Tuesday, December 9, 2008

To be, or not to be…a flack. That is the question.

One of the sad side effects of this current recession is that traditional media in both print and broadcast are cutting editorial staffs in record numbers creating an influx of highly qualified and trained journalists on the street. Last week many of these journalists were reporting on the growing unemployment numbers and now they’ve joined them. Some are shifting their talents online…some are finding income as freelance writers, and some are dropping out entirely in hopes of finding more secure professions. But many, heaven forbid, are debating whether to join what they have always jokingly called, ‘the dark side’…public relations. A field, in their minds, infested by those who simply don’t get it…”flacks.” As expressed by Rob Walker, a New York Times columnist in his recent blogpost PR Corner:Tragedy as hook

And others… B.L. Ochman's blogpost

I for one, welcome these dispossessed journalists not as the elitists they might have once been, but as brothers and sisters that frankly we in the established PR world, need as much as they need jobs. The very thing that Walker complains about is the very thing that good journalists bring to PR…an inside understanding and empathy of what makes the media work…what makes a story compelling and why…and most importantly, how to persuade the media gatekeepers to listen. Or as we say around INK, “to make our client’s story the most interesting one that an editor will hear that day.”

That is not to say that all journalists have the skill or temperament that transfer well to pitching stories as opposed to writing them. Many will fail because of a lack of this skill set and because they simply cannot adjust to the creative demands and pressures of client expectations. In general however, good journalists, those I describe as good news people with an instinct for news, are extremely valuable and welcome.

But what of this question of name calling…i.e., flack. Is it really necessary and is it really so bad? According to Merriam-Webster, maybe not. Flack “One who provides publicity: as in press agent: an agent employed to establish and maintain good public relations through publicity.”

Doesn’t sound quite so ominous put that way, does it?

Peter Himler, a respected long–time pro in the PR profession actually titles his blog post, The Flack. Personally I am not a big fan of this tag, but it is what it is. By sharing best practices and exposing ethical lapses, it is my hope that "the flack" will follow "the hack" into semantic oblivion.”

Those remaining reporters and news directors that complain the most about PR people being “flacks” and not worthy of their time or even email acceptability, had best be cautious and perhaps a bit more respectful. That pitch which you just rejected out-of-hand might well be coming from a former colleague that used to reside in that empty cube next door.

No comments: