The recent brouhaha (I wrote this post so I could use the word “brouhaha”) over The New York Times’ decision to bar tech columnist David Pogue from serving as a paid speaker at PR conferences underscores the perpetually fraught dynamic between journalists and PR professionals.

Arthur Brisbane, the paper’s public editor who moved to take action against Pogue’s participation in such events, notes, “The “Pitch Me” presentation might strike some as pretty harmless. But there is a reason why The Times ethics policy proscribes it. Times readers deserve to be assured that journalists don’t get too cozy with the P.R. professionals who strive to influence coverage.”

Here’s the thing: Journalists have been participating in these types of events and relying on PR pros/their clients for ages. A PR person’s objective is to get his/her client’s story heard. That involves knowing key influencers (reporters, editors, producers, bloggers, etc.), building relationships, and crafting and delivering stories in a way that makes them stand out. A journalist’s objective is to find a good story and tell it in an engaging and balanced way. These goals are not in direct conflict. A good journalist does reporting and research to determine what’s really newsworthy and to get a picture of the broader context. Relationship building is very much part of the process for both parties.

Interestingly, in this era of overwhelming 24-7 digital communication journalists actually seem to be more open than ever to face-to-face meetings. Case in point: I was in The New York Times offices just a couple weeks ago introducing my client, a professor at IMD, a business school in Switzerland, to a colleague of Pogue’s at The New York Times. I was able to interest the reporter in taking the meeting by presenting my client as a potentially useful resource for the types of stories he typically writes. It was, of course, up to the journalist to evaluate my client’s information and expertise. I’d have to be some kind of magician to talk him or any other good reporter into writing a story with no news value, so Brisbane’s underlying concern about journalists and PR people getting “too cozy” strikes me as an underestimation of the writer’s competency.

What’s your feeling about it?

After getting a lot of “feedback” (read: brouhaha) Brisbane’s now working on a follow up column “PR professionals: bane or a boon?” and he’s seeking input, so weigh in here, there, or in both places, if you’d like.

I had a big smile on my face riding the train to work this morning because the focus of this week’s “You’re the Boss” blog in the  New York Times was about the power of PR.   The piece validated the profession in such a way that put a skip in my step as I headed into the office. 

Adrianna Gardella’s profile of Jill Cartwright, entrepreneur and founder of Go Ga Ga – makers of ergonomic tote bags - sheds light on the impact of proactive public relations.  As noted in the piece, PR professionals have widened their scope – adding social media, word of mouth campaigns and blogger relations to the traditional media mix.

In fact, many of our newest assignments at Rose Communications have been hinged on the development and execution of social media campaigns.  We recently expanded our program with Apex Tool Group, one of the largest worldwide producers of industrial hand and power tool brands, including Allen®, Armstrong®, and GearWrench®, among others, to include social media strategy and special projects.

And we’re having even greater impact on the bottom line.

After working with a PR professional Cartwright grew her business exponentially.  Her revenue in 2009 was 134k and after working with a PR pro her revenue nearly doubled, with projections for 2011 in the 500k range. 

I’m excited by the possibilities and love that Cartwright gave her publicist props.  Her advice:

·         View your publicist as your partner

·         Conduct monthly brainstorm meetings with your PR team

·         Invest in PR and you’ll see immediate results

Rolling Stone magazine was founded by Jann S. Wenner in the late 60s – an era defined by Vietnam War protests, hippies and Woodstock.   A chronicle of counter culture, the publication carved out a niche for itself by combining in-depth political coverage with pop-culture commentary. 

The longtime home of gonzo journalists Hunter S. Thompson and P.J. O’Rourke, Rolling Stone’s relevance seemed to fade when the founding baby boomers grew up and the controversial Thompson passed away.  Advertising revenue and circulation was on a downward spiral.  The cutting-edge national affairs pieces that made the magazine famous were nonexistent. 

That is until Mark Hastings, a contributor to Rolling Stone magazine, was granted unprecedented access to a top-ranking military official, General McChrystal.  The piece recounts disparaging comments made by the general and his staff during a few nights of alcohol induced outings.  Hastings’ “Runaway General” article did more than prompt the resignation of General McChrystal, it marked the beginning of the magazine’s comeback. 

Hastings’ article quickly became one of the most read online even before the print publication hit newsstands.  Mr. Hastings appeared, via satellite from Afghanistan, on various broadcast outlets including CNN’s Larry King Live.   Having once worked in the publicity department of Wenner Media, I know the staff there was overjoyed by all the TV bookings and fanfare created around the June 21^st issue. 

But the question becomes can this title that’s been around for more than four decades sustain its renewed popularity?

Some argue that the publication is well poised to continue to churn out notable journalism.  A recent New York Times article attributes Rolling Stone’s recent success to its bi-weekly publishing schedule: “Many newsweeklies have faltered and lost their impact on shaping the national conversation, but as a biweekly Rolling Stone has thrived in defiance of a digital age in which articles are supposed to appear then vanish within hours.”

According to Graydon Carter, editor of Vanity Fair, “Biweekly publications have the best of both worlds: they can respond nimbly to the news and take their time on longer enterprise pieces.”

We’ll have to wait and see if the publication can continue its momentum.  I know I’ll be watching to see what’s on the next cover of Rolling Stone.