4 responses to “PR is dead, long live PR.”
-
PR was also dead as a term 10 years ago. Then the shiny new term was “perception management”. Somehow, PR has continued to stay alive while perception management is just a dim, distant memory!
If PR is going to successfully rebrand itself, it has to mean more than a change of name. It has to do with what we do, how we do it and (perhaps) why we do it.
As we move into a new world of connected media, I’d suggest that we need to start addressing the core fundamental of what we’re now trying to achieve. Once we’ve got that sorted, we can come up with the new “brand name”.
Doing it the other way around seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
What do you think?
-
Yep – you’re right. I saw Johnnie Moore use the phrase “definition deckchairs” today that nicely sums up the activity off shuffling round terminology and shibboleths rather than getting on with the business in hand…
But thinking about how what we do is changing has to be a priority right now. Whatever it’s called.
I don’t recall “perception management”. But it definitely deserved to die.
-
Should PR re-brand? Perhaps—but even the branders need to re-brand, going through the same sorts of things. No practitioner seems to be able to agree to a definition (even though I like my one best to the exclusion of everyone else’s—therein lies the profession’s problem).
-
Great article from The Economist. Wish they’d be a bit more transparent about who actually writes their stories, but I guess their argument for that is well established and a different story altogether.
Although it’s interesting to have a debate around etymology I can’t help feeling it’s missing the point. IMO you can only show real change through demonstrating, in the very least, competence. As The Economist piece quotes, you need to have a legitimate story. That’s so true. So when Jeff Immelt or Lord Michael Brown consider ‘PR’ people to be their closest counsel for reasons way beyond reputation management; for the ability to connect with audiences in a way that they increasingly demand to be connected (no mean feat), then audiences outside our industry will look to define what we do. You can bet The Economist will be there, pen in hand, if that happens. We’re not there yet, but the bright practices/consultants have an idea for what’s needed so I’d rather leave the naval gazing ‘we have an image problem’ brigade in the corridors of SOHO ad agencies and PR companies struggling to keep up. Talk is cheap these days, don’t you think?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.