Comments on: Inside PR #101 – Tuesday, March 4, 2008

By: Inside Inside PR « my(PR)palette

Inside Inside PR « my(PR)palette — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:56:07 +0000

[...] episode, (#101), was released on [...]

By: Rick Weiss

Rick Weiss — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:47:13 +0000

Having guests on to join in the discussion was a great addition to the show. Is there a prize for picking up on the hint David dropped on Kristen Zemlak’s blog a few weeks back?

RE:Colin’s comment – better audio quality would be great, but not a necessity. And I agree a smaller panel might make it a little easier to follow.

Very cool though. Thanks once again!

By: Diana Hodges

Diana Hodges — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 20:30:11 +0000

Hi Terry, David, et al,
I’m glad Rayanne Langdon asked the question about the perception of PR and PR practitioners. I’m often asked what I do, and find that many people don’t understand what we do. Some think they know and will make wise-cracks about the PR profession, but I usually just ignore them or go along for laughs. In fact, I’ve even referred to PR as the “dark side.” Thanks to Jon Greer’s blog post (http://blogs.bnet.com/pr/?p=158), I’m am reformed. The day I read his post, I vowed to always speak positively and respectfully of my profession. Afterall, if I don’t respect what I do, why should others respect what we do.

Thanks and keep up the good work.

By: Josh Turner

Josh Turner — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 17:12:12 +0000

You want it…you got it, Dave. Here’s the official Facebook page for Friends of Inside PRoper English: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=23346750050

By: Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch")

Sallie Goetsch (rhymes with "sketch") — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:18:37 +0000

I agree with Colin that vocal contrast is important and better audio quality wouldn’t hurt. But I think it’s an intriguing experiment.

I will say that I believe all the PR podcasters help to counteract negative stereotypes about “spin doctors” and “flaks” by letting us into their world and their work. Much more effective than a defensive-seeming campaign, I think.

By: Colin Fast

Colin Fast — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:14:52 +0000

I’ll stick with the new show format, but I have a couple of suggestions:

1) Less panelists — Five voices are a little difficult to keep track of. I’d cap it at four. This would also allow for quicker transitions between topics.

2) More topics — I’d pick up the pace a bit. 8-10 minutes per topic should produce a lively, snappy roundtable.

3) Audio quality — In contrast to Terry and Dave’s clean audio, the call-in panelists sounded kinda crappy.

4) Shorter episodes — Episode #101 clocked in around 44 minutes. For me at least, the sweet spot seems to be around 30-35 minutes.

Anyway, just my opinion. Keep up the good work guys.

By: Rayanne Langdon

Rayanne Langdon — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:26:13 +0000

My name is spelled correctly–well done!

Thanks Dave, Terry, Julie, Keith and Martin for your insight into my question this week.

I agree with Keith that PR doesn’t have a terrible name in this city. Simply interacting with many people who work in the field here has made me feel better about the negative comments I’ve been hearing.

What pushed the button on this topic for me this week was a discussion on Seesmic, actually. I’ve become part of a fairly tight-knit community, and it hurt to hear unfavourable opinions of the work I want to do from this group of people I respect.

I find that the pop culture representation doesn’t exist as much as it used to. It’s–just as discussed–a poor stunt receiving a lot of attention. You’re all right–good public relations is rarely seen by “outsiders.”

I watched the Michael Bryant YouTube videos after listening to this. You talked about some things that could’ve been done better, and I agree, but at least others who want to use the tactic can benefit from Bryant’s mistakes. Which include very poor video descriptions, in my opinion!