I’m enjoying the growing list of what me and my people do wrong in the comments section of this post. To re-cap, journalists don’t like it when publicists:
- …use ALL CAPS in the subjects or bodies of their e mails.
- …mail discs with no liner notes/track listings/context of any kind.
- …blindly send press releases to journalists who have no history of writing about that artist/concert/repertoire/genre.
- …don’t include audio or video clips in their press releases.
- …act all lover-scorned when editors aren’t interested in their clients.
- …send releases under the oh-so-attention-grabbing subject line “Press Release”.
- …over-package physical CD mailings.
- …do anything BUT include releases in the bodies of e mails – no attachments, no external links.
- …seat themselves next to critics at events and concerts.
- …talk about other clients at concerts they’ve invited critics to review.
- …don’t actually have a reason for pitching what they’re pitching, besides being paid to do it.
To this list, I will add, journalists (also probably) don’t like it when publicists:
- ….pitch journalists about artists/concerts they’ve already written about (simple…Google…search).
- …include huge photo files.
- …don’t spell-check.
- …write poorly.
- …don’t think it’s their job to come up with and put forth creative story ideas.
THAT SAID, two can play this game! Classical music publicists of the world, what do JOURNALISTS do that annoy you most? Be Brave, little ones! More accurately, Post Anonymously!
I’ll start:
I’m all about taking the on-a-pedestal mystery out of the classical music industry, but my gears get slighted grinded (ground?) when journalists write about the trials and tribulations of arranging and conducting an artist interview in the feature said-interview was intended for.
Opera Chic brought these OC Register and San Diego Union-Tribune features to her readers’ attention(s) last week, and while both pieces are otherwise interesting and very well-written, I have to wonder if the journalists really had to mention that Maestro-elect Dudamel only gave them ten minutes? And that his publicist interrupted the interviews? And that he was running behind?
The hardest part about preparing for a 10-minute telephone interview
with Gustavo Dudamel is figuring out what to do with all that energy.Not with it, actually, but without it: What if his legendary pep
didn’t come across in a chat crammed between six other interviews? What
if he was worn out, or distracted? Because if there’s one thing that
pops out from all of Dudamel’s five-star YouTube clips – the one
attribute both fans and skeptics say defines him – it’s that
indomitable energy.The second hardest part was getting a hold of the man…It took nearly a month of planning, with entreaties from certain
well-connected individuals to other well-connected individuals, dozens
of e-mails and phone calls to the presenter and publicists, and one
minor last-minute rescheduling, but at 2:53 p.m. last Friday, I was on
hold for Dudamel. He was at his publicist’s office in midtown
Manhattan, wrapping up another interview. Running just a little behind
schedule. (San Diego Union-Tribune, November 21, 2008)
You get ten minutes, take it or leave it. I took it. I called at the
appointed time. Sorry, we’re running behind, please call back in 20
minutes. OK. I went and did the dishes, then called back. Can you hold
for three minutes? OK. Then Gustavo Dudamel comes on the line.He doesn’t seem to know to whom he is talking, so I introduce myself…
[ten minutes later]
“Excuse me, Tim, it’s Mary Lou Falcone (his publicist) interrupting
rudely, I apologize. But we need to cut it as we have someone waiting,
OK?” (OC Register, November 21, 2008)
It certainly makes for good reading (as I’ve said time and time again on this blog, people love behind-the-scenes drama), but that time-crunch is a fact of artists’ lives: when an artist is touring 300+ days a year, he or she is forced to do interviews in a crazy speed-dating fashion! Of course it’s not ideal, and the concept of a ten-minute interview is pretty silly, but if you couldn’t get what you needed in ten minutes (fair enough), why not tell Dudamel’s team thanks but no thanks, we’ll wait until he has a bit more time?
