Are PR agencies ruining Facebook?

By , April 26 2011, 9:08 am 9 Comments

Tempero posed an interesting discussion today (based on a post by the marvelous Daniel Stein) that I’d like to amplify here – they (and others) are proposing that PR agencies are adding to the noise on Facebook and propose that “presence over purpose” is happening.



Essentially….


“Isn’t the real problem that PR agencies aren’t runing Facebook but that they’ve spoken to traditional media outlets for so long they’ve forgotten how to talk directly to customers?”



What are your thoughts? Are we really our worst enemies?

Filed under: , , , ,
  • http://prbreakfastclub.com/ Keith Trivitt

    It’s an interesting question to ask, Paul, and I think Daniel Stein made some relevant points, but on the whole, I don’t buy this notion at all (granted, working for and representing the Public Relations Society of America, I surely have some skin in people understanding and respecting PR’s value).

    Here’s the thing: Mr. Stein’s essential question, as you noted, boiled down to whether PR people still know how to communicate directly with customers after speaking with the media for so long.

    To me, this is a rather dim and short-sighted view of what public relations has been doing for decades. The fact remains that at the heart of our jobs, we are storytellers. And good storytellers are able to speak with, empathize and understand a variety of audiences, whether that’s customers, stakeholders, clients or the media.

    Plus, let’s not forget there are many different types of PR firms, just as there many different types of ad agencies and marketing firms. There are media relations shops (which it appears Mr. Stein and some others are referring to in his post), which almost exclusively work with the media. There are also integrated PR agencies, which likely make up the majority of PR firms in the modern, digital age, that are adept at working directly with customers, WOM, media relations, analyst relations, content creation, etc.

    So I’m not convinced we’re our worst enemies.

    But more than that, I’m concerned about this movement among some PR and marketing professionals to place so much emphasis on gathering as many fans as possible for brands, versus the actual level of engagement, brand affinity and reputation building that comes from that engagement.

    Is fan count really our only value to clients and the business community?

    Whether you have 1,000 fans or 20,000, that doesn’t mean squat if it’s not actually helping to build your business or improve your organization in some meaningful way, whether that’s from a reputational standpoint, brand affinity or something else.

    So, no, I don’t think PR agencies are ruining Facebook, just like marketing ad firms aren’t doing the same. But I do think we have placed far too much attention and value on gathering fans rather than on what actually comes from that effort.

    Keith Trivitt
    Associate Director of Public Relations
    Public Relations Society of America

  • http://prbreakfastclub.com/ Keith Trivitt

    It’s an interesting question to ask, Paul, and I think Daniel Stein made some relevant points, but on the whole, I don’t buy this notion at all (granted, working for and representing the Public Relations Society of America, I surely have some skin in people understanding and respecting PR’s value).

    Here’s the thing: Mr. Stein’s essential question, as you noted, boiled down to whether PR people still know how to communicate directly with customers after speaking with the media for so long.

    To me, this is a rather dim and short-sighted view of what public relations has been doing for decades. The fact remains that at the heart of our jobs, we are storytellers. And good storytellers are able to speak with, empathize and understand a variety of audiences, whether that’s customers, stakeholders, clients or the media.

    Plus, let’s not forget there are many different types of PR firms, just as there many different types of ad agencies and marketing firms. There are media relations shops (which it appears Mr. Stein and some others are referring to in his post), which almost exclusively work with the media. There are also integrated PR agencies, which likely make up the majority of PR firms in the modern, digital age, that are adept at working directly with customers, WOM, media relations, analyst relations, content creation, etc.

    So I’m not convinced we’re our worst enemies.

    But more than that, I’m concerned about this movement among some PR and marketing professionals to place so much emphasis on gathering as many fans as possible for brands, versus the actual level of engagement, brand affinity and reputation building that comes from that engagement.

    Is fan count really our only value to clients and the business community?

    Whether you have 1,000 fans or 20,000, that doesn’t mean squat if it’s not actually helping to build your business or improve your organization in some meaningful way, whether that’s from a reputational standpoint, brand affinity or something else.

    So, no, I don’t think PR agencies are ruining Facebook, just like marketing ad firms aren’t doing the same. But I do think we have placed far too much attention and value on gathering fans rather than on what actually comes from that effort.

    Keith Trivitt
    Associate Director of Public Relations
    Public Relations Society of America

  • http://www.bynd.com Faith Chihil

    This question is a bit like asking if technology-inept parents are ruining Facebook. Think about it: they’re perpetually confused, they clog up our News Feeds with pictures of cats, and are not quite sure why they’re on Facebook besides the fact that someone told them they should be. In short, it’s not that they are particularly bad at communicating, but they’re not using the platform the right way.

    I agree 100% with Keith that it is never just about amassing fans and adding numbers; the key is community creation. Not only creating and growing communities, but learning from them as well. Just like teaching our parents, we can teach our clients and each other how to effectively use the tools at our disposal.

