In terms of building out your brand equity and thought leadership getting coverage in the media has always been one of the staples of public relations. Despite our evolving reliance on the Web, people still see traditional 'news outlets' as an indicator of relevance.
Within this context print and television have always been the preferred media catches for most PR people. The reasons are pretty simple, both mediums reach a lot of people and the content can be re-used. When you visit most corporate Web sites you'll find a 'news coverage' section listing recent articles or videos related to the company. I've always said that collectively an organization's news releases and news coverage paint a picture of just who they are (and Twitter and blogs don't replace this reality). Whether I'm a customer, investor, or potential employee, a review of their news releases and media coverage is a huge part of how I better understand an organization.
Radio has never really mattered much to PR folks (and I include myself in this). The reason yet again is simple. The reach is limited (ie. smaller audience) and the content expires almost immediately. With print and television you can simply call up the media outlet and get reprints or video clips of the interview or article (at a fee of course). With radio though I don't think such services are readily available.
So basically with radio the history has been that you reach whatever audience is listening at that moment in time and then that's a wrap. Even with radio now streaming their shows it doesn't really change the model.
Radio content, for lack of a better word, has an almost non-existent shelf life when it comes to brand building.
Some outlets, Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh, break this mold and ascend to the status that print or television usually holds, but the examples are less than a handful.
The question that I think is interesting is whether PR people start to rethink the value of radio when it comes to brand? I like listening to the Michael Harris show on CFRA. Now I'm not a radio guy, when I'm driving I'm usually listening to mp3s. In addition, I can't stand commercials, they drive me nuts (and radio is filled with commercials - it almost seems like there are more commercials than radio content most of the time).
What I really like about what CFRA has done is that you can now download all their shows in mp3 format right off their Web site. Which means that I don't have to listen to Michael Harris at 1pm, I can listen to the show at 10pm if I want. I don't have to use my radio, I can use my ipod and listen while I make dinner or get some cleaning done. I can pause it, fast forward, rewind, etc.
In addition, content now has a shelf life. PR folks can now link to the radio show on which they were featured and three months later know that audiences clicking that link will be able to listen to that interview.
Add to this the fact that radio offers some great opportunities that television and print generally don't. On television if you get a five-minute interview /segment you are lucky. In print if you get a page of white space that's amazing. Yet, with radio, you can get up to an hour under the right conditions and the opportunity to delve in to your field of expertise at length.
Not to mention radio interviews (now that they have a shelf life) can be used with other media outlets that want to get background on who they are talking to prior to doing an interview. Television shows for instance generally are hesitant to put someone on air for whom they have no clue what kind of interview they can give. Referencing them to a print interview doesn't help them feel more at ease. However, referencing them to a radio interview will often give them all the info they need to gauge whether your spokesperson is the right fit for their needs.
There's something very human and grassroots about radio that print and television simply don't offer as well. Radio can often times feel like a fire-side chat allowing you to flush out points you want to make versus the staccato talking points often associated with print and television.
With radio stations now posting and archiving their content online I think it's definitely time for PR folks to re-think the associated value of pitching radio outlets and doing radio interviews. To me, the value now ranks right up there with print and television coverage. Even if the audience size is still smaller, the format and re-usability offer significant value to building brand equity.
Radio has never really mattered much to PR folks (and I include myself in this). The reason yet again is simple. The reach is limited (ie. smaller audience) and the content expires almost immediately. With print and television you can simply call up the media outlet and get reprints or video clips of the interview or article (at a fee of course). With radio though I don't think such services are readily available.
So basically with radio the history has been that you reach whatever audience is listening at that moment in time and then that's a wrap. Even with radio now streaming their shows it doesn't really change the model.
Radio content, for lack of a better word, has an almost non-existent shelf life when it comes to brand building.
Some outlets, Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh, break this mold and ascend to the status that print or television usually holds, but the examples are less than a handful.
The question that I think is interesting is whether PR people start to rethink the value of radio when it comes to brand? I like listening to the Michael Harris show on CFRA. Now I'm not a radio guy, when I'm driving I'm usually listening to mp3s. In addition, I can't stand commercials, they drive me nuts (and radio is filled with commercials - it almost seems like there are more commercials than radio content most of the time).
What I really like about what CFRA has done is that you can now download all their shows in mp3 format right off their Web site. Which means that I don't have to listen to Michael Harris at 1pm, I can listen to the show at 10pm if I want. I don't have to use my radio, I can use my ipod and listen while I make dinner or get some cleaning done. I can pause it, fast forward, rewind, etc.
In addition, content now has a shelf life. PR folks can now link to the radio show on which they were featured and three months later know that audiences clicking that link will be able to listen to that interview.
Add to this the fact that radio offers some great opportunities that television and print generally don't. On television if you get a five-minute interview /segment you are lucky. In print if you get a page of white space that's amazing. Yet, with radio, you can get up to an hour under the right conditions and the opportunity to delve in to your field of expertise at length.
Not to mention radio interviews (now that they have a shelf life) can be used with other media outlets that want to get background on who they are talking to prior to doing an interview. Television shows for instance generally are hesitant to put someone on air for whom they have no clue what kind of interview they can give. Referencing them to a print interview doesn't help them feel more at ease. However, referencing them to a radio interview will often give them all the info they need to gauge whether your spokesperson is the right fit for their needs.
There's something very human and grassroots about radio that print and television simply don't offer as well. Radio can often times feel like a fire-side chat allowing you to flush out points you want to make versus the staccato talking points often associated with print and television.
With radio stations now posting and archiving their content online I think it's definitely time for PR folks to re-think the associated value of pitching radio outlets and doing radio interviews. To me, the value now ranks right up there with print and television coverage. Even if the audience size is still smaller, the format and re-usability offer significant value to building brand equity.
Comments
Post a Comment