Guest post: Can you trust a PR when they promise an exclusive?

I can’t say I’m suprised. Those rotten PRs! Moving an item around internally seems pretty run of the mill and why would they bother letting the PRs know. I would expect many PRs to keep mum about this as well. To my mind The Age behaved as many publications do and so did the PR agency. i would suggest if bothe were being decent, as opposed to typical, The Age should have been up front with Magnum and Magnum with DB. Kudos for the little guy for getting the front page though. Its turned out well for him – so at least there is one winner.

Ouch.

It might have been an honest mistake on the PR companies part, however I believe it was their responsibility to at least inform DB of the fact. Had you not by sheer luck come across the other article, your publication may have suffered some damage to its credibility.

Great recovery though, and great advice – exclusives aren’t worth the risk nowdays.

It also brings up the question of how controlable PR is as well.

Did you tell ’em you were giving ’em the cover and a commissioned pic for it? Many editors refuse to ‘play’, making PRs dance around in an infuriating ‘no guarantees’ guessing game.

Any PR that sets out to offer an exclusive to an editor and then offers it round is insane. Yes, you’re dead right – it’s partly our responsibility to GUARD your exclusive for you. If it’s a deal, it’s a deal.

But you’d have been better off talking to your rival magazine to find out how they got the story rather than other PR agencies, who will gladly burn a competitor’s relationship with an editor if they (sadly) can. Don’t speak to your rival? Tsk tsk, time to start.

I think the agency here could have been tighter and taken/guarded your exclusive more seriously if you mattered to them. Do you? But they also seem to have been pretty sloppy in working out HOW the media they were engaging with were going to treat the story and in setting/negotiating the parameters of the engagements for their clients.

So, for what my 2p is worth, I’d say you didn’t get intentionally screwed over, but you did possibly fall prey to some sloppy practice that would make me cautious about the way I dealt with that agency/exec in the future.

I’d rather, incidentally, have seen the agency’s account of this incident alongside the editor’s side of the story.

Congrats on a very good post Jen – it’s regrettable that this sort of article needs to be written at all and shows times don;t really change in some PR quarters….

When I was marketing editor of the Fin Review a gazillion years ago, a PR breathlessly offered me an “exclusive” interview with the US-based chairman of a mutlinational ad agency, visiting Australia. As I finished the interview and was leaving the agency in North Sydney, my counterpart from the Sydney Morning Herald entered reception. “Are you here to see….?” I asked. “Yep”.

When I confronted the PR over this “exclusive” turn of events, he offered this unforgettable, and unforgiveable, explanation: “Oh but Simon the Fin Review is the only national newspaper getting the story and the Herald is the only metro paper to have it”. The disturbing part of this was he actually thought this was a legitimate excuse. He is still a PR “practioner”.

I think you are being very charitable with your assessment of the situation.
My own experiences of exclusives include being told I have an exclusive AFTER an interview appeared in a rival publication. The PR’s explanation in this case was that “we did not think you compete with that publication,” which rather made a lie of there ever having been an exclusive on offer.

Jen,
First & foremost you should be commended for posting this and standing up for the truth in an industry were it is often tossed aside for a quick buk.
So as the PR for Vision Personal Training – obviously I lucked out here for the better and think the Cover looks amazing. I think in addition to abit of luck I have been upfront with Jen in my dealings with her over the last few months (I also scored the previous months cover with Samantha Wills – yet another exclusive).and this has shown in a strong presence of our client in the magazine, quality stories of someone on the rise will win out at the end of the day.
Now for me to put it straight up – unfortunately as PR’s – we have to cop it on the wrist when we have done something wrong … at all times we know when an article is running or at least have an indication – to play the dumb card and for Magnum PR to say that they were’nt aware – is ridiculous … I have been guilty of this tatic in the beginning of my career and the phrase live and learn taught me my lesson. I will probably anger PR’s but hey – it’s time we took ourselves seriously and immediate fault. I get that we need to get as much press for our clients in such a hard market but put the shoe on the other foot and think what Jen felt and the position she would have been should she not have had a back up – enough said.
Thanks Jen for your support and PR’s patience will bear you great fruits – as shown above for my client!

Hi there, Michelle from Magnum PR – one of the Directors of the company. I think this article raises some important points but I’d firstly like to clarify that we never broke the business exclusive.

