how to pitch bloggers to obtain publicity for your product, cause or company.

As America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach, I cover all the bases when it comes to pitching the media. And that includes bloggers.

Bloggers can be a good source of publicity for your product, service or cause and can reach people not served by other media. And bloggers cover niche areas allowing you to deeply penetrate a subject you want covered for you. In many cases they do not have big numbers of readers, but those readers are gold for you if they meet your target audience. So don’t discount pitching to bloggers, they deserve at least your second tier of effort and coverage.

But bloggers need to be pitched differently that say TV producers. Oh by the way if you are interested in pitching TV producers you should check out my other blog Cassie Boorn wrote a good article with tips on how to pitch bloggers and some of the things she mentions are:

.Like all other media pitches, shorter is sweeter. Don’t make your pitch too long.

.Try to get to know the blogger before you pitch them so they don’t delete you email.

.Don’t expect bloggers to want to give away your product or sell your product for you.

The article can be found here:

So remember, bloggers can be a worthwhile source of publicity for you, but they need special care.

By the way, if you are serious about media pitching, you should go to right now for a special offer.

Thanks for your time and good luck
Edward Smith
America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach.

Please send me an email at with any comments or suggestions you have for this blog.

Share Button

Copy The Pros If You Want Publicity.

As America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach, I believe in keeping up on what other pros in the field of publicity are saying. I pick up a lot of good ideas because of this and I recommend that you scan what the movers and shakers are saying on a regular basis.

It pays to copy the pros when you are doing your own publicity. Yes, doing your own publicity can save you time and money, but it is all a waste if you blow it with your pitches.

I follow Penny C. Sansevieri, and she posted an article on Things Publicists Are Doing That You Should Be Doing To. In the article she lists nine things that fall into this category. Here are a few of the points she makes:

.Think like a journalist. She stresses a key point that is hard for many people new to doing their own publicity to grasp. That is that it is not about you, your product or your cause, it is about the readers of the publication. Your story has to appeal to the audience of the media. The publication does not exist to advertise your stuff, they exist to serve the reader. So you need to think in terms of what people out there are interested in and craft a story that talks to them, not sells them.

.Know the rules. Know when to pitch, who to pitch, when to pitch and so on. This is key. The best message in the world, poorly pitched, gets hit by the delete button. In fact I feel so strongly about this incredible waste of effort on the part of people that would have a great shot at getting coverage if they pitched properly, that I have created a product for this. If you are tired of wasting your pitch efforts go to right now for a special offer.

.Don’t overlook local media. It is not all about getting on Good Morning America. Sometimes local media pitched with a local message can bring a home run. After you get a local hit, you can work your way up the food chain and perfect your message along the way.

You can read the full article here:

Please send me a message at and let me know what you thought of this post and what you would like to see covered on this blog.

Thanks and good luck.
Edward Smith
America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach.

Share Button

How To Pitch Freelance Reporters To Get Publicity.

As America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach, one of my jobs is to keep my clients aware of media pitching opportunities they might not think of.

One of the frequently overlooked areas for gaining publicity is to pitch free lance reporters. Free lance reporters operate under most people radar and do not get pitched a lot. These reporters have to spend a lot of time digging up their own story ideas and actually look forward to being pitched in many instances.

Freelance writers are “hired guns” that can sell a story to anyone in any media. They may write for newspapers, blogs, magazines, etc., you never know. This is good news for you as your company, product or cause may end up being featured in multiple outlets at the same time.

I found an interesting article by Mickie Kennedy on His articles covers how to pitch freelance reporters. It is worth reading and can be found at :

By the way if you are serious about learning how to pitch the media, particularly TV, go to for a special offer.

Please leave me a message letting me know what your thought of this post and what you would like to see covered on this blog.

Thanks and good luck.
Edward Smith
America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach

Share Button

Press Releases-Pro And Con.

One of the things that will be covered quite extensively on this blog will be press releases.  As you get to know me you will find that I think most press releases offer little in the way of payback for your time and money in terms of media coverage.

That said, I do believe there is room in your publicity campaign for the use of press releases if done properly.

Here is a post taken from that expresses much of what I believe about the use of press releases.  This post is written from the perspective of a larger corporate organization, so not all of it will apply to those lucky enough to be free of much of the bureaucracy involved in sending out a press release.

Press releases will destroy your soul

by David Harris on November 3, 2010

Why do we still write press releases? Let’s look at the pros and cons.


  1. You can get a message out to lots of people easily.
  2. There are plenty of systems already built for shepherding press releases to journalists.
  3. You can emphasize the parts of the story that you want people to pay attention to.


