A Promotional Tug-of-War: PR vs. Marketing

Since we have addressed the annual advertising phenomenon known as the Super Bowl, we can now move on to the "good stuff," music industry public relations of course. What else could it be? Ever since the rise of PR's popularity and increased usage, there has been an air of tension brewing amongst the public relations and marketing/advertising disciplines. Although some seasoned professionals from both arenas have looked past the petty competitiveness and recognized the potential for collaboration, the two professions remain generally at-large with one another, and most still perpetuate a subtle distaste for each other.

Is this deep-seated disfavor rooted in a fear of professional legitimacy? Possibly. Do some professionals think that the success of one discipline will eventually equate the demise of the other? Most Likely. Do some professionals from each arena believe that their profession is superior to the competition? Definitely.

Before you jump on the criticism bandwagon, this post is not intended to determine which professional discipline- marketing or public relations- is superior or more effective than the other. It is, however, meant to determine, or merely suggest, which promotional discipline is most adept at addressing the current state of the music and recording industry. I am, as you know, of a public relations educational background, therefore I am slightly partial to the public relations discipline, however, I am fully aware and respective of the many positive aspects that the marketing profession contributes to the public relations disciplines' many deficiencies, and vice versa. No profession is perfectly self-sufficient. We thrive through collaboration with other neighboring and complimentary professional disciplines. For example, where would the music video production business be without the original musical contribution of recording artists, engineers and producers? Nowhere, that's where. Continuing on...

Although the two promotional professions are very similar in purpose, they are, in fact, quite different in approach. The marketing and advertising profession, for example, is largely devoted to acquiring effective "paid-media" opportunities such as Internet, television, radio and print advertisements that promote a specific business or organization, as well as any associated products and services. This type of promotional approach has proven to be effective for various types of businesses and organizations, although it is extremely costly and, often times, difficult for many small businesses to afford.

In contrast, the public relations profession is primarily dedicated to garnering "earned-media" mentions such as newspaper articles, press releases, press conferences, trade magazine articles, interviews, industry-related publicity, public service announcements, word-of-mouth advertising and charity affiliations. This is not meant to insinuate that the public relations profession does not dabble in "paid-media" opportunities, however, it is based- in theory- on the utilization of "earned-media" promotional and publicity tactics. Now, you might be beginning to understand the ensuing competition and dissension between the two disciplines. After all, they are, indeed, both dedicated to the same purpose: promotion.

When two competing professional disciplines scramble after the same profit margin, desired commodity and end result, the potential for opposition is unavoidable. Think about it. They both want the same thing; all promotional efforts from both disciplines boil down to one, single commodity, audience and consumer approval. There is, however, one fundamental difference in the way these two disciplines measure their definition of success.

Traditionally, the marketing discipline has been primarily dominated by sales and figures. As a marketing professional, if you don't meet your sales quota for the month, you are, as they say in the business world, "history." Public relations, on the other hand, is largely dedicated to building and maintaining strategic relationships so that organizations, as a result, are able to either progress or preserve their positive reputation, as well as garner coveted third-party endorsements. Word-of-mouth advertising, often embodied in the form of third-party endorsements, can be witnessed within any issue of a local newspaper, Internet blog, social media platform, trade-appropriate magazine or consumer review. 

Complimentary mentions and business plugs composed by unbiased, non-affiliated third party personas are, without a doubt, publicly perceived as more credible than self-promoted advertisements. Ponder this for a minute. Would you believe something, for example, that the brand Taylor Guitars says about their own products or would you, instead, believe something that a credible, seasoned studio guitarist said about the guitar itself? I thought so... we'll go with the unbiased third-party endorser. Similar to the previous example, these so-called "third-party endorsers" are in no way coerced to provide their product testimonies (unlike paid celebrity endorsers), they are, in fact, willing participants in the promotion of a credible, reliable brand that they have personally come to trust through experience.     

As a result, it depends on what, in particular, your business or organization is looking for when it comes to promotion. Do you want "the sales" or "the reputation?" The money or the relationships? Personally, I believe that increased sales win the race, but a sound, positive reputation wins the marathon, every time. Again, this is just my personal opinion, and not a corroborated scientific theory. It basically all boils down to one thing- you have to decide what's best for you and your organization. Whether that decision delivers you short-lived fame or eternal glory is entirely your prerogative. 

In my next post, I will suggest which promotional discipline- marketing or public relations- is best suited for the current condition of the music industry.