Last month, when Churnalism.com was launched by the Media Standards Trust charity, it sparked arguments as to whether the media was becoming a pawn of the PR industry. The site compares the text of press releases with articles published by national newspaper websites, the BBC or Sky News since 2008, to highlight how much news is reproduced PR copy.
With so much PR material feeding the news, the fear is that the news is being led by PR‘s agenda. It highlights how little investigative journalism there is out there and how much journalists are in thrall to their PR contacts. As Martin Moore, director of the Media Standards Trust, says: “From a short-term perspective PR people may see it as a good thing that so many of their press releases are churned into mainstream media. But it is self-defeating in the long run since it undermines the credibility and independence of news outlets. It's in both PR and journalism's long-term interest to be more transparent about the connection between them.”

Mark Pack, head of digital at PR firm MHP, also worries that PROs will eventually kill the publications they feed: "However understandable the reasons may sometimes be for churnalism, in particular small budgets and over-pressed staff, the net result is not a good one for a healthy media. Good PR practitioners know this. Whatever the short-term attraction there may be of seeing your client’s story in print exactly as you would have wanted it, long-term we all benefit from a media that questions stories, forces people to raise their standards and which wins the trust of the public in the process."

However, Richard Sambrook, global vice chairman and chief content officer at PR firm Edelman, believes that the notion that PR content will somehow pollute journalism is an outdated concept. In his view bad copy is the result of either lazy journalists or sloppy PROs, both are equally accountable. He adds: “Practitioners of either craft can be good or bad. But the best PR is about building influence through trusted relationships with information and conversation which is engaging, relevant and of public value. The best journalism tries to do something similar. PROs, as honest advocates for clients, should be able to be constructive colleagues of independent journalism.”

The argument that news cannot be neutral if it is “infected” by PR spin is spurious in Sambrook’s view. He points out that if the criticism is that corporate communications is never self critical, this is an accusation equally aimed at most of the press: “You won’t read about phone hacking in a Murdoch newspaper or a pro-Europe story in the Daily Mail. We all have agendas – we should declare them more freely.”

Sambrook concludes that it is important that PROs continue to strive to maintain standards and build media relationships: “Transparency and openness are virtues both disciplines need to pursue. As journalism shrinks, and PR grows with the opportunities of the digital age, we need new ways to think about and manage the relationship between them. “

Soundbites

Gary Quinn, media consultant at agency Tangerine PR:
“What Churnalism.com fails to recognise is the ongoing relationship that exists between journalists and PROs. For example, many leading journalists, on some of the UK’s biggest selling newspapers, work with PROs to ensure they produce the most relevant press releases for them. This is because they recognise the relevance and importance of the stories that certain PROs can offer them, and in turn their readers.”

Claire Thompson, freelance PR consultant:
“Churnalism has had its day. Content aggregation sites serve the need for raw, instant information at source more reliably. When there were lots of media outlets, needing to fill lots of pages, supported by advertising, there was a constant need for quick, easy information that reworked press releases delivered. That game has now changed, and journalists must look for new ways to differentiate on quality of content. The maxim of the moment for publishers seems to be 'get big, get niche or get out'!”