<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>In Defense of Public Relations &#187; Bloggers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://indefenseofpr.com/tag/bloggers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://indefenseofpr.com</link>
	<description>tough task, but someone has to do it</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 04:16:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Holtz v. Scoble Round 1</title>
		<link>http://indefenseofpr.com/2009/04/07/holtz-v-scoble-round-1/</link>
		<comments>http://indefenseofpr.com/2009/04/07/holtz-v-scoble-round-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>prdude</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bloggers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pitches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PR]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://indefenseofpr.com/?p=98</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So the PRWeek/PR Newswire Media survey came out yesterday to practically no fanfare. Maybe I was blind or plain crazed yesterday that I didn&#8217;t see any PR pro tweet about the findings save for Shel Holtz who challenged technology blogger/editor Robert Scoble to respond to his open query.  Apparently, Shel takes issue with some of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So the <a title="PRW/PRN Media Survey" href="http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/prnewswire/37762/"><em>PRWeek</em>/PR Newswire Media survey</a> came out yesterday to practically no fanfare. Maybe I was blind or plain crazed yesterday that I didn&#8217;t see any PR pro tweet about the findings save for Shel Holtz who challenged technology blogger/editor Robert Scoble to respond to his <a href="http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/weblog/comments/an_open_query_to_robert_scoble/">open query</a>.  Apparently, Shel takes issue with some of Scoble&#8217;s attitude towards PR pitches and PR people in general.</p>
<p>Shel got his answer. Scoble ain&#8217;t backing down and posted<a href="http://scobleizer.com/2009/04/07/a-private-note-to-pr-people/"> this</a> in response.</p>
<p>My take.  Both have valid points, but as a PR pro, I&#8217;ll have to side with Holtz on this one. Yes, there are crappy pitches out there, and it&#8217;s in your inbox, so simply click delete. It&#8217;s nothing personal. If reporters only knew the kind of pressure PR people are under and the amount of time we have in a day to service clients.  We try to be as smart and strategic as possible, I hope, but do we really have the time to research every reporter&#8217;s and/or blogger&#8217;s past articles to ensure pitches are targeted? In front of clients, we say YES, but in reality, who&#8217;s got the time?</p>
<p>If I had to research every reporter/blogger and figure out whether they&#8217;re an appropriate target, I&#8217;d be 7/11, that means working 24/7.  No one wants that even in this sad economy.  To put it mildly, be happy we&#8217;re pitching you, and the fact that you work in the media means you&#8217;re a target.  Just think of yourselves as celebrities, but not as pretty, and PR pros as the paparazzi, but not as sleazy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://indefenseofpr.com/2009/04/07/holtz-v-scoble-round-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

