I am attending the RSA conference in February as press because of my Computerworld blog. I applied at the RSA Conference site, and they accepted me. And like Martin has been posting, I have been getting multiple requests for interviews, breifings, etc. from security companies that are attending.
Well, today I received an email from a public relations firm that did not tell me who they represented. Here’s the text of the email:
Hi Michael,
I saw that you were attending RSA on behalf of Computerworld. I’m just curious – are you attending for content for your blog postings or are you acting in more of a reporter capacity for Computerworld at the conference and planning to write on hard news and discussions with folks who have a presence and activity at the conference?
I don’t know about you, but I was offended by this question. So, because I blog I am not legitimate? Here is my response:
It is for my CW blog and my personal security blog.
And though I may just be feeling defensive, and I also suspect you are not being purposefully belittling, many bloggers would take issue with the tone of your question. Blogging is a completely legitimate news source and is considered by many to be “hard newsâ€. I think this is proved out by RSA accepting so many bloggers as press. And “discussions with folks who have a presence and activity at the conference†are excellent sources for blog posts. In fact, I am interviewing a couple of people for my blog, and these people are security professionals and security industry executive types.
Just because bloggers post their opinions (because we both know “hard news†reporters never report their opinion, right?) does not mean we are not a valid news source.
Any body else take this as I did? Am I being too defensive?
Vet
Yeah, I’m on the RSA-death-by-PR-flack list too. Some of these people need to get a clue. Still, see you next week?
Michael,
I received the same email. My reply was “both”. I wasn’t going to give it a worry after that. Any one asking questions like that doesn’t understand the power of blogging yet and is still more comfortable talking to big media. I figured she’d either not get back to me or give me more information to base a decision on. Turns out it’s an invitation to talk to a couple of the big wigs from Computer Associates. I don’t particularly care for CA, so I’ll probably be roundfiling this invite.
Martin
Well, I can see how it would be offensive in the sense that it assumes that ink in a magazine is somehow more meaningful to a given reader. The reality is that blogs have a significant impact of how people decide to buy and what they buy, as well as who they trust for info.
Your comment about “Just because bloggers post their opinions (because we both know “hard news†reporters never report their opinion, right?) does not mean we are not a valid news source.” is off the mark, however. Think of it this way – not all print media is reporting (relating news factually), much of it is op/ed, which is opinion. The vast majority of blogs are op/ed, not news. If the PR flack is driving for press mentions in print (typically a useless measure of reach), then knowing whether you are reporting or editorializing on your blog makes a difference.
Doesn’t imply that your blog is not valuable, only implies how they are measured by their client.
RB
Mike,
I can see where you are coming from, but I would much rather get a shotgun approach that I can ignore (I could have ignored this one, I guess) than ask me a question about whether or not I am a valid use of her and her client’s time. Arguably, ink is better used on blogs that people generally have more time to read because it is not some three page article. I can’t speak for everyone, but I read about 50 blog posts per every article I read.
Maybe I was too harsh, but it really struck me wrong. And since Alex agrees with me, I feel vindicated!
Michael
Nope. I would take it the same way.
It ticks me off because in my professional experience both as practitioner and as marketer, I’ve found the mainstream press to be less credible than most of what I read in the Security Bloggers Network. At least members of the SBN are allowed to have opinions, you know?
You have no need to be defensive. It gets back to the goals of a PR person, which is to get ink for their clients. Actually, you should be happy that these folks actually asked what you were doing before they just randomly asked to meet with you, not having any understanding why you are there.
Most PR folks shoot with a .12 gauge. You are on the “press” list, so they want to meet with you. I wish more folks would ask what I plan to do and whether I plan to write something as a result of the meeting. It would save me a lot of time.