<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Money makes it news</title>
	<atom:link href="/2008/09/30/money-makes-it-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://veryofficialblog.com/2008/09/30/money-makes-it-news/</link>
	<description>Social Media Integration Means Business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:47:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandon Chesnutt</title>
		<link>http://veryofficialblog.com/2008/09/30/money-makes-it-news/comment-page-1/#comment-290</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandon Chesnutt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shannonpaul.wordpress.com/?p=167#comment-290</guid>
		<description>Shannon,

Very timely post.  I&#039;ve been picking up on this same trend on both HARO and ProfNet.

It is definitely a hard sell getting your typical private business to open up and discuss detailed financial information with the press.  I&#039;m sure I&#039;m not the only PR pro who has seen a company pass on a slam-dunk opportunity simply because they refused to provide more data.

However, since most business media is transaction-focused by nature, it should be the agency&#039;s job to counsel their clients and make it clear that stories need to be compelling, informative and &quot;quantifiable/measurable.&quot;  While there are some companies out there that &quot;get it&quot; and are willing to be pretty open when it comes to discussing facts and figures, the other firms sometimes require a little arm-twisting.

As more and more information becomes readily accessible online, I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if private firms eventually start opening up more when it comes to sharing their numbers with the media, simply because another source might share them first.

Brandon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shannon,</p>
<p>Very timely post.  I&#8217;ve been picking up on this same trend on both HARO and ProfNet.</p>
<p>It is definitely a hard sell getting your typical private business to open up and discuss detailed financial information with the press.  I&#8217;m sure I&#8217;m not the only PR pro who has seen a company pass on a slam-dunk opportunity simply because they refused to provide more data.</p>
<p>However, since most business media is transaction-focused by nature, it should be the agency&#8217;s job to counsel their clients and make it clear that stories need to be compelling, informative and &#8220;quantifiable/measurable.&#8221;  While there are some companies out there that &#8220;get it&#8221; and are willing to be pretty open when it comes to discussing facts and figures, the other firms sometimes require a little arm-twisting.</p>
<p>As more and more information becomes readily accessible online, I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if private firms eventually start opening up more when it comes to sharing their numbers with the media, simply because another source might share them first.</p>
<p>Brandon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ari Adler</title>
		<link>http://veryofficialblog.com/2008/09/30/money-makes-it-news/comment-page-1/#comment-289</link>
		<dc:creator>Ari Adler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shannonpaul.wordpress.com/?p=167#comment-289</guid>
		<description>I understand your point Shannon, but I think it&#039;s unrealistic to expect companies to open up about business decisions. The proprietary nature of the corporate world means playing things close to the vest so that competitors don&#039;t hear too much too soon and beat you to the punch.

I disagree that without stats, etc. that company PR is nothing but marketing copy. If you want to be cynical, you could say that even with stats, etc. it would still be marketing copy. Isn&#039;t that the point of PR in a lot of ways?

The problem is that business journalists don&#039;t want to know about what happened, but rather what is going to happen. Combine that with businesses not willing to talk until something is done means there&#039;s an adversarial relationship that develops. If business writers could write about something from the recent past to illustrate a tactic, you might still get a good story and folks like you would hear the stories you want to hear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand your point Shannon, but I think it&#8217;s unrealistic to expect companies to open up about business decisions. The proprietary nature of the corporate world means playing things close to the vest so that competitors don&#8217;t hear too much too soon and beat you to the punch.</p>
<p>I disagree that without stats, etc. that company PR is nothing but marketing copy. If you want to be cynical, you could say that even with stats, etc. it would still be marketing copy. Isn&#8217;t that the point of PR in a lot of ways?</p>
<p>The problem is that business journalists don&#8217;t want to know about what happened, but rather what is going to happen. Combine that with businesses not willing to talk until something is done means there&#8217;s an adversarial relationship that develops. If business writers could write about something from the recent past to illustrate a tactic, you might still get a good story and folks like you would hear the stories you want to hear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