    Example: recently, my agency’s been going through exploratory work looking into what directional insights we can gain from what fans of a particular page like, such as what content creates the most engagement and what other interests they may share.

    In these ways, PR agencies can definitely enhance the Facebook experience by helping brands provide interesting, relevant and engaging content.

  • http://www.twitter.com/munkyfonkey Paul Armstrong

    Interesting points Keith. Do you think there should be a storytelling IQ? Course? Standard? What more should/could Facebook be doing to help liven things up? Is it their role to do this…?

  • Beth Carroll

    I’m going to say no. Some PR agencies have got a bad rap for attempting to jump on the social media bandwagon without understanding the platforms or establishing objectives and a strategy. But some are also doing a spectacular job, having dedicated specific resources to recruiting expertise and leading best practice.

    For some brands budget and resource constraints make agency support the only way to go. We regularly talk to brands who want to ‘set up a Facebook page’ without considering their objectives for doing so. We PR people (well most) know how to set them on the right track.

    I think working with a PR agency allows brands to knit together the different strands of the marketing mix and bring expertise from other areas of the business – because that’s what we’re used to doing. Social media is in the public eye, so a strong lead from PR/ marketing makes logical sense. And mostly we are pretty good at that. Well, I think so anyway.

  • http://www.PassItOnMedia.co.uk Shannon Boudjema

    In short! YES! They are… ‘presence over purpose’ is all over the place most obviously on Facebook. Great call by Tempero and Daniel Stein. It’s an accurate assessment.

    The real problem you pose is interesting. I noodled this all day yesterday – wonder if the real problem is that the key stakeholders are more interested in ticking boxes than delivering quality content. After all quality content takes work, trial, flexibility and longer term commitment that fosters course correction. But surely we can’t assume this to be the case for all stakeholders. So I follow your line of thinking…

    Are we our worst enemies? Hmmm – perhaps!

    I wonder if:

    Agencies are having to do far more with less. Less visibility to big plans, less money, less time, less resources. Less gusto and passion for their work after one too many knock backs. Or are they doing less because they run an agency more like a factory than a consultancy.

    Clients have to meet objectives that don’t line up with the bigger organizational objectives resulting in it being ok to tick boxes over here… but really deliver great work over there. Clients don’t believe social platforms do much more than rack up likes and fans.

    Consumers are the litmus test. They are not stupid. Their attention spans have shortened so much that 15 spot air time is seeing unprecedented growth. Surely the evidence (or lack thereof)between brand and community would make agencies take notice and clients demand more.

    I (foolishly) blogged last year about Facebook’s demise given the onslaught of brands and news feeds and ultimately noise that was going to flood our Facebook homes. Maybe the enemy of PR agencies are their client’s noticing their mere presence more so than their purpose.

    Clients hold the wallet share.. so doesn’t put them in the driver’s seat?

    As for Facebook going to lengths to enable PR agencies to be effective at their jobs? I say – hell no. Facebook provides a platform… agencies need to be worth their weight in gold… or find another vocation.

    No easy answer… although the answer is likely one that sees each of us in the mix share the egg that graces our face.

  • http://twitter.com/samsonadepoju Samson Adepoju

    Can’t we all just get along? People speak of the media like it’s this great machine that you need to know how to communicate with. The person reading the news is a person, the editor is a person, the journalist is a person. And they are all consumers. So PR people have been talking to consumers all along. Those consumers just happen to create media content and broadcast/publish it. If you can provide someone with what they need, consumer or media, that’s a score!

  • http://prbreakfastclub.com/ Keith Trivitt

    Paul – I wouldn’t say it’s Facebook’s role to manage this so much as it is the responsibility and duty of PR pros and marketers to ensure that the content they develop for Facebook and the engagement campaigns they create are actually … engaging. That they are strategic and have a purpose beyond merely gathering up a whole bunch of fans.

    But let’s be honest: Facebook is likely in no rush to change this because PR pros’ efforts to drive up their brands’ total fan count is what drives more ad dollars to the site. And Facebook is very smart; it’s not about to turn into MySpace and become overzealous in its attempts at generating ever more ad dollars.

    So once again, I think it falls upon PR pros to be wise with how they build their Facebook campaigns and how they tell their brand’s unique stories within that space. To me, that goes back to two key elements:

    1. Understanding the core element of public relations. Whether you’re working within social media, media relations and community outreach, the basics still matter.

    2. Beyond the basics, we need to do a better job of educating ourselves on communicating and storytelling within the digital space. Yes, I just said the basics still matter, but like anything else, the basics will need to be updated and modernized to change with the times. And right now, Facebook and much of social media is “the times,” but that focus should not replace what makes for great public relations: the ability to tell compelling stories in a variety of mediums.

  • http://www.twitter.com/munkyfonkey Paul Armstrong

    I disagree Keith, Facebook is (like brands) increasingly best served by seeking relevancy above people/numbers – all recent announcements seem to point to this. Numbers means squat if they don’t do anything for you. This is why this debate is so important.