Most of us know that when you advertise, you are actually paying to get an ad space, knowing when that ad will be published or aired. However, PR is all about getting your company free publicity, not knowing when that information will get out, or even get out at all, so you got to pray...!
So I agree that it’s an advantage when you pay an advertising company to get your information out, because you have control over it and know where and when it will be shown. Many companies are spending thousands of pounds on advertising to get what they want to say out to the public.
PR however, is all about getting the company’s name out there with no hype, only news. It is a free way to get the image you want recognised. How the media presents the information sent to them is something PR people cannot control. That is risky, and can make or break a company’s reputation. You have little say in what comes out on the other end, but free publicity is always good, right?
I found an interesting article, stating the 10 differences between advertising and PR. So many people are discussing and saying that it really depends on the products or service you want to publicise. That PR is better when you are communicating depth of information and more effective and with advertising it’s easy to control the message you want to get across. But is it?
Philip Kotler, says “when a customer sees an ad, she knows it is an ad, and an increasing number of customers are tuning ads out. PR has a better chance of getting a message through.” So this means that the message via PR is more likely for people to believe. People are not dumb, they know how adverts work, and it’s the minority that fall for it. With PR however, people may view an article on the web, written by someone outside the firm hence, finding it more reliable and trustworthy than advertising and view it differently.
So I’m guessing that advertisers should say goodbye to the glorious days when they could reach millions through TV, radio, and print. It’s too expensive and too many channels to catch up with. I’m not saying advertising is not an option, or it never works, but I feel that it’s not a very effective quality anymore. Traditional advertising is considered a monologue, and companies would benefit if they enabled systems that contributed into dialogue. It’s healthier to build a relationship with your publics and potential buyers, which PR is most commonly known for.
PR has what Kotler likes to call, the ‘PENCILS’ (publications, events, news, community involvement, identity tools, lobbying and social investments) and I believe that it works most of the times. Although it might need more work to achieve what you want, it’s way better than someone turning my ad out!
READ MORE - “You Pay for Advertising and You Pray for PR” – (Unknown)
So I agree that it’s an advantage when you pay an advertising company to get your information out, because you have control over it and know where and when it will be shown. Many companies are spending thousands of pounds on advertising to get what they want to say out to the public.
PR however, is all about getting the company’s name out there with no hype, only news. It is a free way to get the image you want recognised. How the media presents the information sent to them is something PR people cannot control. That is risky, and can make or break a company’s reputation. You have little say in what comes out on the other end, but free publicity is always good, right?
I found an interesting article, stating the 10 differences between advertising and PR. So many people are discussing and saying that it really depends on the products or service you want to publicise. That PR is better when you are communicating depth of information and more effective and with advertising it’s easy to control the message you want to get across. But is it?
Philip Kotler, says “when a customer sees an ad, she knows it is an ad, and an increasing number of customers are tuning ads out. PR has a better chance of getting a message through.” So this means that the message via PR is more likely for people to believe. People are not dumb, they know how adverts work, and it’s the minority that fall for it. With PR however, people may view an article on the web, written by someone outside the firm hence, finding it more reliable and trustworthy than advertising and view it differently.
So I’m guessing that advertisers should say goodbye to the glorious days when they could reach millions through TV, radio, and print. It’s too expensive and too many channels to catch up with. I’m not saying advertising is not an option, or it never works, but I feel that it’s not a very effective quality anymore. Traditional advertising is considered a monologue, and companies would benefit if they enabled systems that contributed into dialogue. It’s healthier to build a relationship with your publics and potential buyers, which PR is most commonly known for.
PR has what Kotler likes to call, the ‘PENCILS’ (publications, events, news, community involvement, identity tools, lobbying and social investments) and I believe that it works most of the times. Although it might need more work to achieve what you want, it’s way better than someone turning my ad out!
So, let's sharpen our pencils!!!
