The charter which is in response, in part, to the Inconvenient PR Truth campaign and represents the outcome of the roundtable session hosted by the CIPR this summer. The charter covers guidelines for best practice in three areas – Research and Planning, Relevance and Reputation.

The full announcement can be read here.

But as promised the responses can be found here Inconvenient PR Truth Second Survey Response Data (216) in their original state with the names removed so anyone can pull together their own analysis.

However for anyone who doesn’t have the time we have pulled together some slides which summarise the results of the majority of the questions below and can be downloaded here.

We have gathered input from a number of sources in the community as to what to ask and format and we are now ready (we think!) to launch. The survey can be found here

(full url http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/inconvenientprtruthrelevancesurvey2010).

As stated in the “Areas for further study” in the first report it seeks to build on the results of last year’s exercise by trying to ascertain more information about the following three areas:

Who is most affected by the issue

What are the main sources of the problem

What is the impact on media recipients in terms of time wasted

The survey data will be published on a Creative Commons basis with no branding or reporting bias whatsoever (without names and publications of course) so anyone can utilise the results in anyway they wish and so people can make up their own minds about the issue.

But the survey is only going to be of any value if we get lots of responses. To date any exercise (that we are aware of) that has tried to quantify and analyse this problem has been limited by the small number of respondents anyone has been able to achieve on their own. We hope that with the help of the PR and Media communities we can get a huge response so that the data can provide an accurate insight into the issue once and for all.

So please help us to gather as many responses as possible, as soon as possible. Our target date for completion is now early May.

If you have any queries about the survey please contact me at @AdParker

Thank you.

As of 7th February 2010 the 38 pages, articles or posts below have resulted in approximately 650 tweets (that weren’t by supporters of the campaign) and over 100 comments.

The animation has been watched over 3,000 times and the campaign site has had over 3,000 unique visitors from over 60 countries.

Campaign related or by supporters:

Inconvenient PR Truth website – related tweets – site, animation and here, bill of rights and here, research and here, opportunity not to be wasted, animation FAQs,

Vimeo video – related tweets

Wadds PR blog – Speed backs Inconvenient PR Truth campaign as Realwire reveals 1.7 billion irrelevant press releases sent each year – related tweets

Wadds PR blog – Inconvenient PR Truth Campaign plainly inconvenient – related tweets

Stephen Davies – Time to End PR pollution – related tweets and also here

Journalism.co.uk – Time to address waste – related tweets

Industry statement:

CIPR – CIPR response to “Inconvenient PR Truth” campaign – related tweets

Editorial:

PR Week – Industry backs new campaign aimed at cutting PR Spam – related tweets, here, here and here

Communicate Magazine – Press release spam – the PR Industry fights back – related tweets, here and here

Journalism.co.uk – Campaign backed by industry urges PR to cut irrelevant press releases – related tweets

Reputation online – Realwire leads charge to stamp down on PR spam – related tweets

PR Week – Professionals Lukewarm on Inconvenient PR Truth Anti Spam Campaign – related tweets

UK Media Blogs:

Mobile Industry Review – An Inconvenient PR Truth – related tweets

Gordon Kelly – An Inconvenient PR Truth

Chris Green – An Inconvenient PR Truth

72point.com – PR Emails what the papers say

UK PR Blogs:

Stuart Bruce – Experience and Training are What Counts – related tweets

Max Tatton Blog – How to Stop PR Spam – related tweets

Sean Fleming – Letter to the (Inconvenient) Truth Fairy – related tweets

Emily Cagle – Spam wars saving PR from itself – related tweets

Reputation Reputation Reputation – How to Improve Inconvenient PR Truth – related tweets

Waves PR – An Inconvenient PR Truth

Press for Attention PR – PR “Bill of rights” – An Inconvenient Truth

PNIQ – Porter Novelli Digital News 2nd February – related tweets

The Red Rocket – An Inconvenient PR Truth

Willoughby PR – The Inconvenient Truth about PR

US/UK PR Blogs:

PR Open Mic – An Inconvenient PR Truth – Enough is Enough – related tweets

For Immediate Release – FIR#522 (From 26 minutes)

For Immediate Release – FIR#523 (From 54 minutes)

US Media Blogger (German Blog):

Everything PR – The Inconvenient Truth about Bloggers and PR – related tweets

US PR Blogs:

Communikaytrix – An Inconvenient PR Truth or an Inconvenient Solution? – related tweets

Dave Fleet – Journalists prefer bulk email to personalised – huh? – related tweets

Flack Me – Irrelevant news releases threaten PR says British Video

Other

Bulgarian CIPR – A beginning or not?

