Anyway, these were the result of a combined effort between Tracy Erickson (now grand poobah of sorts over at PocketGamer) and me, along with… the guy who filmed it and all that. Single biggest problem with these videos, and the reason they didn’t do better? The fact that, because of platform approvals and such, we weren’t allowed to actually show the game, the logo, the package, or anything. “Oh, these are about Dungeon Siege: Throne of Agony?” would have been a perfectly acceptable reaction to viewing. However, I feel quite free at this point to say, yes, these are about that game.

Peaceful day in the park… not so much (on YouTube)

Unwanted Party Guest

Laundromat Hijinks

(Yes, this stupid blog needs updating, so I can, y’know… embed videos without it crapping out… it’s coming, don’t worry.)

Previews are starting to hit, and people are really digging it! Here’s the buzz so far:

Pocket Gamer
“With a few months between now and its early 2011 release, this highly promising game is destined to only get better as independent developer 11-bit Studios lavishes it with polish.”

Rock, Paper, Shotgun
“Despite the sluggish pace of your units, the pace of the game itself is relentless. You’re constantly weaving your commander back and forth, dropping sandstorms and decoys, repairing your units the moment before they’re flattened by an energy beam, and bringing up the tactical map just before your team reach a T-junction to make sure the team travels down the less painful-looking road.”

NowGamer
“If you’re at all interested in strategy games or fans of Indie developers, then this is very much a title you should be looking out for early next year.”

GameSpot
“11 Bit Studios is pushing replayability with new objectives for completed missions and leaderboard support. There’s even a combo system that will reward you for defeating strings of enemies in a timely manner. Anomaly is clearly taking a creative approach to the usual tower defense formula.”

That’s just the beginning, folks! For more info about Anomaly: Warzone Earth, hit up http://www.anomalythegame.com and follow 11 bit studios on Twitter or Facebook! And, of course, just keep reading this site.

The job is pretty much the same as the last one I was advertising, so pardon me for copying large chunks of the previous job description. However, it’s not an internship this time around… looking back, neither was the first one. I digress. By working at Evolve, you’ll get the opportunity to work with awesome companies and franchises like GOG.com, CD Projekt RED (The Witcher), TimeGate Studios, Paradox Interactive and more.

Duties include, but are not limited to:

• Conduct media relations – pitch stories, write press releases, follow up
• Assist in planning PR, marketing/creative and community campaigns
• Interact with people — media, fans, whoever — on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
• Do random marketing stuff, offering feedback on selling points, marketing copy and whatever else we have to help with
• Compile coverage/buzz/community reports
• Help with business development, securing new clients, partnerships, etc.
• Come up with cool new ways to promote clients and their products
• Contribute to this blog more often than I do

Still a pretty good gig, as far as I’m concerned. The ideal candidate has these traits:

• Excellent writing abilities, able to deliver fun, creative and enticing copy
• Knowledge of games industry necessary (consoles, PC and mobile), tech and social media knowledge nice
• Extensive network of contacts in games industry preferable
• Prior PR experience within a games developer, publisher or agency greatly preferred
• Not against working from home, wherever that may be
• Based in NYC, SF, LA or Edmonton preferable
• Able and willing to travel internationally
• Active and engaged on Twitter, Facebook and/or other social networks

This is a paid part-time position with 20-30 hours of work per week and the potential to grow to full-time in the future. If you’re interested, please submit your cover letter, resume and salary expectations to tom@evolve-pr.com. CLOSING DATE: January 6.

Essentially I’m looking for someone interested in tackling all aspects of the job I do; I don’t really want to hog all the glory, and I know that interns tend to get stuck with the crappiest possible jobs. Yes, you’ll still be responsible for compiling reports for clients, but beyond that you’ll also have a chance to do all sorts of other stuff that’s a lot more fun.