  1. Institutional requirements about attributions, credits, etc. usually require them to be bloated, ugly pieces of writing.
  2. Journalists get so many of them that it’s increasingly difficult for yours to get attention.
  3. Journalists might consider it spam, but it’s hard for you to tell if you’ve been relegated to the spam folder.
  4. Press releases have a kind of mythic status in many institutions and among many people, and institutions typically have unreasonable expectations for results.
  5. They can take huge amounts of time and effort to prepare because of approval overhead and political paranoia.
  6. The researchers typically have the final say on what happens.
  7. They are generally diluted to least-common-denominator form as multiple layers of approvals each water down the content.
  8. You really don’t have the control you need to serve the research well.
  9. You usually can’t target your audience very finely.
  10. Press releases are subject to policies/guidelines/rules enacted only because some person got upset with some other person sometime in the past, or somebody was paranoid, or somebody didn’t know what they were doing and just copied the way somebody else did it.
  11. Researchers are often apprehensive about getting involved.
  12. Somebody almost always gets upset.

One of these lists is much longer than the other. Given the imbalance, are the pros worth the cons? To decide this, can we achieve the pros some other way because, after all, the press release is just a tool, and you might be able to achieve that goal some other way.

I worked in an institution that typically required about five internal approvals and up to 17 agency approvals to get a release out. By the time that process ran its course, my staff would have used up to 100 hours of time between us, and the news would be old before it got to the public. I hated it, and it didn’t work. The way we got press was by subverting the system, but you can’t always tell management that. As I write this, I have just received a message from a colleague at that institution saying that they couldn’t meet me for coffee as they were waiting on a press release approval. Your life shouldn’t be dictated by such things!

Let’s really decide if the pros are worth it.

Pro 1) You can get a message out to a lot of people at once

This “pro” isn’t really about press releases at all but about distribution mechanisms. The real value here is that you only have to write one piece and can send that same version to lots of people. However, the information ecosystem has changed and you are no longer dependent on news outlets picking up your story to have it widely distributed.

There are plenty of other options available for distribution now. And they don’t just get your information to journalists. You’ll probably want to consider whether you want to target everybody with one form of writing for a start. It might be worth the investment to spend a little more time writing different versions of the same story suited to different audiences and then distributing those broadly. The incremental overhead of a second/third version, if it doesn’t need to go through an effort-consuming approval process, is probably worth it.

Press releases are no longer mailed out or faxed out (except in some particularly archaic institutions—yes, the practice still exists!) It is almost all electronic, but your specific mechanisms are plentiful. Email lists are still pretty standard, commercial and non-commercial press release distribution mechanisms are common, and then we have a whole world of Web sites, RSS feeds, blogs, social media, and the like as tools for distribution. How many of these actually require your news to be in the form of a press release? Perhaps the release distribution services, but even those are likely to be far less restrictive than your institution’s own rules.

Most institutions will allow you to get around most of their rules if you don’t call your writing a press release because the bureaucracy has barely noticed that the Web exists, let alone all your myriad ways of putting information out.

So really, there is nothing in this distribution question that requires a traditional press release. Let’s move on.

Pro 2) There are plenty of systems already built for shepherding press releases to journalists

The ease-of-use argument is probably the strongest for using press releases but it’s definitely not the only option. You might need to work harder to get other distribution mechanisms working well, but you ought to be doing that anyway, and not relying only on press release distributions. Given that these distribution services exist and can be cheap or free, use them by all means if it doesn’t mean turning your story into something lifeless. But keep working your networks and communication channels in all the other ways to make these services redundant.

Again, there is probably nothing here that requires what you would call a traditional press release, except you might have to fill out boxes on a Web form that include various info about contacts, funders, etc. That’s actually a good thing as it means the service is probably placing that information in a box/section separate from the body of the release so it becomes more journalist-friendly. Journalists can get to that info easily when they need it but it’s not in the way when they are trying to find out if you have a story worth covering.

Pro 3) You can emphasize the parts of the story that you want people to pay attention to.


You really think you can tell journalists which part to listen to? If the part you choose isn’t the best part, you’re damaging your chances of pickup at best. Otherwise, you’ll look you’re spinning, or are incompetent, or out of touch.

Journalists will write what they want to write and you are doing everybody a favor if you lead with the real news. Even if some spinning will be effective in the short term, it won’t help in the long term because it will undermine any trust in you.

Last week I saw a case where a press release claimed a biggest, first result published in a leading journal, without acknowledging that another group had put out a paper the week before which beat that supposed record. Some journalists who didn’t have time to find the previous work picked up on the story and wrote it based on believing the release. But when they found out about the other, they had to do more work to add corrections and comments to their stories. Editors hate it when that happens, and writers aren’t too fond of it either. Now, do those writers and editors trust the source of that press release more or less seeing as they gave an incomplete story that led to more work and poorer quality work?

At this point, I’m sure you can see what I’m getting at. Traditional press releases have very limited benefits and plenty of downsides. I’m not even going to go into them in detail as I’m sure you’ve experienced many of them yourself.

The solution? Write good stories. Get them out efficiently and promptly through your networks without calling them formal releases. Use formats that best suit the story and audiences, rather than squeezing it into a set of silly expectations about a “press release.”

Avoid the press release and save your soul”

The writer really nailed it didn’t he?  I know especially those in the larger organizations are cheering about now.

By the way if you are interested in getting on TV with your message, go to for a special deal on media pitch coaching.

Thanks and good luck.

Edward Smith

America’s Leading Media Pitch Coach.

Share Button

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Share Button