4 ms·

Press releases are always written in a way that makes it as easy as possible for journalists to just, well, basically copy the text and just use it without modi

by arrrg 4y ago

Press releases are always written in a way that makes it as easy as possible for journalists to just, well, basically copy the text and just use it without modifications. That’s a press release writing best practice. Your goal is to match the journalistic writing style as closely as possible, all the while still transporting all the messages you want to transport. Make it easy for the journalist to be lazy. It has been this way since basically forever because PR writers know that journalists are under a lot of time pressure and often don’t even have the resources to write everything from scratch. So you offer them something that’s hard to resist … I guess the web has sort of muddied the waters there (with companies being able to publish press releases on their own websites) but the intended target audience of press releases are actually journalists. In the past companies usually had no way of publishing and distributing news about themselves on their own. (And, to be honest, press releases on their own website still aren’t the best publishing platform.)

ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
This is true. A lot of "stories" that are released under reporter bylines, are actually verbatim from the corporation or government agency. I wouldn't be surprised if the original text is copyrighted, so people can't play with it too much. Many years ago, an Australian magazine, called Crikey, did a series on Spin in the Media: https://www.crikey.com.au/topic/spinning-the-media/ https://www.crikey.com.au/topic/spinning-the-media/
- arrrg 4y ago
  Nothing to do with copyright at all. Reporters can do with the text however they please. There are no practical legal issues involved. It‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists, not legal enforcement of anything.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
    > It‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists I'm not so sure about that being the principal motive. I think it's actually a way to exert control. I remember discussions with our marketing folks. Pretty eye-opening. "Communication," in corporations, is really about controlling and shaping the message, and building the brand. You see these coordinated campaigns, all the time. Usually, they are efforts to control the vocabulary (for example, instead of calling camera flashes "flashes," we try to always refer to them as "speedlights," and get everyone else to use the same language). Also, you have things like entertainers starting to behave badly, just as their albums and movies are coming out, etc. I'll bet that publicists ask entertainers to time things like divorce announcements, with significant market events. It's really Machiavellian.
    - arrrg 4y ago
      I mean, sure, controlling the message is how you can call it, but that doesn’t mean the legal threats (or threats of any kind) are doing the actual controlling. When I say “it‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists” what I mean by that (and what I thought I had made pretty clear) is not that convenience for the journalist is the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is to get the messages about your announcement you want to have published published. The convenience is a stepping stone towards that destination. That way you exert control without force or threats. It’s the carrot. Which is not to say that threats are absent from corporate communication. Just not as part of press release writing and publishing.
      - ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
        But I wonder if, let's say, a media organization were to publish a "hit piece," based on the text, if you could send a DMCA notice to their hosting provider.
        arrrg 4y ago
        If you want a PR nightmare for yourself, then that’s how you create one. There is probably more than a century of tradition and expectations around how journalists can work with press releases. Whether companies could sue them for releasing press releases (it‘s in the name!) is in that light mostly theoretical. Because no one would sue.
        ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
        Agreed. What was it that someone once said (not sure who)? ”Never pick a fight with someone that buys ink by the barrel.”

by arrrg 4y ago

ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago

This is true. A lot of "stories" that are released under reporter bylines, are actually verbatim from the corporation or government agency. I wouldn't be surprised if the original text is copyrighted, so people can't play with it too much. Many years ago, an Australian magazine, called Crikey, did a series on Spin in the Media: https://www.crikey.com.au/topic/spinning-the-media/ https://www.crikey.com.au/topic/spinning-the-media/

arrrg 4y ago
Nothing to do with copyright at all. Reporters can do with the text however they please. There are no practical legal issues involved. It‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists, not legal enforcement of anything.
- ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
  > It‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists I'm not so sure about that being the principal motive. I think it's actually a way to exert control. I remember discussions with our marketing folks. Pretty eye-opening. "Communication," in corporations, is really about controlling and shaping the message, and building the brand. You see these coordinated campaigns, all the time. Usually, they are efforts to control the vocabulary (for example, instead of calling camera flashes "flashes," we try to always refer to them as "speedlights," and get everyone else to use the same language). Also, you have things like entertainers starting to behave badly, just as their albums and movies are coming out, etc. I'll bet that publicists ask entertainers to time things like divorce announcements, with significant market events. It's really Machiavellian.
  - arrrg 4y ago
    I mean, sure, controlling the message is how you can call it, but that doesn’t mean the legal threats (or threats of any kind) are doing the actual controlling. When I say “it‘s about making things as convenient as possible for journalists” what I mean by that (and what I thought I had made pretty clear) is not that convenience for the journalist is the ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is to get the messages about your announcement you want to have published published. The convenience is a stepping stone towards that destination. That way you exert control without force or threats. It’s the carrot. Which is not to say that threats are absent from corporate communication. Just not as part of press release writing and publishing.
    - ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
      But I wonder if, let's say, a media organization were to publish a "hit piece," based on the text, if you could send a DMCA notice to their hosting provider.
      - arrrg 4y ago
        If you want a PR nightmare for yourself, then that’s how you create one. There is probably more than a century of tradition and expectations around how journalists can work with press releases. Whether companies could sue them for releasing press releases (it‘s in the name!) is in that light mostly theoretical. Because no one would sue.
        ChrisMarshallNY 4y ago
        Agreed. What was it that someone once said (not sure who)? ”Never pick a fight with someone that buys ink by the barrel.”