Stop producing press releases, they are a waste of time

One of my biggest bugbears is the amount of time and resources spent on press releases. (If we’ve met in person, there’s a very strong chance you’ve heard me talk about this!) Too many mornings, I wake up to an inbox that’s full to the brim with press releases that sit unread, just piling up until they’re deleted. I feel a little guilty admitting this, but I know I’m not alone in this! 

The frustration isn’t just from the people receiving them. I’ve lost count of the number of conversations I’ve had with communicators who spend an inordinate amount of time getting their press releases approved – and too often, for very little impact. 

I’ve had one communicator tell me that they spend three full workdays getting a press release through internal approvals. Another told me that in the past year only ONE of the dozens of press releases they prepared were approved. They were expected just to keep producing them, never sure which ones would get the final tick. How demotivating – and what a waste of a talented team of communicators.  

I get it, complex organisations can have complex processes. But what about the opportunity cost? Ask any journalist and they will tell you that they ignore most press releases. So, why are they the staple of EVERY communications plan? Why isn’t anyone pushing back?

Let me segue to the third greatest movie of all time, after Terminator 2 and The Godfather: The Lord of the Rings. At the start of the film, Galadriel the elf shares the provenance of ‘The One Ring’ and its mysteries: “History became legend; legend became myth.” 

That’s what the press release industrial complex is about. It’s so ingrained in communications that we just accept that it is the basic requirement of every communications plan. Tick! We’ve produced a press release. Tick! We’ve followed up with the journalists who have probably already binned them.  

Most organisations will track their press release output as part of their overall communications metrics. But have we ever considered whether press releases actually correlate with more impact, whether it’s more media coverage, better awareness of your brand, or a better relationship with journalists? Are we really measuring the right things?

Instead of doing the same old same old, why not run an experiment? Have you ever measured the value of not doing some or even all of those press releases? What if you invested that money and time into other communications methods such as original content, social media posts or other areas? 

Often, when I suggest this, I get a lot of shock and pushback that feels almost automatic, like I’m attacking a sacred cow. In a way, I am – so much of the argument in favour of the press release is based on the myth that it MUST be a necessary staple.

My favourite argument is that the scientists will be upset, as they like press releases. Is this actually true? I think they’d prefer the approach that leads to more funding.  

What if, instead of spending time on the same old, the focus was on creating modern, eye-grabbing content that establishes you as a leader in that field? 

A website that’s compelling to read will become the new destination point for your area of expertise – and will make the press release irrelevant. Journalists are always hunting for stories, so if your website is the go-to place for that topic, then you have a much greater opportunity to attract media attention. You can always get in touch when something ground-breaking happens.

There are plenty of ways to promote your stories. Journalists are all over social media – try something creative like the CSIRO to stand out:

Social media gives you a perfect opportunity to see what others are doing and to experiment with your own approach. You could explore a new strategy for engaging a different audience, invest in a new platform, or partner with an influencer. 

There are endless ways to reach the public. So, ditch the press release and spend your money on something more effective. 

Inspiring me this week…Nobel Prize-winner Claudia Goldin (and Pika!)

This year’s Nobel Prize in economics went to Harvard economist Claudia Goldin for her research into the gender gap and women in the workplace. The first woman to receive tenure in Harvard’s economics department, Goldin is only the third woman to win the prize – and the very first solo female winner. 

While the gender gap is well-known, the specific causes and contributing factors have been less well-understood. In her prize-winning study, Goldin analysed over 200 years of data on women’s participation in the US labour market to create the first-ever comprehensive account of women’s earnings and labour market participation through the centuries. 

And let’s not forget Pika! An accomplished prize-winning pup with his own Harvard Scholar page, Pika is a constant companion to his rather accomplished owner – even joining Goldin’s post-win interview. They’re a well-matched pair: Goldin has described herself as a detective, and Pika is a prize-winning sniffer dog.

Pika even featured in the official art celebrating Dr Goldin’s win. Credit: Johan Jarnestad/The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

“Claudia Goldin’s discoveries have vast societal implications,” said Randi Hjalmarsson, a member of the economic prize committee. “By finally understanding the problem and calling it by the right name, we will be able to pave a better route forward.”

We’re obsessed with…

Speaking of gender differences: Female frogs fake their own death to avoid unwanted attention from males.

And so do female dragonflies – seems like a trend to me…

On the other hand, male wolf spiders will bring gifts and also play dead to avoid being eaten during the act. Feminism? 

Perhaps these ladies (and gents) could take inspiration from Aussie fairy-wrens, who are socially monogamous but otherwise enjoy a libertine lifestyle. 

Or you could avoid the whole thing entirely, like this Costa Rican crocodile that managed a spontaneous virgin birth.