PR Types: Why do you bury the lede in your releases?

Press release writers have it tough, I imagine: Clent/boss wants to you to 'sell' the project, attract the interest of journalists so we'll write stories about the project, and, oh yes, get the bigwigs names up as high as you can. It's that last one that drives me nuts personally. I give you this release, issued earlier this month by Canada Economic Development for Quebec Region:

Sainte-Ursule, Quebec, August 6, 2009 Acting on behalf of the Honourable Denis Lebel, Minister of State for Canada Economic Development, Jacques Gourde, Member of Parliament for LotbinièreChutes-de-la-Chaudière, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue, today joined Jean-Paul Diamond, Member of the National Assembly for Maskinongé and Parliamentary Assistant to the Ministre des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de lOccupation du territoire, acting on behalf of Laurent Lessard, Ministre des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de lOccupation du territoire, in announcing …

… You've lost interest, by now, in the rest, haven't you?

Now, really, Mssrs. Lebel, Gourde, Diamond and Lessard must surely be reasonable gentlemen and recognize how silly they all look in insisting their names and titles lead off this relatively routine funding announcement?

5 thoughts on “PR Types: Why do you bury the lede in your releases?”

  1. The federal government has been insisting on this particular stupidity for decades. I once was the provincial party to “The Honourable ***** *******, Minister of ******* ********* and MP for ******* on behalf of the Honourable ****** * *********, Minister of ***** ********* *********** with the Honourable ****** ********, Saskatchewan Minister of ****-********* ********* *** ****** ******** today announced . . .”
    The nicest bit was that the Feds decided to play ignorant games with the French translation, wherein the federal ministers continued to be “l'honourable” while the provincial minister suddenly wasn't. They were a little put out whhen I refused to let the French translation be distributed at the event since they had behaved so unprofessionally.

  2. I am still trying to get my head around why A-channel and CTV Ottawa are mentioning and thanking Baird and Poilievre so many times in their advertising over the Government pushing their own appointees at the CRTC to bend one way on new funding (after giving direction to the appointees the other way no doubt). In my many many years I can't recall another time when the public airways were so used in an ongoing fashion droning on and on. Now I do recognize the intentional use by the parties of repetition especially when they engage in the “big lie” technique. But I don't see where this case fulfills the other requirement for a “big lie”. Is it a quid pro quo? Certainly it is of high monetary value to those 2 MPs coming so close to an election, but they both have comfortable majorities. Some value may rub off on their parties but I don't see this as a Con-conspiracy (unless it is repeated in other local news environments across the country). then baring some special bias in CTV management I am left with the likely reason for requiring any quid-pro-quo is the Political narcissism that the 2 MPs exhibit (a common ailment alas).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *