Comments for In Front Of Your Nose

Comment on Why the current #CIPR Presidential election is so important for the PR industry by Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit)

Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit) — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:45:11 +0000

Hi Jon – thanks for dropping by – clearly I think it is vital that CIPR members do put some effort into listening to both candidates and actually voting. An election at this important time for PR deserves the attention of CIPR members – and making sure they participate in having a say in the outcome. Best of luck.

Comment on Why the current #CIPR Presidential election is so important for the PR industry by Jon White

Jon White — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:39:43 +0000

Andrew — thanks for encouraging your readers to look at the discussion around the election and to vote or prompt others to vote. Best wishes Jon White

Comment on How to guarantee a successful career in PR for $30 by Why Justin Cutroni’s post on Google Analytics and PR is so important for the PR industry – #pranalytics – In Front Of Your Nose

Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:51:02 +0000

[...] http://blog.escherman.com/2008/05/16/how-to-guarantee-a-successful-career-in-pr-for-30/ [...]

Comment on Top 5 reasons PR firms should ask clients/prospects for access to Google Analytics data by Why Justin Cutroni’s post on Google Analytics and PR is so important for the PR industry – #pranalytics – In Front Of Your Nose

Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:50:59 +0000

[...] http://blog.escherman.com/2011/03/25/top-5-reasons-pr-firms-should-ask-clientsprospects-for-access-t… [...]

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by HMV’s Twitter meltdown, a masterclass in multimedia storytelling and this week’s bits and bytes | Thomas Knorpp

Sat, 02 Feb 2013 00:05:59 +0000

[...] (does he RT? Does he @? When is he most active?). This leads to a number of suggestions for how PRs should engage with journos on Twitter. It starts to get interesting though when Charles responds in the comments to the post and provides [...]

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by Stuart Bruce (@stuartbruce)

Stuart Bruce (@stuartbruce) — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:19:50 +0000

Charles has already made many of the points that I would have. But my two pennarth is that PR people (with some notable exceptions) are rubbish at data. Data is good.Data provides you with insight. But data doesn’t provide you with answers. Data can contain errors. Data needs to be interpreted. What data does is enable PR people to make more formed decisions,but it is always the experience and expertise that makes it a good or bad decision.

Tools like Twitonomy and lots of others should be a vital part of a PR professionals armoury, but only if that PR person is sufficiently savvy to use them well.

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit)

Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit) — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:13:18 +0000

Hi Alistair – you are right about the manual process element – it is time and labour intensive – tough trying to persuade people to bankroll that kind of activity any more – agree that the right tools can at least reduce the time and the cost of getting to a point where you deploy people on spending their time as effectively as possible on proper research.

On a side point, I know a cynic might ask why a client or org would hire PRs who were unfamiliar with the market or the journalists serving that market – but we all know the reality of that scenario

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit)

Andrew Bruce Smith (@andismit) — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:06:04 +0000

Thanks. That’s a really succinct primer – so the client stats in Twitonomy could be helpful and the list analysis feature.

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by Alistair Wheate (@alistairtweet)

Alistair Wheate (@alistairtweet) — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:53:20 +0000

Where I see tools like this being useful are in narrowing down a long list to a short list. The process Charles describes in his last post is great, but that’s very manual and be quite time consuming, especially if you are unfamiliar with a new subject area or market and you have dozens or even hundreds of journalists to work through when deciding who might be worth engaging with on twitter. Automated tools aren’t really going to tell you who is influential or who is worth engaging with but they can give signals about who might be. Once you have used the tool to flag up a dozen or so potentials then perhaps it is worth using a more manual process like Charles outlines, all of which are good points.

Comment on Which journalists aren’t worth engaging with on Twitter? by Charles Arthur

Charles Arthur — Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:21:46 +0000

The basic thing is (a) look at what stories they write (b) look at their bio and any website in there (c) look at who they’ve been communicating with (d) look at whether they tweet their stories there (e) look at whether they seem to interact with people or if it’s just broadcast (f) look at how often they tweet, particularly during weekdays, which are probably their workdays (g) look at how many followers they have (h) look at how many they follow (i) look at their lists, if any (j) look at their favourites, if any. No lists and no favourites to me suggests someone who hasn’t quite grasped its full use. Oh, and (k) look at which client they use – if it’s just “web” then either they’re in an office environment, or they’re not that engaged.