CIPR President Jay O’Connor responds to the Inconvenient PR Truth campaign.

“There is value in the conversation Adam and his team have started and there is also something to be gained from looking at the factors behind poor targeting of media, including issues such as client expectations and systems of measurement.

“We would be happy to host a working session with practitioners, media, bloggers and the campaign founders to develop guidelines for practitioners, to complement our current Code of Conduct and the training courses on dealing with and pitching to media. The guidelines should be something practitioners and the media craft together with the goal of encouraging best practice – and we should get the input of those who do do it well – there are many practitioners who engage exceptionally well with those they wish to influence.”

The campaign is delighted that the CIPR want to take the issues raised in the debate forward and will be very happy to participate in the session/s suggested. The PRCA have also stated they are in favour of the initiative and we hope that they will participate in the suggested way forward from the CIPR.

In the meantime we will still be seeking to carry out more research into the issue as indicated in the report and any assistance would be welcomed.

The An Inconvenient PR Truth campaign has generated a considerable amount of debate about the issue of irrelevant press release emails or PR spam.

What prompted this campaign? Critics have called it a stunt, but as a small business RealWire was taking far too big a risk in raising this issue in this way – particularly given what we do – just to get 15 minutes in the spotlight. And then only to share it with competitors.

Conversations about PR spam

For a long time we had been listening to what journalists and bloggers had been saying about the issue of irrelevant press releases and observing that the discussions were always reactionary in nature.

They generally follow the same story: journalist or blogger reaches the end of their tether with a particularly annoying example of bad practice pushing them over the edge; online rant appears; PROs agree that the bad practice is unacceptable but nothing really changes.

None of the points raised are particularly new. It’s just that the internet and in particular social media has meant that reputation damaging rants are amplified in their impact.

Realwire wanted, along with our supporters, to start a constructive discussion around the issue. Despite the content and language being polarised, it has occurred, with some very interesting ideas already being generated and discussed around education, standards and technology to try and tackle this issue once and for all.

PR and media industries in turmoil

As we all know the PR and media industries are both facing unprecedented changes in the communications landscape. The, mostly, free nature of online reporting is leading the publishing industry to pressure journalists to deliver more content in less time.

Meanwhile PR professionals are under pressure to not only deliver coverage through traditional media channels, but to also engage with a wider range of influencers than ever before – from bloggers, to academics and the general public.

In this environment the relationship between the PR and Journalism communities is arguably more important than ever. But because both groups are time poor it is imperative that this relationship is as efficient as possible.

Journalists need interesting and relevant content, provided in a timely manner. PR professionals need to be able to identify and connect with the key influencers that are relevant to their organisations and clients in an equally effective way.

Seeking solutions

From the debate to date I have picked up on four areas that people seem to think could help address this issue.

• Social Media – with many PROs and journalists, not to mention bloggers and other influencers, now being part of social media networks, in particular Twitter, social media is already bringing the communities together. The asynchronous nature of Twitter allows PROs to follow journalists and understand their interests, while at the same time allowing journalists the option to follow back and engage if they see value in the relationship.

• Technology – this is an area that service providers and database companies need to invest in. We need to seek more sophisticated ways of matching PR content to recipient’s interests to make it easier to achieve higher standards of relevance in an efficient way and at the same time build in more safeguards to systems to prevent abuse.

• Education and training – there is a need for a shared understanding of what each group needs from the other. This understanding should then be codified to an extent in guidelines or a code of practice. Though perhaps not quite as dramatic as the campaign’s Bill of Rights, at their heart these guidelines should promote respect for each other and, in particular, respect for each group’s time and expertise.

