Re: PR is better for branding than advertising?

From: Adrienne Kramer <ASKMGMT_at_aol.com>
Date: Fri 26 Apr 2002 23:14:12 -0600

I really don't believe that the question is PR vs. advertising. For either
to truly work effectively, you need a strong cohesive plan which includes not
only PR and Advertising (including proper media planning) but Promotion,
Pricing, Packaging, etc. And moreover, they all start with the basic
assumption that the communication and message are on target.

What I have found is that people believe that Nike only does advertising that
is "image-driven" and so they can do what they want. Those people have lost
the basic premise to Marketing and Business Development, which is... give the
customer what they want. Nike just adds a little panache in how they deliver
their message. Their are basic tenets of what is believed by the customer as
to what is always going to be delivered, e.g., the costs of doing business.

So when evaluting the media to choose, be it PR, Advertising, Direct Mail,
etc. it is critical to make sure that you are delivering what your customer
needs, and wants and you uniquely explain how you are going to do it better.



> >While advertising is no cure for shoddy quality
> >or a too high price, PR isn't either. And part of
> >the problem with PR is that the most avid believers
> >in glowing press releases are those who write them
> >and those working for the companies releasing them.
> >The competition and the public relies on testing and
> >measurement to learn the Truth.
> >

> >PR is useful for announcing new products and
> >major improvements to existing products, provided
> >the PR efforts are supported by advertising to keep
> >the message in the minds of prospects.
> >
>
>
PR is a wonderful tool. Many of the editors understand their power of being
able to make or break a business. However, Editors are no longer available
to do so at their own whims. Just look at the covers of beauty magazines and
understand that the product messages are funded by their biggest advertisers.
Fortunately, there is still a little "play" room inside for the underfunded
start-up. But the reality is... there is no free lunch.



> Maybe it's that I have so many start-ups and under-funded clients
> that make me partial to PR. I know that both PR and advertising are
> (RIP Doug Kenney) like dynamite: used properly they can move
> mountains; used improperly they can blow your legs off.
>

I prefer clients who pay their bills. Don't you?


> I've found that well-executed PR is almost always more effective
> because it carries the implied third-party endorsement of the media.
> For advertising to really work, you have to throw a lot of muscle
> behind it, and not too many clients are prepared to do that.Finally, as
> advertising becomes more expensive and varied, the
> relationships formed by PR agents and their media contacts inevitably
> prove the more cost-effective choice: the story gets out there when
> you need it, where you need it at a much more acceptable cost.
>

Consumers know that the endorsement is bought. They are no longer that
naive.


> Measurability is another one of those aspects that people THINK
> works, but is tremendously subject to flaws in its structure. Just
> because you have a tracking code doesn't necessarily mean what you're
> tracking is of any real value.
>


Like any good tool, it is one more that can guide us in some level of
achievement. All devices need to be put in perspective. After all, it is
quality of mention, not quantity.

Adrienne Kramer
Lotions & Potions
lotionspotions_at_aol.com




Received on Sat Apr 27 2002 - 00:14:12 CDT