The Public Relations Society of America announced last week that it is increasing enforcement of its media policy for its annual conference.
The new level of enforcement potentially affects trade publications wishing to attend the conference with press credentials. In the past, trade publications were granted press access to attend the conference. This year, however, publications that had attended the conference as media in the past may have to pay full conference price.
“In the two years that I’ve been at PRSA, we’ve proactively and reactively granted International Conference press credentials to editors at the various public relations trades — and even to their publishers, as a professional courtesy,” said Arthur Yann, APR, vice president of public relations for PRSA. “Decisions on whether or not to extend press credentials will be made on a case by case basis, taking a number of factors into consideration. Those factors include our past experience with the publication and whether or not its interest in attending the current year’s conference is editorial related.”
What happened in the past, he said, is that some publications were using the press credentials to gain information for their own businesses, including networking with attendees, attending sessions for learning and gathering data on sessions – numbers of attendees for certain speakers and topics, for example – in order to create their own product offerings.
“(PRSA’s) stance is not a deviation from prior policy, but a renewed vigor in terms of enforcement,” Yann said.
Longtime PRSA critic Jack O’Dwyer has already complained about the change, saying that reporters will be forced to pay full price to attend the conference.
According to Yann, however, publications wishing media access would be considered on a case-by-case basis. He added that PRSA’s policy is consistent with other organizations and allows PRSA a degree of flexibility.
This year’s conference is October 16-19 and is being held in Washington, D.C. Writers, bloggers and reporters wishing to cover the conference may contact Diane Gomez at 212-460-1437 for information.
What do you think of PRSA’s new level of enforcement given past concerns? Your comments are welcome below.
Arthur Yann, VP, Public Relations, PRSA
1 year ago
I appreciate your diligence in compiling this post, Bob. May I add a couple of quick points?
– PRSA’s media policy is online at http://media.prsa.org/prsamediapolicy, for anyone interested in reviewing it. (It contains some inward-looking information up front, because our members frequently refer to it when developing media policies of their own.)
– Our policy not a media “ban,” as has been incorrectly reported elsewhere. PRSA has granted press credentials to this year’s International Conference (gratis) to both traditional media and bloggers. This is in contrast to public relations conferences, such as the Seminar, which do not permit media coverage.
– While our approach may be counterintuitive to what we know as professionals, this not a normal situation, and it cannot be managed in customary ways. This is one of the reasons why we sought a measure of flexibility with the policy, which we consider to be fair and sensitive to media needs and consistent with industry norms.
Jack O'Dwyer
1 year ago
Hi Art and Bob:
This is a pretty dumb policy because I have many hundreds of friends in the Society and among the exhibitors who would be only too glad to take notes for me or give me tickets to any of the events.
The speakers this year are very minor compared to the heavyweights of previous years–Tim Russert, James Carville, Mary Matalin, Mia Farrow,
James Earl Jones, etc.
More than 350 Society members have signed a petition aimed at ending rule by the APRs who have instituted such backwards policies. This will only give them further motivation. Foreign dictatorships allow more press freedom than the Society.
Jack O’Dwyer
Bob
1 year ago
Thank you both for your comments.
While I agree this policy is highly subjective — and the membership may never be aware of the reasons behind decisions being made for who gets granted, or denied, media access and why — I also don’t see a way for such a policy to regulated without potentially rubbing some folks to wrong way.
At the end of the day, it is the freeloaders who should bear the brunt of the responsibility here. One would hope the level of vitriol directed at PRSA over this problem would also be entertained toward the chronic offenders of the media policy, should they ever be found out.
b