• Measurement – the thorny, age old, PR issue of measurement requires revisiting once again I’m afraid. The industry needs to educate clients on the importance of relevance and influence, rather than just simple numbers, when measuring the impact it achieves. This should hopefully discourage clients from wanting to send releases to as many recipients as possible.

I suspect the likelihood is that the solution is probably a combination of all four of these areas and perhaps more. But the fact that the campaign has generated ideas such as these from the respective communities, fills me with optimism that the situation can be improved significantly.

If we don’t grasp this nettle though and start to address the issue of irrelevance, then the impact will continue to be felt on both industries’ financial bottom lines – through the waste of time and money, never mind people’s talent.

“While I applaud [the inconvenient PR truth] initiative, I’m not totally convinced about either the approach or if it will work. It also fails to mention the elephant in the room – the media database companies”

Perhaps we can learn from network theory? Media databases are a form of automation that promote mechanical networks. They enable PR executives to distribute press releases to lists of journalists with whom they have no prior relationship.

To follow the network argument through to its conclusion means building knowledge of the media that you’re targeting and forging organic relationships.

The rise of blogs and proliferation of traditional media means research is more important than ever. The answer lies in balancing the efficiency of databases while maintaining relevance and building organic relationships.

Where the Bill of Rights was concerned the word “demanded” was used in conjunction with the word “believe” as we had based the initial list of so called “rights” on public posts written over the years by journalists and bloggers and by feedback from the research. However this did not mean that we “know” that these are demanded by *all*. That is one of the things this campaign and the resulting debate is aiming to establish.

Secondly the title the “Bill of Rights” seems to have got some peoples’ backs up. Leaving aside whether we would be having such a fascinating conversation if softer language had been used we do not want this to be, as Will Sturgeon says in his comment on PRWeek, just a publicity stunt and this week’s bandwagon. So if people will help us we are offering to tear it up and start again. What should this be called? What should be in it? Should it represent both sides of this debate? Alternatively forget about this campaign and someone else take up the standard – CIPR, PRCA? What matters most is surely that having got this discussion started we don’t miss this opportunity.

30/1/10 Update we have added answers to many of the frequently asked questions and comments that people have raised in connection with the animation here, and the bill of rights here.

Journalists’ complaints about PRs are the same in 2010 as they were in the early 90s when I started my career as a reporter on a trade magazine.

We used to receive 400 to 500 press releases a week by fax and post.  90 per cent were complete bollocks. Nine per cent were on target but dull and were usually followed-up if we had time. Only one per cent (4 or 5 stories a week) would end up in print.  Our title was a name in a media directory organised by topic and was all too easy to add to a generic mailing list on the off chance that we’d cover a story.

I crossed over into PR in the mid-90s and joined the ranks of account teams building mailing lists using database systems to despatch hundreds of copies of press releases to the media each week.

Paper-to-email

Paper turned to email in the mid-90s but the direct mail driven mentality continued except now it was even easier to add a recipient to an email list.

But I’m optimistic. The PR industry is at a threshold. The distribution of press releases by email and wire prevails but the media is shifting to networks as a means of newsgathering. Bloggers and journalists are building trusted networks on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter and will begin to use these exclusively. Email will be turned off and PR professionals will need to earn their place in a journalists’ network through personal expertise and reputation.

But this won’t necessarily be a cure all for relevancy. People can abuse networks and spray their content around the web. But it’s far easier in the long term to be transparent and put in the effort to build a network.

Tackling the issue

In the meantime PRs are divided on the issue of press release spam either ignoring it altogether or placing themselves beyond reproach. And for their part journalists use the issue as a stick to periodically beat up PRs. Rarely does meaningful dialogue take place.

This is an issue that the whole industry needs to tackle. I commend Realwire for launching the Inconvenient PR Truth community. Agencies, clients, journalists, publishers and PR professionals need to join in this conversation to resolve this issue.

“PR spam is as contagious as chlamydia and has the same effect; it can cause sterility in the people infected. The only difference is that everyone in the PR world’s passed on a spam infection at some point, accidentally or not.

The best prophylactic is intelligence and research. Follow the guidelines on this site and you could help prevent the slow death of the PR industry from an overdose of laziness and stupidity.”

Read more of Mark’s views on this issue at PR Spam: The New Chlamydia?