We kept our word with Dynamic Business Magazine. We initially pitched a food story to Epicure in the Age which obviously has nothing to do with business. Epicure then notified us that they didn’t have space for the story so passed it on to an Arts Reporter. Again, nothing to do with business. We set up the interview and photo with this journo and she wrote the story. The article then appeared in the Metropolis section of the newspaper which typically covers entertainment, films, lifestyle, music and the arts. We were never told that it would also appear online in the My Small Business section.

We know how important it is to keep exclusives exclusive. It would be good to get other PRs comment on this – would you have done anything differently?

Michelle

Having worked in PR, I can see both sides of the story. It is very plausible that Magnum PR pitched an article to a different section of the newspaper and without their knowledge, the article ran in the business section, hence breaking the exclusivity agreement.

What we can learn from this as PR practitioners is if we have promised an exclusive to a business publication and we are pitching a story to a media outlet that includes a business section, to advise the editor of that particular section you liaising with that the story cannot run the story in their business section. Even so, we are relying on the editor of that section to honour that agreement.

In general, the PR representative should be following up on the story and know in advance what section the story will be appearing and on what date the story will run but at the end of the day, you cannot dictate to a media outlet what section they will run the story in unless you have advised previously that an exclusivity agreement is in place.

It is not in Magnum PR’s best interest to try and burn bridges or ruin relationships with editors of magazines. Journalists are PR’s bread and butter. At the same time, as soon as Magnum PR found out about the article running in The Age, a call should have been made to Dynamic Business Magazine and a sweetener such as an exclusive image, follow up interview in a few months or an exclusive interview with another business client or the like should have been made.

Jen, you sounds like a child who didn’t get her way! It’s not a PR’s responsibility to know what is happening behing the scenes at a newspaper. If a PR offers a story to one section of a paper in good faith, then what control does he or she have if that editor wants to move it or place it elsewhere? It’s not a PR’s job to run around and harrass editors to see where an article is going to end up. Grow up!

I disagree Carmen in that I do believe that it is PR’s job to know where an article will appear and I think Magnum PR did drop the ball on that. What bothers me about this article is that the ‘us and them’ mentality. PR and journalists should be working hand in hand together. Perhaps what Magmum PR has learnt from this is to try and build better relationships with the journalists they liaise with but in addition for editors and journalists to have respect for PR as well. It is not always the easiest of jobs speaking to journalists who can be quite rude at times and answering to demanding clients.

I think magnum PR could have simply stated that there is an exclusive element of this article for any business aspects of this story. When pitching the story post signing a deal.

Great post Jen and yet as a PR I have to agree there are many variables that can go really really wrong with offering an exclusive, especially to a long lead. I’d offered an exclusive for a rather famous billionaire type to The Deal once only to find the CLIENT’s marketing head set up an interview for him on A CURRENT AFFAIR! Bye bye PRs credibility!!! Bye bye great in depth, hard hitting business interview in The Deal. The marketing heads view – one is business, the other consumer so why should there be any conflict? Urgh! Yet the PR firm copped in the neck when the interview with The Deal fell over. I really feel for both you and Magnum but ultimately you came out of it with a great cover story, while no doubt Magnum was having a bit of ‘splaining to dooooo….

Great post Jen – always like to hear the stories from both sides of the fence, and often there’s too much red tape for larger publishers to let loose!

I hate to think it, but do you think they could have orchestrated the whole thing? Coming from a niche publishers, I’ve found some PR practitioners have the masstige mentality and think numbers and front pages of newspapers, rather than audience and focus for stories. Sometimes, it is all about exposure for them. Anyway, the cover turned out great!

“I went ahead and spent hundreds of dollars on commissioning an illustration for the feature, on the basis it was an exclusive cover story. Why not make a big deal of it?”

Why not indeed? I think as a nice gesture of good will and to mend any burnt bridges, Magnum PR should pay for the cost of commissioning the illustration. As Malkuth Damkar and I have said there should have been an exclusive element of this article for any business aspects of this story. Magnum PR were a bit sloppy in not following up with the journalists and not knowing what section the story would run.

Put your hands up if you agree 🙂

I agree with Carmen (Comment 9). Jen, you do indeed sound like a petulant child. The PR doesn’t run the publication and determine where something will or won’t run!

