Does it bother you as much as it does me when you hear the news media talk about something as “just a PR tactic” or deride an initiative as “simply a PR stunt“? It irks me that this profession’s well known acronym is often perceived negatively or cynically. Maybe I’m over-sensitive because I work in the industry, but I can’t think of another profession that has a ubiquitous acronym that is so often misperceived as conniving or negative.

After all, why should “public relations” be anything but good? What company or personality or politician would not want to relate to its public? If you have good things to say, or good news to communicate, wouldn’t you want to relate it to those who you want to hear it?

As a brand, “PR” has a PR problem. Irony is common in all walks of business, but I have always found it especially ironic that the PR industry itself doesn’t work harder to change the erroneous perception of what “PR” is.

I wonder how many PR associations actually have a PR plan. My observations tell that few, if any, bother to preach what they practice, and instead work solely at internal communications – singing to the choir (to extend the metaphor).

The same might be said of most PR agencies (not this one), which are very good at being aghast at prospective clients that lack a PR program, but then don’t actually have one of their own.

The PR industry often snickers at advertising agencies because they generally use PR (awards, media relations, speaking opportunities . . .) and not advertising to promote their business. But I think the converse can often be said of many PR organizations. When it comes to marketing, PR associations and agencies often will look not to public relations, but to advertising to get out their word.

Shoemakers children, perhaps.

I would love to work on a PR program to change the perception of the “PR” brand. After all, communicating things that work and are intrinsically positive and beneficial is relatively easy. Why we make it so hard on ourselves as an industry is a mystery.