Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Paul Graham on PR

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the dozens-of-press-releases-in-my-inbox-every-day dept.

ralejs writes "Paul Graham takes on PR. From the article:'Why do the media keep running stories saying suits are back? Because PR firms tell them to. One of the most surprising things I discovered during my brief business career was the existence of the PR industry, lurking like a huge, quiet submarine beneath the news. Of the stories you read in traditional media that aren't about politics, crimes, or disasters, more than half probably come from PR firms.' As always, it's an interesting, surprising and slightly provoking read."

3 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. The Ironing is Delicious... by myheroBobHope · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In a article about how PR firms write stories to get attention for their clients, there is a link to the PR firm the guy worked with and a statement that they are the best... hmmm... Maybe we should learn a lesson from the article?

    --
    http://www.pterrys.com
  2. There's No Such Thing As News by stlhawkeye · · Score: 5, Insightful
    News stories are often nothing but political opinions or advertisements disguised as press releases. When a local business is having a major event to honor some anniversary, they contact newspapers and local TV stations and request that it be covered. The news programs don't seek out these photo ops, the businesses solicit the TV stations in exchange for continuing their advertising on those stations. What you see on TV is carefully hand-picked to ensure that you see exactly what they want you to see. Although Fox takes a lot of heat for its meticulously packaged news and slanted editorials, they're at least pretty blatant and obvious about it. People watch CNN or ABC and genuinely believe that they're getting unbiased, objective news. People who watch Fox know, in their hearts, that it's a conservative news station and that's exactly why they flock to it. Easier to be steadfast in your beliefs when they're not being seriously challenged.

    The other kind of news is the political op-ed that's dressed up like a news story but it's not really a story. These, at least, provide some value to the voter concerned about understanding who he is voting for, but very little value. Countless news "stories" are just recitations of a public figure's opinion. This sounds like it should be valuable to it, but it's a carefully crafted, generally ambiguous and misleading statement, intended to befuddle and confuse the casual reader into agreeing.

    For example, say I dislike the new pope. I go find a reporter and say, "I'm concerned and dismayed that the College of Cardinals believe that a former Hitler Youth is the best choice to guide the Catholic church through its unsure future."

    This isn't a news story, it's not even an event, it's just one guy saying what he thinks. Now, this has value to intelligent people because we can research the statement and determine that the author is a manipulative jerk and not vote for him. But most of the population fails to do this. I suppose there's something to be said for not depriving the rest of us of information to compensate for the ignorance of the masses.

    I don't really have a point to all this either. Oh! I know. By not having a point and just complaining I'm disguising directionless ranting as an intelligent Slashdot post. Ok, just as a Slashdot post. And by doing so, I'm demonstrating by example the very phenomenon that I distrust. Man, I'm brilliant!

    --
    "I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
  3. Re:How is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's surprising because the article says the exact opposite of what you just did. You didn't read it very carefully.

    What it said is that for a fairly small amount of money, an amount that fits into the budget of a small business, you can have magazines all over the world say the same nice things about your company at the same time and disguise it as something the magazine found out on its own.

    The rich and powerful in this country like to say bold, stupid, brash things with the media they control. Microsoft goes out and labels Open Source a communist conspiracy. Some weirdo like Dvorak agrees and we all sit about shaking our heads at how crazy he is. That doesn't convince anyone of anything.

    The example Graham uses of articles about suits coming back is subtle and insidious. Instead of using advertising to tell you what you should do, they hire reporters to tell you everyone else has already done it... and they do it without all that much power. The Men's Warehouse is no media conglomerate.

    The entire notion of journalistic integrity goes out the window in a way that's much harder to compensate for, even as a clever consumer. When MSNBC says that people still trust traditional media more than bloggers, it's easy to assume they may be biased. When MSNBC says that people are consuming more ice cream in an attempt to build strong bones, it's difficult to see how they might have an interest in selling you ice cream.

    If the answer is just that the reporters were stuck for something to say on a deadline, then we're selling our minds for glass beads. Trinkets. Nothings.

    The news is, nobody has to bribe the media for the media to suck. It sucks on its own.