Take a deep breath before pitching to bloggers

For better or worse, many PR practitioners use media relations as their model for blogger relations. In this scenario, the question they ask is not "what's best practice in blogger relations?" It's "how is blogger relations similar or different to media relations?"

Well, here's one difference that should be apparent to all. Make a ham out of a media pitch, and you'll damage your relationship with the journalist, but the only people who'll know about it will be you and that journalist. Make a ham out a blogger pitch, and they're likely to tell the whole world. Witness recent posts from Brian Oberkirch and BL Ochman.

That's right. Your own bad pitch will appear in the social media monitoring report that you will have to prepare for and deliver to your client. And then you have to explain it. Ouch.

So, my tip for getting positive results in blogger relations is this: take a deep breath before you pitch. If there is any chance at all that you've not addressed what really makes that blogger tick, then revise your pitch or bin it.

Update: a typo has been corrected. The content is otherwise untouched.

Published 11 April 2007 08:26 by Steven Noble

Filed under: Blogger relations

Comments

• 

  Brian Oberkirch said:

  Hi Steven.  I get kinda lame pitches all the time, but I didn't post this quote just to be a weenie.  I really thought it demonstrated a radically different perspective on the site, one that the pitch lingo brings to light.  They see my blog as a 'vehicle for news delivery,' and that just strikes me as so not the point.  
  April 10, 2007 22:51
• 

  Ryan Peal said:

  This is spot-on Mr. Noble on a variety of levels.  Getting people to first realize this is a whole new sector if you will versus an extension of what people know will go a long way.  
  April 11, 2007 00:51
• 

  Michael Tangeman @ Media Mindshare said:

  "What really makes that blogger tick ..." is the key.
  
  But, it's also the key to successful media relations. I harp on and on about the importance for media relations professionals to know an understand what's inside the journalist's head. Not just the profile of the publication and the types of stories that particular journalist writes, but what kinds of pressures they work under -- regular deadlines, shrinking news hole because of dwindling advertising, staff cuts and hiring freezes that have doubled their workload. And, the particular quirks of a particular journalist -- what irks the holy s__t our of them, what are their bugaboos, etc.
  
  In that sense, blogger relations is not all that different. Except, of course, that if they're not under a deadline to produce a piece as part of the normal quota of stories that an editor vets and for which they get paid, they might find a blogger         with too much time on his/her hand that will simply take the pitch itself and -- if it's lame -- turn it into a story itself, making for embarassment with the client.
  April 11, 2007 19:33
• 

  B.L. Ochman said:

  Before I was a web strategist I did PR for many years. So I know the art of the pitch from both sides.
  
  After you take that deep breath, ask yourself "Who cares?" and if you can't answer that with certainty, don't hit send.
  
  And please, please, talk to me like we're both people. Don't pitch! Inform. Yes, they're different.
  
  I use info all the time from PR people and press releases that get the story right. I quote a Nielsen Buzzmetrics release today.
  
  I was nice, I didn't name the person or the agency who sent me that pitch you noted.
  
  If you read that post, you will know what I look for in an email -- for it to be information, not a pitch.
  April 11, 2007 20:34
• 

  vaspers the grate said:

  In general, I reject all pitches that come to me in blog comments or emails.
  
  I have people wanting to pay me for running an ad in a specific high traffic Vaspers post.
  
  I reject them, because the ad links to a site that doesn't have enough contact info, has low credibility.
  
  Pitching to bloggers? A risky venture, IMHO.
  
  Better to interact with bloggers and help them with good advice and insight. If you have something to sell, make it a low priority.
  
  Focus instead on contributing value to the blogosphere.
  April 11, 2007 21:03
• 

  B.L. Ochman's weblog - Internet and corporate blogging strategy, and online marketing trends, with news and commentary said:

  Ok, time for another "how to pitch a blogger post." And really, PR folks, there are lots of you I respect, like and even count among my friends. But oh boy, the ones who are bad are awful. Steven Noble at Hill & Knowlton's Elbow Grease Blog
  April 11, 2007 21:05
• 

  Steven Noble said:

  Yes I noticed you both didn't name the practioner. It was all quite reasonable.
  
  I also like the distinction between pitching and informing. To be frank, pitching is always going to be part of the thinking, especially when there's a new announcement and you're charged with getting the message out. However, I agree: you get far more sustainable results when you're not "all in a hurry" and instead are focused on building relationships and sharing information (informing and being informed).
  April 11, 2007 21:07
• 

  Jeremy Pepper said:

  Interesting, but a few problems that I see immediately. First, it's not pitching or informing, but reaching out to be part of the conversation.
  
  I am somewhat surprised that I wasn't contacted, though. I've written about the Nokia program three times (run by Communicano), and have the phones. But, that's another discussion.
  April 12, 2007 01:06
• 

  Steven Noble said:

  Well, yes and no. Being part of the conversation -- for example, by having a blog like this one -- is essential, and in the long run far more powerful. However, the pitch is not going to go away, and nor should it if it's managed respectfully and artfully. The real challenge is in stopping all the bad pitches...
  April 12, 2007 02:25
• 

  Jeremy Pepper said:

  Well, that's my point. You think of it as pitching, you lost the battle. You think of it as reaching out to the community, you're half-way there. If you think of it as merely pitching a new media stream, well, all the pitches will be bad. End of story.
  April 12, 2007 03:12
• 

  Steven Noble said:

  OK, I gave myself a day to think about it before responding, but Jeremy I have to disagree with you.
  
  It's not a "battle" as you put it, but the only honest word to describe this part of what we do is "pitching".
  
  Let me start by acknowledging that reaching out to the community without a pitch is also an important part of what we do. It should be at the heart of PR practice. It's why I have this blog and my personal blog. Both involving very little pitching. They involve conversations.
  
  However, if I send an email to a blogger saying "I notice you've participated in gadget review programs in the past; would you like to know about our espresso machine review program?", it's a pitch. To call it anything else would be, er, spin.
  
  Likewise, when I used to a freelance journalist, I'd often call magazine editors and say something along the lines of "have I got a rip-snorter of a story for you mate". It was a pitch.
  
  The system allows any of us to run for parliament, but in the end elections are about a handful of parties and candidates pitching their political story to us. Corporate writers pitch their services to us, as do job-hunters. Our clients pitch their products and services to their customers, and we open doors for them by nurturing their reputations.
  
  It's pluralism at work, and it's an essential part of our work.
  April 12, 2007 20:38
• 

  ' + title + ' - ' + basename(imgurl) + '(' + w + 'x' + h +') said:

  PingBack from http://blog.netmind.ru/2007/04/18/58
  April 18, 2007 06:48
• 

  Mediahead - ???????? ?? ?????????? media. ????????????????-??????????????, ??????????, pr, ????????????, web 2.0, ????????????????, ???????????????????? ????????, ????????????????. said:

  PingBack from http://mediahead.ru/?p=170
  April 19, 2007 07:37