At PitchEngine we’re constantly trying to improve and implement social media tools into our PR efforts. One of the topics we’re discussing is the new press release format – we’ll call it “social media release” as that’s been our working title to this point.
If you’ve been following this topic, you know a little about the social media release templates out there and what their purpose is. For the sake of naming this thing, I’ll clarify what we’re after.
The new press release or (social media release or new media release) is designed to be as Brian Solis puts it, “a new socially-rooted format that complements traditional and SEO press releases by combining news facts and social assets in one, easy to digest, and repurpose, tool.”
Brian and creator Todd Defren refer to it as the Social Media Release, but there is also another angle to the naming convention. Does including “social media” in the name turn off journalists?
As I mentioned in a previous post “Why Social Media PR Gets a Bad Rap“, In Deirdre Breakenridge’s new book PR 2.0, she interviews Phil Gomes, VP of Edelman who offers up some good logic. He prefers the term “New Media Release” as opposed to “Social Media Release” and he may be on to something, since the “social” aspect is often misunderstood by journalists. Aside from technology bloggers and editors, most writers don’t grasp the concept. Announcing that you’re opening up a two-way conversation can be daunting, especially if it’s with an unidentified PR hack eager to spam you. That said, the social aspect is vital to the future of interaction between media and brand – not to mention, brand and consumer.
I prefer the term Social Media Release as it describes the goal of the release more accurately. The downside of calling something “new” is that it won’t always be “new”. It also makes it seem like it’s different or constantly changing.