It was public relations companies versus the media in the Middle East’s first Oxford-style debate held recently before a packed house at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Dubai. The evening was organized by the Middle East Public Relations Association (MEPRA). The aim of MEPRA is to increase the awareness of PR in the region and to educate businesses, the media and other organizations about the role of PR in improving understanding and goodwill, while delivering bottom line results. This is especially important as the Middle East PR industry has grown rapidly from a single, independent PR firm in the early 1980s, to nearly 100 entities today. According to MEPRA chairman, Sadri Barrage, these PR organizations generate approximately $20 million per year in fee income with continued revenue growth expected to be well over 20 percent annually.
Many members of PR firms feel that while their importance to the business community has grown, their potential, influence and usefulness are, unfortunately, not well understood, especially by the region’s media outlets. Consequently the goal is to use education to change perceptions. With that in mind, two teams were invited to debate two issues. Representing the PR firms were Hamad Malik, senior regional manager, Marketing & Corporate Communications, LG Electronics, Middle East & Africa; Jim Donaldson, regional director, Gulf Hill & Knowlton; Andrew Bone, PR manager, Showtime; and Riz Khan, senior international consultant, Burson-Marsteller, Asia-Pacific Region. Out in front for the media were Robert Serafin, managing director, ITP, Nimah Abu-Wardeh, producer and presenter at Dubai’s Business Channel TV; Mekki Abdulla, managing director, New World Media; and Khaled Al-Maeena, editor in chief, Arab News.
In a forum lasting more than three hours, the debate focused on the questions “Does the Middle East media appreciate the value of the PR industry?” and “Do PR companies intentionally mislead the media?” It quickly became apparent that PR companies felt they were undervalued by the media, and that the media believed they frequently had to wade through PR spin in their efforts to uncover the truth. While the evening proceeded in a civilized manner, it was obvious that each side in the debate held considerable animosity for the other.
Donaldson started the debate by stating, “The PR industry is a bridge between the corporate world and the media and it adds value to both sides... It’s our job to turn corporate information into news of interest to consumers... Usually we don’t get credit for our efforts. Sometimes we are viewed as an obstacle, not a bridge.”
He went on to explain that frequently PR companies had to work very hard with clients to get them to be honest and forthcoming with the media. Donaldson estimated that 50 percent of a PR representative’s time was spent in this type of activity. PR companies also had to spend considerable time educating the media on a variety of topics. This was necessary, however, because once members of the media were educated on an issue they would inform their readers about it.
Rebuttal to Donaldson’s comments came from Serafin, who pointed out that he felt that there was no perception at the PR end of what the media was trying to do.
“We sell publications because we tell people what’s good and what’s bad,” he said. “We can’t simply flog the products of our advertisers. If we did we’d lose credibility.”
Serafin was critical of the performance of PR companies. He told how they filled fax machines to overflowing, instead of using e-mail in this digital age. PR companies often withheld access to a client as punishment for a negative story. In interviews, Serafin found PR representatives seated next to their clients telling them not to answer certain questions. At the end of his remarks, Serafin emphasized that, “Good journalists do news stories whether they like or don’t like the client.”
After the opening salvos from each side, the debate heated up with comments coming from both sides and questions being asked by members of the audience.
Khaled Al-Maeena accused the PR companies of making local journalists very lazy. “They take freebies and slap out a story written by the PR firm,” he said, adding that “editors were at fault for allowing this.”
A good part of the whole PR versus media problem, according to Al-Maeena, was that a lot of people in the corporate world didn’t know what PR was. He felt that companies needed training in order to understand how to work with the media. PR companies also had to change their tactics and come to think of PR as more than just press releases. And even more important, honesty must never be compromised by media outlets in their quest for advertising revenue.
Al-Maeena was ably supported by Abu-Wardeh who claimed that in her experience, “Companies in this region are not media savvy. Even if a journalist gets an original spark (of inspiration), he/she will be turned away and told to go to the PR firm. So journalists are only able to get information that the PR firm deems acceptable.”
As the remarks became more aggressive, Riz Khan jumped into the fray cautioning, “It is dangerous to point fingers as there is a lot of dirt on both sides. Some journalists collaborate with businesses to get stories out. Some journalists advise businesses how to best handle stories and the media sensationalizes stories.”
Leaving the auditorium after the debate, everyone agreed that the event had been a good effort, but that it was clear more discourse was needed between the two sides. With PR firms increasingly having a say in the distribution of advertising revenues, coupled with the difficult economic climate, the region’s consumers must speak out for the good of all and urge media outlets to resist the temptation to go for revenue over reality. Only in an environment where honesty prevails will spin be defeated and businesses forced to act with integrity.
Arab News Features 31 January 2003