Ground-breaking news: How to be the journalist's true friend

Can journalists and PR people ever really be friends? Mainstream metro daily journalists are driven by their editors to produce a certain kind of content. They are not there to promote your product but to provide controversy, humour, human interest or some other parochial factor that aligns with editorial policy.(This differs from the 'op-ed' opinion based columnists who are more like bloggers.)
If you, as a PR person, bombard a business or general news journalist with product-focused media releases, you are going to get the flick. You, and more likely your client, then get upset because your perfectly crafted words and ground-breaking world first announcements have been rejected. Product releases belong with the trades, unless they truly are sensational, ground-breaking world firsts.
It's a better strategy to offer your favourite journalists a real story at any time - even when it doesn't apply directly to your client. And even to offer journalists stories you've identified when they're not related to your clients at all.
The problem is of course that your clients want you to send product focused releases - so send them you must. What I find works for me is to send the release but include in the body of the email a note that talks about how the content of the release could fit in a real story - whether this is because it's relevant to the news of the day or because it could become part of a larger feature story. This is hard work - and you must convince your client of its value. That's a whole other story :).

Why journalists are important

I read the gorgeous Simon Small's blog and couldn't resist a rant on my favourite topic.
As I commented to Simon, I agree that social media is of course another PR outlet - because PR is not just media relations, it's the whole shebang of getting a message across to people using any medium. But there are a few differences and coming from a background of old school journalism i feel kinda sad that trained journalists may not be perceived of value up against the flood of bloggers. The biggest difference is that journalists are trained to report a story more or less without prejudice (this argument can take place separately LOL) , whereas bloggers ALWAYS have prejudice....
Journalists are paid to to present their story from many viewpoints, and because they get paid they can hone their message to give it depth and/or entertainment value. Eg, i would be deeply saddened, even distressed, if the Australian Financial Review could no longer employ great journalists because of a lack of ad revenue. IMHO - and as I'm actually building a business based on Simon's premise that the web allows you to control your message, this is not self-serving at all -- trained journalists can't be replaced by casual bloggers unless the whole thing comes down to money. It's always been said that people get the politicians they deserve; much as i love and adore the social networks - i hope we are not going to get the newspapers and other media outlets we deserve if all their ad revenue goes where the eyeballs apparently are.

Further, yes you can promote your product online rapidly using self-publishing tools combined with DIGGing, Google News etc -- but you still need the skills of a GOOD or even GREAT PR person to manage your message - it's not just about the relationship with a journalist, it is multi-dimensional. Somewhere along the line you want someone to buy your product - Simon does and I do. Somewhere along the line you need to close the deal. I'm interested to see how the wonderful world of social media will wend its way -- inevitably towards that sale!
Thanks, Simon, for getting me going with a real blog!! Mmmwaaah xl

Not everyone is attached by the umbilical to Facebook

According to this survey, the internet has surpassed newspapers as a source of national and international news for the first time, with only TV still attracting more news viewers. I find it surprising that TV continues to lead, though in the sub-30 bracket the internet and TV are neck and neck. (This is a reminder that not everyone is attached by the umbilical cord to facebook!!) So where would you spend your advertising dollars in this scenario? If this survey spells impending doom for newspapers, where does that leave advertising agencies, still pumping out the media spread of TV, print, bus shelters and cinema ads, with a continued uncertainty of how to milk the millions of online consumers. Online consumers like control, they are a breed apart. They make agencies accountable for every click and purchase. Is 2009 the year of the search engine marketer?