A friend sent me a notice found on the Bulldog Reporter website, which is designed to help public relations people pitch their stories to journalists.
The item was entitled, “AP Radio Welcomes News and Information Related to Healthcare, Eldercare.” It appears to be a clear invitation to PR people to send audio clips along with news releases because that might improve their chances of getting their message on the air.
The notice read: “Include audio in your release. New technology allows AP Radio to put more natural sound into news reports, and this allows for new PR opportunities. “Provide bits and pieces of your news release in audio,” AP Radio news general manager Thomas Callahan suggests. “Everyone sends printed releases, but attaching an MP3 with excerpts might attract attention.”
It is surprising to see such an open invitation from a journalism organization to PR people, especially given the myriad concerns raised in recent months about the dissemination of video news releases in TV news. How will listeners know which audio clips and which stories came from the work of independent journalism, and which came from a source hawking a product or some other vested interest?
By the way, the notice bragged that AP’s radio division serves more than 4,300 stations with text, audio and/or web content, reaching more than 1 billion people around the world who see or hear an AP story every day. And now that may be more than 1 billion people every day who hear unfiltered PR hype.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
“Not everything published in a medical journal is newsworthy, proven, or even important.” https://t.co/J37btponS6
@chrishendel @HealthNewsRevu I believe that "What Would Gary Think?" should be a kneejerk response to any 'junk food causes blindness'-type single case.... 🥴
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Comments are closed.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like