A timely topic these days involving children is bullying. Stories of bullying leading to tragic circumstances seem to be appearing on a regular basis across the country. This is an important issue and many experts, from many different points of view, could address it.
A recent email pitching bullying experts to the media missed the mark. After introducing the experts in the first few lines, paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 were quotes from those experts. Then came some background information, which explained the experts worked in four areas in the Northeast. (I read the pitch after it was made to someone in Arizona.) The pitch went on for a total of 18 paragraphs.
Where’s the compelling story about the parents whose child was bullied? If you offer the media that, you wouldn’t need three paragraphs of quotes to persuade a journalist to put the experts on air. If you explained how these experts assisted these parents through a difficult time they never expected when deciding to have children, someone wouldn’t need to type out 18 paragraphs most media won’t finish if they get past paragraph two. And if these experts are well-established leaders in their industry in states in the Northeast, why spend time pitching them to journalists in the Southwest? If there’s a good reason to do so, then spell it out.
There’s actually lots to talk about on bullying, especially with how social media, texting and the internet make it easier and more complicated. PR pros have a solid opportunity to pitch a client plus address a key issue important to families. So why slap together something that likely won’t get the job done? If these experts really have something important to share, why should we miss out on that because of a pitch that should be ditched?