then find out what the right channels are.
Like Michael Smart often says, it’s OK to follow up. If you are 100% certain of the relevance of your story and did the research – make your conviction shine through in your follow-up. However, you have to do your research.
In this case, it seems the polar opposite is true. Not only was there zero research done, but a number of lines were crossed despite actual feedback. Note that if you are exceptionally inconsiderate your brand or your name may be mentioned – and shamed.
Again, journalists work for their audiences and their publications, not for PRs or their companies. Understand them and their process.
Full press releases go in emails. Some journalists have expressed they do not mind being pitched via Twitter or LinkedIn, but probably that’s not the place to include a full press release.
You might have seen articles written by journalists from years ago. Don’t assume they are still writing about the same things. Do your research!
Not much else needed. Do like Robin says. Surprise and delight people.
If you are going to compliment or flatter a journalist, there are probably better ways to do that than focusing on the spelling of their tweets. But it did catch his attention, for the wrong reason.
What can we say? We are not huge fans of wires, although we understand they have their uses. A personalised message is always more valuable and you could save yourself some embarrassing moments.
Similar to wires, mail merge services can also result in unintended consequences.
Wrong name. Wrong start to an email. Wrong tone.
Check before pitching op-eds. Should you be pitching op-eds to that publication or journalist?
Not really a pet peeves about PRs, but we thought it was a nice inclusion. It’s an accurate reflection of the harsh conditions under which journalists operate (no time) and why they can’t give individual feedback to most PRs getting in touch with them. Thank goodness there’s Twitter to learn from though!