PR doesn’t run the publication but it is PR’s responsibility to ensure that an exclusivity agreement is not broken and it is up the media to honour that agreement.

I agree with Gillian’s comment that “PR and journalists should be working hand in hand together”. In fact, why not get rid of the journalists completely and get the PR folks to write the articles? Much better idea.

Good idea Tim but hardly original. If you read some publications of less integrity, the article has been lifted straight off the media release. Like it or not, journalists need to work with public relations representatives either in-house or at external consultancies in regards to organising interviews, obtaining images, studio or development tours and so forth. Now grab yourself an icecream and cool down :-p

lol – I thought you’d like that one 🙂 I know you are right and agree with what you are getting at – I just thought that the way it came out was rather amusing, and I can’t help myself when it comes to being facetious so no hard feelings I hope (was done out of mischief rather than spite!).

So let me get this straight.

You think your ‘business exclusive’ was broken and therefore junked your front cover because The Age published a breezy lifestyle focused interview with the bloke on its Metropolis page, and then republished the article on its MySmallBusiness website (even thought that was element was barely mentioned in the piece).

Did you actually read The Age piece before declaring that the promise to you had been broken?

No hard feelings at all Tim 🙂

I wasn’t suggesting that journalists and PR skip hand in hand down the street or hold hands and sing Kumbaya around a camp fire. In fact, the thought just creeps me out but there is no need to be antagonistic. I am not directing this at Jen or anyone in particular on this thread. Everyone is just trying to do their job to the best of their abilities with competing pressures.

I’ve worked in publishing, worked in public relations both in-house and at a consultancy and now freelancing as a journalist so I can see all sides to this story. Just call me a ‘Gill’ of all trades haha.

I’ve just discovered someone has eaten the last Cornetto. Not happy.

Great post Jen. Coming from the PR side I can appreciate both sides of the equation, as sometimes, things are beyond your control – such as Samatha’s comment about the client approaching media without advising the agency, or if breaking news means an exclusive needs to be pushed or pulled. However, in my book an exclusive is an exclusive and fundamental to ensuring that the wheels don’t come off and both sides end up with the outcome they want is COMMUNICATION.
As PRs we need to clearly inform our client of the strategy so their expectations are met and don’t railroad the process by talking to other outlets unbeknown to the agency. Importantly, we need to be clear with the media we are engaging as to what we have promised other outlets so they don’t get burnt and also can build a story that works for them. In this case if I was Magnums PR, I would have been more open about any exclusives I had secured with publications and the angle, ie business, food etc, so the media being engaged are aware of the parameters around the story. Hey, it may not have worked in this instance, but from our experience transparency and working collaborately with each journalists to help them build the story does.

In Magnum’s defence, it can be impossible to know what will become of a story once it’s been offered to a newspaper. I bet the bright spark who leaked the story of yesterday’s terrorism raid to the Oz did it on the proviso it wouldn’t be published until after the fact – but we journos often can’t resist getting the jump on everyone else, regardless of the consequences!

However, as a PR agency’s success depends entirely on its relationships, it would have been sensible for Magnum to keep a closer eye on this story. I’m sure Jen will think twice next time they pitch something to her.

Magnum owed it to DB to inform them what had happened – before DB found the offending article themselves. A boring, but nontheless vital, part of a PR agency’s job is to monitor relevant media. Magnum could have nipped this whole thing in the bud by getting to DB first and telling them the bad news about the broken exclusive…

“We journos often can’t resist getting the jump on everyone else, regardless of the consequences!” – This is where a journalist needs to show they have ethics. There is an honour system and journalists need to respect embargoes, exclusives and so forth. If a journalist broke one of my embargoes, a harsh call would have been put through to the editor of the publication either from me or my boss. I’ve had stories pulled from the web at 10pm at night that have broken exclusives. If this continues to happen, all exclusives and indeed interviews would be offered to their competitor. Unless the article is a one off and the editor wants to burn their bridges with PR, this doesn’t usually happen because the reality is that if it is a high profile product or personality you are promoting, the media outlet needs you as much as you need them. I don’t think a journalist would last long with this attitude because there are heavy consequences and what you need to remember is that it’s not always media who have the balance of power in the relationship.

