Needle in a haystack

One aspect of PR practice which is arguably changing as a consequence of the rise of new media is that of evaluation and measurement. The question of how to measure the impact of PR has long troubled PR practitioners, because how can one evaluate something as diverse and intangible as public relations? This question has become even more difficult to answer after the “new media revolution” has propelled an endless number of new channels, thus creating an “information overload” that is difficult, if not impossible to handle.

Traditionally, evaluation of PR has included methods such as counting total media cuttings however, nowadays, PRPs are struggling to find a way to evaluate new media because it is simply too much information to analyse. At a recent PR and media conference covered by PR Week (9 March), PRPs debated how to monitor new media. Some argued that monitoring and evaluation were no longer useful, while other stressed that PRPs should steer away from attempting to monitor all coverage, and instead focus on those channels that have the most influence. It is not only the massive amount of websites and blogs that make evaluation and measurement problematic, but also the fact that stories now have greater “longevity”. For example when a TV programme is put online after it has been broadcasted, the programme can be viewed several weeks later, which makes it impossible to measure viewer ratings. As Ben Cordle, marketing manager at FHM said:

We used to say that yesterday’s news is tomorrow’s fish and chips. But viewers can now find content weeks later, in it is still relevant

One issue that was not raised in the debate, but one that caught my mind, is the issue of proving PR’s worth. It has always been difficult for PR practitioners to demonstrate the value of PR as a result of the difficulties in measuring and evaluating PR. I have noticed, after looking at different PR consultancies’ websites that PRPs tend to prove the value of their PR campaigns by putting a value to broadcast and press coverage. Brave PR, for example, states that their SPAR campaign resulted in national TV and newspaper coverage, with ad equivalency of £72, 000.

However, if PRPs are struggling to evaluate PR as a result of new media, I suspect they will probably find it increasingly difficult to prove the value of their PR campaigns. If they lack overview over how much exposure their campaign generates, then how can they “prove” its value? I suspect the solution will be to put a value only on those publications that have the most influence. It will certainly be interesting to see how the industry will solve this. What do you think?

15000 websites 'wear' the virtual red ribbon to support World AIDS day

The expansion of new media, and not to mention the explosion of social media (blogs, MySpace etc) has without doubt propelled quite a heated debate about to what extent this new technological revolution poses a threat to the PR profession, and how the industry shall approach these new technologies.

Several authors have written about the internet and its opportunities; Alison Theaker writes in The Public Relations Handbook that there is no reason to believe the internet should do away with the PR function, but is simply a faster and more efficient way to disseminate information. Joseph Fernandez, author of Corporate Communications: A 21st Century Primer also highlights the many advantages the internet poses, as a cost-effective, user-friendly and wide-reaching information resource. Both authors offer a range of tips about how PR people can use the internet as a communication tool. Although their books were published in 2004, which is not that long ago, with the speed of new technologies there should be no surprise their useful tips are nowadays taken for granted. Today, there is no doubt the internet is an integral part of PRPs communication practice.

However, the debate is not dead, as a matter of fact, it has intensified with the expansion of social media (the current estimated size of the blogo-sphere is now 60 million). The debate echoes the one that rose with the birth of internet - there seem to be this uncertainty within the PR industry about how to approach and take advantage of web 2.0. A lot of questions are yet to be answered: Is social media offering a new business model or is it just another mechanism for connecting with consumers? (PR Week 23 Feb 2007) Should PROs fundamentally redefine how they manage their clients? How much influence and power do bloggers have, and should PRPs build a relationship with them? (PR week 9 Feb 2007) Is social media badly overvalued? (PR Week 17 Nov 2006).

The list of questions is endless, which is why I found PRWeek’s article (9 Feb 2007) featuring how Edelman Interactive successfully managed to generate massive online buzz around the World Aids Day, both interesting and promising. Interesting because it explained in detail how PROs can actively engage with new audiences through sites such as MySpace, and promising because it suggests that PRPs have discovered the potential of social media and is in the process of taking advantage of its opportunities. Edelman designed a virtual red ribbon as a clickable icon that supporters could “wear” on their website, MySpace profile or blog. To directly appeal to young people, a personal profile for the trust was set up on MySpace, which linked to the World Aids Day’s website. Edelman also set up an official partnership with MySpace, resulting in an eight-day promotion on its homepage with a link to the World Aids Day site. More than 15,000 virtual red ribbons were “worn” on blog sites (go to worldAIDSday.org to get your own virtual red ribbon to wear on your website), and 136 million people were estimated to have seen the MySpace page, as a result of the campaign.

These results arguably indicate that new media poses a range of opportunities to reach new audiences. I bet that in a couple of years, all the questions above will be answered and that Edelman Interactive’s strategies will be fully integrated into PR practice, just as the internet is today. However, the debate will not die. PR practitioners will continue scratching their heads, as new technologies will create new threats or opportunities (depending on the eye of the beholder) to PR.