Duties include, but are not limited to:

• Compile monthly coverage/buzz/community reports.
• Conduct media relations – harass journalists endlessly for coverage,  write press releases, put together story pitches, follow up
• Do random marketing stuff, offering feedback on selling points, marketing copy and whatever else we have to help with
• Assist in planning PR, marketing/creative and community campaigns
• Interact with people — media, fans, whoever — on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
• Help with business development, securing new clients, partnerships, etc.
• Come up with cool new ways to promote clients and their products
• Contribute to this blog more often than I do

Doesn’t sound so bad, right? So here’s the type of person I’m looking for:

• Awesome
• Friendly
• Can put up with my stupid jokes
• Strong communication skills – both writey and speaky
• Not against working from home, wherever that may be
• Prefer someone in NYC, SF, LA or Edmonton… not necessary, though
• Knowledge of games industry necessary, tech and web knowledge nice

This is a paid part-time position, between 10 and 20 hours per week (variable), with the potential for full-time work at some undetermined point in the future. If you’re interested, please send your resume, cover letter — anything you think will make me like you — to tom@evolve-pr.com.

Here I sit, perched high above the streets of San Francisco in a swank Japanese theme hotel that I couldn’t possibly afford were it not for the miracle of Hotwire.com. In an hour or so I’ll set off to wax professional and hand out business cards to people who’d probably rather go start a tongue-wrestling war with the colorful street folk in the area than listen to yet another pitch from yet another PR guy.

But I like to think I’m different–nay, better–than those other, surely sleazy (at least in my head) PR folks. They’re out there hawking their services with a big fancy suit and a big fancy package of big fancy sales collateral. I forgot my suit, probably wouldn’t wear it anyway, and printed up some last-minute business cards with an overnight business-card printing place. I’m not like them, right? That should count for something, right?

Deep inside, of course, the inevitable truth weighs on my mind: the people I’m trying to get business from likely expect that sort of uber-professional who’s recited his sales pitch a million times. Sure, they’ll say, “oh, I’m so tired of that same old crap” (maybe they wouldn’t use those exact words, but you get the idea)… but at the end of the day, big agencies still win out over the little guy.  The global presence of offices in San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Copenhagen and Sao Paolo will surely win a contract over that freelance rep in rural Wisconsin — not to say that ability, character or any of those other important factors necessarily play into those decisions. This doesn’t just apply to the business-development side, though, where I have to muster up all the charm of a used-car salesman to provide a life for myself and my family, but also with media.

I’ve read all sorts of articles complaining about PR, suggesting how we should be better doing our jobs, how we’re pretty much all buffoons who can’t be bothered to actually do some research. I understand there are some awful PR people out there. They hop on Vocus, generate some massive list of journalists they couldn’t possibly know much about–much less research and have time to follow up with–and blast out their press releases like a farmer unloading the buckshot at a flock of helpless ducks. They’ll send a dozen emails on the same subject, leave 20 voicemails, send five faxes, hire a Renaissance Faire court jester to deliver a song-and-dance pitch directly to the writer’s door… and they won’t take no for an answer. I understand these people exist, and I understand they’ve fucked it up for the rest of us.

But now I go into pleading mode (and this isn’t the first or last time I’ll have to do this): please give those of us who do our research and try to do our jobs ethically and effectively a bit of credit. I understand that I need to build a relationship before you’ll read everything I send you; that’s fine. But hey, if I’ve sent you three emails (absolutely my limit) and you can’t be bothered to hit the reply button and say, “no thanks,” what sort of message does that send to me? When I see you write a story that is completely relevant to what I’m pitching you, or worse, I see a story that is completely irrelevant to anyone–but is solely news because it involves some mega corporation or someone you went to lunch with last week–then what am I to gain from doing things “the right way”? It seems like it would be so much more effective for us–the PR people who want to do a good job–to start spamming you, harassing you endlessly and to not stop until we’ve secured the coverage.

I suppose this is, again, a moment of pleading. Journalists, PR execs… or really, anyone who ever has to hire any sort of external help or work with PR reps… hell, I suppose this could apply to anyone at all: if you’re going to say that you want things to change, or that you wish everyone wasn’t doing the same crappy, half-assed job in trying to reach out to you, then the least you can do is try to reward the people who do things differently. If you don’t want to hear from us, say so. If you’re not interested in whatever we’re pitching, tell us. That’s totally fine. But if we spend all this time and effort trying to cater to your needs, giving you exactly what you want, and then we’re simply ignored… we have to wonder if any of it is really worth it.

