‘Everyone’s very busy’: or why the Press Association doesn’t want tech stories
The latest edition of the emailed Fullrunner makes fascinating reading pretty much all the way through, notably for IDG’s assertion that on present trends it will earn more from online advertising than print.
But far more enjoyable is what happened when Peter Kirwan of Fullrunner (a former editor of Computing, so he knows what it’s like) rang the Press Association with a modest proposal.
The Fullrunner recently called up the Press Association newsdesk to ask if they’d like to send along a representative to Talking Shop. En passant, we explained one of the benefits of speaking at this event: namely, the subsequent increase in the number of suitably-crafted story pitches received from PRs.
nswered our call shall remain nameless for reasons which will become clear in a moment. He said (and I’m typing from written notes): “Sorry, mate, but we’re a bit cynical round here. We get so much rubbish from the f******. If you can get PRs to start sending decent pitches, I’ll show my arse in Burton’s window.”
We’re unlikely to witness this presumably magnificent spectacle. Pressed further, the hack in question told us that “everyone” was “very busy” and had “no time for going around speaking to people”.
I’ve done one of the Talking Shops, which I thought was well worthwhile. OK, so only a few of the pitches I received afterward were better, but any number is a start, right? And I met some people who had interesting stories to pitch; their problem had just been that they didn’t know who or how to tell them.
The next one will be David Smith, the Observer’s technology correspondent (who I’ve not met) some time in March. Sunday papers are probably the best place to be seen with tech stories… as long as they’re the right ones.
A side note: I don’t think PA has anyone who handles technology stories, as such. John von Radovitz does science and a fair chunk of medical science, but tech - I know - leaves him cold. For the sake of his sanity and your own, probably safer not to call. Which does leave the big question of whether PA needs that, and if so, what would they cover precisely?
- These posts might be related (the database thinks..):
- If the name fits... (26 May 2005; score: 48.38%)
- Here in Exeter, it's Ethernet madness (6 September 2004; score: 46.73%)
- Why I'm not reading PR emails to get news stories any more (5 January 2006; score: 42.85%)
![[Valid RSS]](wp-includes/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
February 23rd, 2005 at 4:28 pm
What is a talking shop? In this context, I mean.
February 23rd, 2005 at 6:12 pm
The PA could have hired a few tech journalists and provided The Register’s sort of service if it had wanted to, but IIRC their pay is so horrid no tech journalist would have touched it when our sort of stuff was fashionable — and now it’s not.
wg
February 24th, 2005 at 11:46 am
‘Talking Shop’ is an event where a journalist comes along (for free) to a (paying, to Fullrunner) audience and explains what their job involves, what the timescales and pressures are, and what sort of things work and don’t work for them. The sort of thing that you would think would be obvious, yet happens so infrequently it’s notable when it does happen.
February 24th, 2005 at 4:34 pm
Thanks for the mention, Charles.
Anyone interested can find out more about Fullrun and Talking Shop here: http://www.fullrun.com/calendar.html
Re: PA — The difficulty is essentially to do with the way in which PA carves up its reporters’ beats.
PRs need to tailor their stories around these beats/reporters: eg — Graham Hiscott (consumer affairs) is a starting point for B2C pitches.
List of PA hacks and beats (*very* well-hidden on their site) is here:
http://services.press.net/pressnet/mediapoint/index.jsp?include=contactUs&detail=who
Cheers,
Peter
Peter Kirwan
Co-Founder, Full Run Ltd
|| Tools For Tech Marcoms Pros || www.fullrun.com
February 24th, 2005 at 5:07 pm
On the other hand, the number and inanity of pitches shows no sign of subsiding and *any* contact to large numbers of PRs seems to result in more. It’s particularly bad if you make the mistake of pre-registering before something like 3GSM, when you can guarantee a thundering herd of email buffalo headed straight for your paddock. It would take the barest minimum of research for most of these people to realise that they’re talking to the wrong person… so while better pitches would be wonderful, the ‘more’ bit is really less than enticing.
R
February 24th, 2005 at 7:01 pm
Rupert — The parallel with the 3GSM media list made me come over all post-traumatic (I’m typing this from beneath the desk, wimpering softly…)
Does speaking at Talking Shop increase or diminish the amount of PR-as-spam you’re likely to receive?
My guess is probably neither. The PR agencies that rely heavily on PR-as-spam don’t tend to turn up to our events. In any event, PR-as-spam is a bit like the supporting cast of Shaun Of The Dead. . . a broken monster that will keep coming back, maybe until agencies and hacks get RSS feeds sorted. And even then. . .
All we do, every fortnight or so, is to hire a nice room equipped with a bar in central London, and start what might just become a useful conversation between a small number of real people who have clambered out from behind their desks for a few hours.
Sometimes, it works.
Peter Kirwan
Founder, Full Run Ltd
|| Tools For Tech Marcoms Pros || www.fullrun.com
February 24th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
Peter, I’d gladly come to one of these things. Once.
wg
(www.pelicancrossing.net)