As I have said previously, Magnum PR should have spoken to the journalist and confirmed where the article was going to be published. Of course things can change at the last minute and the journalist may not have time to notify PR but this is rare. Regardless the journalist should have been made aware of the exclusivity agreement.

All this saga says to me that Magnum PR needs to build better relationships with the media they liaise with and this situation would not have occured.

P.S. I apologise Mal Damkar for calling you Malcom!

As someone who states in the opening of her blog that she has worked in a daily newspaper, Jen, you should be very aware of how a large a newspaper like The Age works. No one in production is thinking about the exclusivity of a story – why should they? They are on strict deadlines and they just have to get the bloody story up there ASAP. \

It’s unfortunately, but the sad reality that your exclusivity agreement fell through the cracks. It’s not Magnum’s fault and not The Age’s fault. Such is life. stories fall over all the time – having a Plan B is an essential part of life.

As for your relationship with Magnum, it has been an unfortunate situation but I should hope not one that could potentially ruin an important relationship. It’s not personal… no one has “screwed” YOU or your magazine over. It just happened.

An interesting blog, Jen.

Wow, hot topic. I can see how both sides would feel. Working in PR, and understanding the importance of an exclusive for journos, it’s definitely a tough situation.

Jen, I can 100% understand where you’re coming from – it would be an extremely frustrating situation. However I can also understand where Magnum are coming from. If they are telling the truth (which I’m going to assume they are because I’m an honest PR person and I like to think that many other people in PR are too), then it really isn’t their fault. If they were told the story would feature in Metro, then that’s okay. If they were told it would be syndicated in the small business section, then they should have stopped that. I’m guessing they didn’t know…

The only way I would have changed this situation would be to notify Jen when the Fairfax small business story appeared – this shows honesty.

When it comes down to it – it’s a horrible situation for all!

A lot of really interesting responses, thanks 🙂
I think this proves these were points worth raising and this has been a worthwhile debate.
While it’s tempting to reply to every comment, I’ll stick to clarifying my thoughts. No, I don’t think that PRs can be expected to know exactly what’s going on behind the scenes of a large newspaper. However, if they can’t they shouldn’t promise, and if they promise, they should make the exclusivity clear to the other media being offered the story. I’m not sure this happened.
How or why it happened doesn’t change the fact that it was no longer an exclusive. Imagine if we hadn’t realised it had appeared in MySmallBusiness and run with it as an exclusive. How would that have made us look? And who would have been the one who had to justify that cock-up to the publisher? Me. If Magnum had let us know, that would have softened the blow a little.
Ultimately, we were very enthusiastic about this cover and consequently disappointed when we had to change everything at the last minute. Luckily for us we had the team and the back-up plan to come up with a great alternative.
Last but not least, this was never intended to be a PR vs. journalism debate (yawn) and anyone out there who has worked with me knows I have great respect for PR done well and enjoy very good relationships with PRs. That’s what it’s all about: honest and mutually beneficial relationships that are invested in by both sides. I know which side of the fence I prefer to be on though!
STICKS OUT BOTTOM LIP AND STOMPS OFF IN A SULK IN MANNER OF PETULANT CHILD 😉

Great post Jen. It is an unfortunate situation, and Magnum should have been upfront with you in terms of their media strategy and where DB fits in the overall picture. They may have not intended to break the exclusive (and I do feel for them), however they should have kept you in the loop regarding the whole process so you could make an informed decision whether you wanted to proceed or not.

When pitching exclusives I think the best approach is to be extremely clear with the journalist regarding the media strategy in order to manage expectations. For instance, when I pitch exclusives I am very clear that they understand the deal i.e. they have the exclusive for the channel and another publication has a business exclusive. If the journalist is not happy with the arrangement, then I will negotiate. At the end of the day, pitching exclusives should always be a win win situation for both parties and i always prefer quality coverage over quantity.

Working in TV News, this is in fact a common occurrence and has happened to both myself and many other colleagues.

I’d like to applaud Jen’s blog because it highlights something which a lot of people in the media have don’t always have the chance (or time) to raise. Often we’re assigned stories / projects with such a tight turn around we barely have time to reflect or have a debrief.

What I find quite difficult to understand is why PR agencies are in the business of ‘communicating’ but don’t always keep everyone in the loop at all times.

I think this particular incident showed a major breakdown in communication (after all Jen did mention she continually followed up with the PR agency about whether or not the story would be an exclusive).

Interestingly @word up quoted the famous Ned Kelly by describing the whole debacle “such is life”. To some extent I do agree with him/her as I don’t think this one isolated incident should permanently damage a media organizations relationship with a PR agency… unless of course the exclusive was Donald Trump, then maybe.

After all, the media game is such an incestuous industry – one damaged relationship could be the start of many more.

i guess the lesson here for anyone involved in the industry is not to promise what you can’t deliver. wonder how they explained the disappearing front cover to Max Brenner? probably told him the Age was a better outcome for him (even if accidental on their part)

To the idiots (Carmen and Dave i think) who ridicule this post as that of a petulant child. Grow up yourself! If you go back and read the article, she is giving an honest rendition of what happened, and invites constructive debate on the matter. She did not, despite being quite possibly more than right to do so, make a personal attack on Magnum PR in the way you did on her. And in the way I am on you. Please Troll elsewhere.

The crux of this problem seems to be the misuse of the word ‘exclusive’. To claim an exclusive because your story – which is essentially the same story that has appeared in a number of other publications/media – is the only business-based interview is a ridiculous overreaching. Now, I know that a small magazine like DB may not have the power to demand that a subject like Brenner speak solely to them, but why even pretend your story is an ‘exclusive’ when he has granted interviews to anyone his PR company has managed to sell him into? The title ‘exclusive’ should be reserved for those rare and memorable times when you have the sole story/interview. It’s a word that is way overused.

Exclusives should not be offered unless all of Mr Brenner and all his relatives and colleagues had been confined on a small island, and legal documents were procured from every other media outlet testifying that they would not publish an interview with Max Brenner..

Both agency and magazine acted with petty self-interest.

I can only hope this is all good publicity for the delightful and clever businessman Max Brenner, who was a very nice man and gave a very good interview.

Hack raises a good point: an exclusive should, IMHO, be just that! Splitting hairs between “business” and other types of exclusives muddies the waters.
But proper exclusives remain important. I cover technology for another small business publication and the other day I was offered a contributed piece that had already appeared in Dymanic Business! You can’t blame the PR for trying to get more mileage out of a story, but this stuff goes on a fair bit and makes editors keen to ensure the content they source from PRs really is going to represent something unique for readers.

I’d like to flip this around for a sec… Imagine a blog asking the question “Can you trust a journo when they promise to run the story”.

I would have kept the original cover; nobody reads the SMH small business section because it’s rubbish.

Your story highlights why this is: they just republish articles from any other sections of the paper and website that have the words ‘small’ and ‘business’ in them, often with no SME relevance or interest. I wonder if it even has an editor, or if they just use a search bot to aggregate the articles.

And give me a sexy, chocolate-coated bald man over a clichéd stiff in a suit any day… errr, magazine cover-wise, that is.

Nice point Simon. It’s not much of an exclusive if it’s a ‘category’ exclusive. Certainly not worth the angst you went through Jen.
Audiences aren’t locked into one category/medium/channel and we well know that newspapers can and will shift stories across their sections and categories — especially online.
We run plenty of ‘exclusives’ in titles we produce, though we don’t brag about it on the cover/front page/homepage.
Now here’s the commercial question: if you had a proper exclusive with Max Brenner on a small biz mag, what news stand boost would you get, really?
Best exclusive that did shift units was a britpop band doing a global exclusive with The Big Issue in the 90s.

I LOVE the idea of Roger’s question – is trust, indeed, a two-way street?

Roger and Alexander: Yes, absolutely it is. I keep trying to make this point (perhaps not successfully) but an open, honest, two-way relationship between journos and PRs is the key and I have many of these. Petty name-calling and saying one profession is ‘better’ or needs the other more is just pointless if you ask me.

In my naivety of how the mechanics of PR works I have some observations/questions:
* how can a PR agency offer an “exclusive deal” when as all the posts say the actual placement is out of their control and in the hands of the editor of the publisher
* it appears as though the PR agency thought “the deal” was with Epicure when clearly “the deal” was with The Age (well it appears as though it stayed within The Age’s editorial remit)
* was there “a deal” or was a phone call made making an offer that was interpreted as a watertight deal

It appears as though such deals are as good as the paper they are written on – there WAS a written agreement wasn’t there? Maybe Samuel Goldwyn best summed it up all those years ago with “a verbal agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on”. Caveat emptor.

