Will Google Wave Eliminate the Need for PR as Media Relations?

New media has already reminded up that PR stands for public relations and not just media relations. This is still something that many organizations are navigating at the moment. Now Google is giving us yet another Wave of innovation and showing us what is possible in the browser. It was developed by the team that gave us Google Maps. From the site:

A wave is equal parts conversation and document. People can communicate and work together with richly formatted text, photos, videos, maps, and more.

A wave is shared. Any participant can reply anywhere in the message, edit the content and add participants at any point in the process. Then playback lets anyone rewind the wave to see who said what and when.

A wave is live. With live transmission as you type, participants on a wave can have faster conversations, see edits and interact with extensions in real-time.

Note that Wave is an open protocol that will allow third party developers to make their own Wave servers - just like they did with email. What seems nice about it is that it treats media as a process, where truth could emerge from many voices and forms. Is this going to spell the age of news in the cloud?

I was reading a post by Jeff Jarvis on the possibilities of Wave and news and noticing how resistant to proposed changes people are in the discussion that ensued in the comments. We don't have to like it, we can however admit that things are and have changed. As a reminder, I encourage critics to propose an alternative, to build it, to champion it. It's way too easy to just say "I don't like it," and "you suck".

Rather than resisting to the idea that this is happening, I'd like to think with you about the opportunities - and changes - that such a tool brings to the fore. When media becomes fluid this way, does the public relations profession need a digital tune up?

Where will the public relations professional and publicist fit in? Is it time for the transition to true communicator and conversation agents vs. merely passing along information, in some cases pushing it onto people who do not want your news?  Will press announcements be streamed real time through the wave? What will be the long term changes?

In a wave, your press release would have a long tail. Would PR be free? What are the things you should think about for your news?

• the content - what value components will allow your publics to derive self-worth and interest?
• the multimedia - this goes way beyond the social media release to access and potential community involvement
• the conversation - what's the story from the point of view of the community?
• the social aspect - this is where the information generates engagement

Would we use other software with the Wave? What kind of changes will this bring to the ability of small businesses to compete with larger ones? Will Google Wave eliminate the need for PR as media relations? How about listening tools? You should be thinking about the implications. Wherever there are changes, there is opportunity.

The future belongs to those who make it happen.

___________

Related posts:

Your New Media Equity
You're Writing for End Users, You Always Were
Do You Need Trade Media for a Product Launch?

Comments

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Shannon - my PR agency team at work is really good. They get it when it comes to developing relationships. I cannot say the same with many of the PR people whose constant flow of pitches I get. Most of the time their emails are so clearly cut and paste and just plain lazy. Every time I was interested in a story, the PR person could not speak to it at all and insisted on me scheduling a phone interview with their client. When it would be much easier for me to communicate by email... I've also had experience of interruptive and pushy PR professionals. An intermediary needs to add value to justify being in the middle. On the media side, many freelance trade writers do not have the deep technical expertise they need to cover their beat. They probably cover many industries or verticals to make ends meat. What I'm saying here is that self-service is a reality - whether we like it or not. Conversations with people who are passionate about a service, product or company are by far often more interesting and yield better value. I think every time we deny that something different like Wave will change things we close off to opportunities and change in our profession. Best practices are often the way we were.

@Rusty - the funny thing is that I'm getting a reaction out of PR professionals when I asked the question of whether Wave would eliminate the need for media relations. It's not like we haven't been talking about the decline of the traditional media model.

[Rusty Speidel]

Another tool, another distribution channel. The strategy behind effective communications, and knowledge about the most effective tools or methods to facilitate communication between brands and customers will always be valuable.

[Shannon Jowett]

@Valeria What if it's both? It could be argued that readership, or the perception of it, was the original community involvement. Now there is merely a direct mode to process feedback with the capacity to archive. But if you read commentaries on blogs, YouTube, Twitter, Amazon, Yelp, etc., it is painfully apparent that most people have little to add to the conversation and/or are ill informed. Then again, many people with something to say do it with only a star or a thumbs-up. The few commentators with expertise and writing chops tend to be journalists.

A PR professional has to be, to some degree, an expert on what they are pitching--they are a resource for the journalist that feeds the media outlet. This isn't going to change just because there are more voices and more outlets out there, which, even with the decline of print, is the case when you factor in every business entity has to be their own continuous online content generator.

What's happening right now is a little bigger than one-way-or-the-other question. Again, the PR professional has to utilize every available tool. Is it going to help to have unskilled third/fourth/fifth parties interrupt communication between the the source and the outlet with chatter? Do I want anyone seeing my pitch before I've tweeked the tricky second paragraph for the 100h time to get the wording right to attract the one voice that's going to build on the story and explode it across the masses? Faster conversations aren't tantamount to better or more accurate conversations. I have conversations with 100s of contacts every month, and there is no way a) they all would be interested in what I have going on all the time and b) I could keep up with simultaneous feedback from all of them.

Then again, maybe I should wait until I've had a few months with Wave before I pass judgment...