This kind of thing is very frustrating for publicists and artists: we try to make time for everyone, and then sometimes get punished for it. Last spring, a writer e mailed me to fact check Hilary’s interview with her. No, not what Hilary said in the interview, but rather how many interviews had she done before their’s, what time did she get up to do interviews that morning, and how many journalists had I turned down for interviews on her one press day in New York City? Erm….while I appreciate that this makes Hilary (and Dudamel, in the cases above) look all in-demand and celebrityish, I’m not entirely sure it’s fair to the artists.
And one more thing, before I hand it over: Just as Greg Sandow commented in the publicist post that press releases should give him a reason to care about their subjects, let me go on record as saying that features and reviews should probably do the same.
«…send releases under the oh-so-attention-grabbing subject line “Press Release”»
This is representative of a widespread and deep-set problem: in my experience too few professionals give their emails sensible or informative subject lines.
It’s a continual gripe for me (and I’m neither a publicist, nor an arts journalist, although my work brings me in contact with both). Too often subject lines are uninformative or completely irrelevant. Or worse, the person hasn’t thought about what will make the subject distinctive for the recipient (e.g. you might send only one email a year re the general subject of “program notes”, but I receive and send several thousand – so you’d better be specific).
I’m eternally indebted to Microsoft for giving Outlook the functionality to edit the subject lines of messages received. But really, I shouldn’t have to waste my time turning “Reminder” or “Advert” or “You’ll never guess” into something meaningful and useful.
Unfortunately, when everyone around us is being thoughtless with their email subjects (the spammers do it better!), it’s really no surprise that publicists are too.
Let me just say that, as a former arts journalist (though I may resuscitate my career in the new year – I am Hamlet-like in my indecision), I think the pieces about how difficult it is to get an interview are boring cop-outs. “The guy I’m writing about is getting a lot of media attention – including from me! So you should pay attention to him too!” Normal people do not care.
The only way that stuff is interesting is if there is something exceptional about it – e.g., “Though Dudamel could only promise 10 minutes, in the end we talked for 45, as his impassioned outbursts regarding Venezuela’s national soccer team proved too much even for a team of trained publicists to contain.” And even that’s kind of boring unless what the person is saying is interesting.
press releases, listings or audition notices for that matter sent out as jpegs or tiff files so you can’t copy and past the information. has to be at the top of our list of most hated communications!
As someone who has worked both sides of the press table, I appreciate
the difficult task each of us faces. As a publicist I dreaded the last
second call for tickets, critics who failed to show up, and those who
called for information that was right in the press release.
As an arts writer, I do wish today’s PR people would get the basics
right – like the who, what, when, where in the first paragraph. And
wouldn’t use Microsoft Word for their text, since many online editors
don’t translate it correctly. Use plain text.
Generally speaking I find the work of performing arts publicists far
more professional than that of those who promote visual artists.
As to Opera Chic’s comments on her site, sometimes you just have to go
with the most interesting material you have. And when getting the
story is more interesting than the story itself, well, there you are. I
am never bored by her site for that reason. Unlike in print, letting
your own personality shine is quite ok online, IMHO.
Pet peeve of the day: when publications/editors with whom I have been following up very carefully ignore my client in “Holiday round-up” articles.
One more press person’s gripe. Some publicists ask for a return receipt when their e-mail is read, or for a receipt when it’s deleted. My e-mail software always asks me if I want to send these receipts, and I always say no. It’s harmless, but I feel a little spied on. And from the publicist’s point of view, why do this? To prove to your clients that your e-mail actually was read? To find out which recipients pay attention to you?
I’d dissent on the 10 minute thing. Media people can be under a lot of pressure to get an interview, especially if it’s with a huge star who’s written about in all the big places. So they’re not in a position to say, “oh, forget it” when the circumstances of an interview aren’t constructive.
And if the interview conditions make it impossible to find anything out — and if there’s generally a PR operation radically more concerned with hype than truth (much more than usual, in other words — it’s fair game to say so. Dudamel, for all his power of a conductor, seems (from everything I’ve heard — I haven’t done any stories on him) — to be in the center of a press flurry like this. Interviews, even with major critics, are limited to just a few minutes, and he says the same things at every interview. Much more so than other stars. That in itself is a story, and it’s reasonable for media types to write it.