I’d like to jump in here and point out that no-one’s perfect, least of all DB in how they run their editorial. Most PRs who’ve dealt with DB would know that there’s a hint of ‘cash for comment’ in this magazine. If you’re not advertising in the special upcoming feature then don’t even think about getting any editorial coverage, even if your client is a leader in the field and has some topical issues and points to offer.

While Magnum PR isn’t perfect, neither is DB. You can’t criticise one organisation for how they conduct business when your approach ain’t that great either.

Janice: that’s a very BIG accusation! Unless there’s proof (an email perhaps, one that hasn’t been doctored)?
Most editors I know would go ballistic at such a suggestion… though you it’s unfortunately rather common for ad sales to attempt to apply pressure on editorial.

Been there, have the scars.

Tim Burrowes: perhaps this new topic needs a new story or at least a new thread?

Not so long ago, when you were still at B&T the publication implied content-for-ads / ‘cash for comment’ was rife in the SME publication segment… what say you now?

That is absolutely not true Janice and if you would like to raise that with the magazine you should do, and under your full name with your company details and contact details. Editorial for DB is commissioned on its merits. Take the August issue as an example. Vision Personal Training and Max Brenner are not and are never likely to be advertisers, neither are any of the companies in our top green businesses feature, or the authors of the IT procurement feature, the printer feature, the web analytics feature, the personal branding feature, the groups and organisations feature or indeed the AIMIA feature. There are only three features in this issue written by people from organisations who advertise with us so your suggestion of cash for comment is libelous and untrue. If you would like to discuss this further you are welcome to call or email me.

Just responding to Janice’s post. I have to say I totally disagree with your comment. Our agency, The PR Group, has secured a lot of in depth feature stories for our clients in the publication and all of these have been based on the newsworthiness of the pitch, not advertising spend. The editorial team in my book are fantastic to work with as they are open to new story angles and you can really collaborate on story ideas.

I too have to jup on and say I have dealt with DB and Jen many many times and have always had great dealings here in terms of editorial and none of my cleints advertise at present – this comment is silly – and I know this is not how DB runs it’s business ….

Me too – we’ve just had a byline placed with DB and it was because of high quality input from our client not advertising dollars. This story/post/debate is certainly a hot one!

Cash for comment is the cry a lazy PR makes.

Janice, you’ve offended not only a good editor, but also a lot of really hardworking and credible PRs in saying the only way they get stories in Dynamic Business is to pay for it. Tut Tut.

Let’s not confuse advertising and PR. I work with placing stories that are credible to not only my client, but also the publication covering the story.

When I pick up the phone to a journo I’m not in the business of pitching in heard before key marketing messages, but instead what I believe to be a good story.

Daily I both successfully pitch and am refused.

One thing I always am is prepared. By that I mean I’ve thoroughly and in a well-researched manner drummed up an angle, am across the topic, know my client’s business, and know what journo usually writes about.

Importantly, I know the publication. I figured for every publication there is a proud editor. Decency and smarts has me taking the time to read it.

I’ve seen the us and them thing come up quite a bit in blogs, articles and even in this link. By following a few simple guidelines to PR I don’t often come across this problem.

Finally, be interested in what you’re doing. If you’re not, the journo sure as hell won’t be.

Jen,

Does your publication run advertorials? If so, what is your disclosure policy?

Cheers

Sir G: I don’t think this is relevant to the original post and while we have nothing to hide, I don’t think this is the forum to discuss our editorial and advertising policies. If you have a relevant reason for wanting to discuss this then I’d be more than happy to speak to you. You can email me at jen.bishop@dynamicbusiness.com 🙂

But you *are* already discussing them here at #45.

You’re also quite happy to use this forum to name and take another business to task over it’s conduct, but you’re not too keen to have that scrutiny publicly bought to bear on yours.

You are also happy to claim slander is taking place yet when given an opportunity to publicly address that, you don’t. Thought-provoking at the very least.

