I have had some online discussion lately with FreshGlue about whether something that appears to be bad in the press can actually do some good for a company, product person, etc . . . in terms of publicity.
I don’t think all PR is good PR as they have stated, but I do think that (in some cases) even something that appears to be bad PR can actually benefit a company, product, person, etc . . . in terms of publicity. Thoughts?
2 comments ↓
I tend to think that any PR is good PR — for websites, at least. Personally speaking, I’ve found myself visiting and revisiting websites that I’ve heard about in rather negative ways in the news. For example, I was a late-comer to MySpace, and only went to that site out of curiosity after all those problems were publicized.
Russ-
I was thinking that same thing the other day. If some reputable person comes on T.V. and says that company X’s product sucks because of this or that, how could that be good for the company? Something like that doesn’t bode well for a company’s revenue or its brand.
However, a year down the road that same company can use that bad PR as a way to say that they’ve bettered their product and the media way like to try and prove them wrong. If the company did, in fact, improve the product, the media may be inclined to mention the progress.
I guess it matters how the company/person deals with it.
Leave a Comment