It’s much worse in pop music, TV, movies. With _real_ celebrities, in other words. Can you imagine what it would be like if glossy magazines stated the conditions under which they got their celebrity cover stories? “The artist’s publicist said who the writer had to be, and said that the artist wouldn’t speak about the following subjects” [list follows, naturally including at least some of the scandals everybody wants to read about].
Re 10-minute interview. Agree that it’s tacky to comment unless that’s part of the story itself. However, I don’t know why a publicist would even set up a 10-minute interview…yes, it’s probably enough time to deliver your message but the publicist should have been able to deliver the bare bones without the interview. In the end, the 10-minute interview puts everyone in a bad position, including the poor in-demand, overworked artist. It’s like speed dating…you either walk away never wanting to see the person again, or you want way more. Frustrating.
So pet peeves…here I go again. I believe that as a good publicist representing my organization, it is my job to service all media, no matter how big, no matter how small, no matter what their agendas. That means I try to treat my media with respect, not an “us against them” mentality. Often, I will and do bend over backwards to make a story happen or provide a background. That doesn’t mean that I grant all interview requests, but I do try mightily to at least respond to every request with a thoughtful answer.
Which brings me to my first pet peeve: NOT ALL MEDIA ARE CREATED EQUALLY. Thus, not all media can be treated equally all the time. Sorry, but a podunk blog that has been around forever, writes 200-word synopses and passes them off as “reviews,” and gets negligible traffic ain’t gonna get my attention like Tony T. Nope, podunk blog reviews aren’t going to sell tickets, and they’re not going to improve my org’s image. Yes, who knows where Joe Schmoe blogger might end up in a few years, and that’s why I deliver on professionalism and hook everyone up whenever I am able, but until I have an inkling that Joe Schmoe blogger’s work is going to in any way impact my org, he’s lower on my priority list than an established outlet (including some established, reputable and well trafficked blogs, such as this one or Opera Chic). Maybe anticipated impact was the reasoning behind giving the SD paper only a 10 minute interview? Honestly, if i were Dudamel’s publicist, I might have thought twice about granting it at all…the guy’s quickly nearing critical mass in terms of major media coverage.
And while I do try to give tickets every media person who asks, I can’t always grant every request. So unless you’re god’s gift to journalism, I’m not going to make press tickets magically appear when I’m out, the show is sold, and you contact me two days before. Complaining to VIPs, my boss, another member of the media doesn’t change this. It’s only going to make me grumpy.
By the same token, I expect to be treated with a certain collegiality; PR folks and journalists are usually on the same team at the end of the day, especially in the arts. Are all of my pitches perfect? Nope. But I hate when I have a beautiful, unique, well-written pitch sent to the right person at what seems like the right time, and the “target” doesn’t respond at all. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it just makes me want to follow up, and follow up, and follow up. If you don’t like the story, aren’t interested, think I’m a moron, just tell me “no thank you” and I’ll probably thank you for getting back to me and leave you alone. Obviously, being rejected or ignored is part of the game, but I guess that’s why they call it a pet peeve. A big thank you to the many journalists who do give it to me straight.
Also, arts orgs aren’t the only ones with interns and green journalists who don’t do their research. News outlets have them too, and when they’re working on stories, they can be real time suckers. Or I love, love, love when I get a call and the person on the other end can’t pronounce the name of a MAJOR artist…think of all the ways you could mispronounce straightforward or mainstream names, for example Yo-Yo Ma or Josh Bell? [insert eye roll] Lost points for credibility from the get-go, and I’m left thinking, “do you really not know who my big, big star is?”
Finally–what’s up with journalists who still expect to have an organization pay their way for a review or feature? I’m always shocked when I get a “yes, I’ll review your blah blah, but I do need reimbursement for travel, hotel and meals.” We’re nonprofits for pete’s sakes. Can I really justify your $1,000 trip?
For all this venting, I am actually pretty good at what I do and a gem to work with. I swear…just don’t ask me for tickets the day before opening night.