I would also observe that not being open about your advertorial and disclosure policy, here, does not bode well for what that might actually be. i.e. it doesn’t sound like you’re disclosing it in the mag itself. If you were, it would be a simple matter to address my question here.

Advertorials are a matter for our sales team rather than me, and off the top of my head there have only been two in DB in the past 12 months which were strapped ‘Advertorial’ or ‘Special Report’. We don’t recommend our advertisers run advertorials but, if they want to, we insist they are clearly strapped.

As I stated in #45, editorial, which is different, is commissioned by the editorial team on its merits. We do have byliner guidelines for editorial contributors which state, among other things: “All byliners are subject to editing to style and final versions are not made available for client/PR company approval. Byliners should read as unbiased expert commentary on the relevant topic and not as advertorial for the company. The company may be mentioned once or twice in passing, but there should be no obvious product endorsement.”

Sir G: I hope this addresses your, albeit indirect, suggestion that we have something to hide.

Jen,

Thanks.

It seemed a reasonable question to ask under the circumstances. The intent of it wasn’t to be antagonistic but in posing in some questions in direct way it’s hard to avoid sounding that way.

I could have buried it in some sneaky obsequious comment along the lines of “very serious allegation – I’m sure Jen can defend the magazines editorial stance!”
and then invited you to do so. But that seemed dishonest.

Cheers

My pleasure. When I saw you had a balanced view on both sides of the argument I realised you weren’t being antagonstic for the sake of it 🙂

I’ll have a double choc chip with one of those flakes stuck in it. And hundreds and thousands too. Will this friday ever end?…….

Do you think it’s because Twitter’s not working too well today?!

Comments posted on this one single blog post on Mumbrella: The Next Big Thing Online

Lots of opinion here. My thought, having worked on both sides, is that when anyone mentions ‘exclusive’ – run! Agreements like this should only be entered into between two people who have a working relationship and understand what each means when discussing ‘exclusive’.

The fact that some have admitted to getting it wrong earlier in their career – is of concern. Nobody early in their career should be given the opportunity to negotiate anything as controversial as an ‘exclusive’.

Happy weekend everyone! My prediction for it – the fastest on the day will win on Sunday!

Fair points, but I think Max Brenner is the winner. He still gets a run with a great pic! I now know who this guy is.

I agree with Lotta that the “us and them” mentality is ridiculous. PR has always been a logical career option for journos and the reality is we are all communciations professionals. As we can see from some of the posts here, some people even go back and forth between the two during the course of their careers. It’s about time the handful of journos who still view PR people as being nothing more than “evil gatekeepers” wisened up. Good on you Jen for kicking off a sensible discussion about what’s right and wrong.

As a PR who has offered many exclusive deals on stories I have been let down by journalists many times. Most recently with a major glossy mag who we did an “exclusive’ deal with, only to have them not run the story due to “lack of space”. We were gutted to say the least having spent weeks with multiple interviews, allowing access to the story that other journos just did not have and then we got nothing… not even a teeny tiny piece.. just a breezy email saying “Oh yes, we ran out of space so the editor bumped it”. Clients, my team and I all devastated and really angry- try explaining to a client that a magazine “runs out of space” for their exclusive, heavily negotiated story. So yes as a PR I am cautious of exclusives but categorically keep them exclusive when I offer them despite the same courtesy not being extended to actually run the stories by the media.

MIMI – i empathize with the predicament this may have left you with in terms of your client. But anger? I’m not even sure a staff writer gets ‘angry’ when his/her story gets spiked due to a lack of space. There are only so many pages in a publication – always far less than news and stories in the world. Not sucking eggs here – but it’s the Editor’s duty to constantly evaluate which stories serve the best to keep the reader informed/entertained.

I figure if you’re not dealing with the likes of MJ passing away unexpectedly – no story’s ever a guarantee. Just think how ‘angry’ Farrah Fawcett must have been with her lack of coverage compared to the prince of pop.

I think in general Australian media is way too obsessed with ‘exclusives’. It strangles open and interesting coverage and it’s just rather childish.

I work both in journalism and PR and the general lack of trust on both sides is what leads to these tricky situations. And in defence of PR, very very often we have set up important extracts or interviews, often forced to have them as exclusives because of the publication, only to have them bail on it at the last minute. So the frustration goes both ways.