Watch out, trolls. It's hammer time.

The apocalypse is surely approaching, as I ready my hands for another gripping blog post — the first time this has happened all year, and my fingers are struggling a bit with this new task, like a pubescent boy fumbling with a bra strap. So bear with me if I ramble a bit; like that boy, it might take some time for me to get to the goods. It doesn’t help that it’s barely past 6:30am and my coffee cup isn’t refilling itself without the intervention of my fumbling fingers… which are writing this blog post. Duh.

Okay, so yesterday a pillar of the tech blogosphere/websiteosphere (I don’t even know what to call websites these days anymore, since most of them are blog-like), Engadget, shut down comments on its stories. As explained to VentureBeat by Editor-in-Chief, Joshua Topolsky, the decision was made because of a recent shift in the tone of comments, spurred largely by an influx of new visitors who found their way to the site because of the iPad unveiling. Now, apart from concluding that the iPad is an inherently evil device created to brainwash hipsters the world over, I’m forced to think about whether shutting these abusive commenters out entirely is really the right decision for Engadget.

See, I’ve been working in video games for a long time. There aren’t too many game-related forums out there that don’t occasionally — or regularly — devolve into sixth-grade playgrounds, with personal attacks on other users echoing through the digital air. It’s possible that my time spent trying to rehabilitate trolls — or to otherwise peacefully coexist with them — while arguing whether Fantasy Creature X could actually take down Hero Y with Feat Z and Weapon of Awesome Power +2 has desensitized me to the more vile of commenters. I’ve come to accept that anonymity, when combined with a group of idiots, tends to create some new breed of superidiot.

Topolsky’s thinking is that by turning off comments, he’s, “hoping they’ll get bored and decide to stop commenting.” That’s absolutely a possibility; these superidiots, although exceptionally gifted at spewing verbal vomit, surely have short attention spans — I liken them to those fast zombies in Dawn of the Dead, bound to be distracted by some other target that zips past their view. They’ll go complain somewhere else (via @dsilverman), they’ll go be turds on Xbox Live, harass their fellow Tauren on World of Warcraft, push over seniors at the grocery store… whatever. Or let’s say these superidiots are, like, even more advanced zombies — they’re angered by Engadget’s efforts to thwart their attempts at intelligent conversation, and feasting on commenters on other websites just won’t sate their hunger.

At some point, Engadget will turn comments back on. Apple will eventually announce the iHat (a hat I just made up that beams movies directly to your head but still has no USB port), and the superidiots will once again catch a glimpse of a shiny “Comment” link at Engadget. What then? They could come back with greater fury. I’ll agree with the Houston Chronicle’s Dwight Silverman (yes, sir, you get two links in one post!) that moderating the comments is really the only way to go from here. It requires a commitment from Engadget, either to devote internal resources to monitoring all comments or by enlisting the help of trustworthy people within the community to police the superidiots. As Topolsky said himself in that VentureBeat piece, Engadget can handle the flamewars. If it’s just a matter of cutting off outright offensive comments and personal attacks, the resources required to moderate user contributions is minimal.

We’ll see how it all plays out over the next couple of weeks. It’s possible that the trolls will move on and find a new home. In that case, Engadget looks really smart, making a bold stand against internet idiocy and ignorance. But if these particular trolls are the grudge-holding type, they’ll likely be waiting for the minute comments are turned  back on. At that point, Engadget has to decide whether to abolish comments altogether or just to start moderating them more actively.

As always, I welcome your thoughts in our comments — don’t screw with me or I’m shutting them off — via email or on Twitter! Until summer, when I write another post!

Ah, what a great vacation that was. So relaxing. I can still hear the sounds of the waves crashing on the white, sandy beach, tropical birds singing their alluring songs in the lush forest behind me. I really meant to update the blog from my cabana, but the resort was having problems with their wireless intern– ah, who am I kidding? The muses just weren’t watching my back. I try to keep updates here interesting, and have to wait for inspiration instead of just picking a random topic out of a hat.

So I was listening to the always-entertaining Mobcast last week, and the guys got to talking about “staying on message” and I went through a series of emotions — first, excitement about the onslaught of inspiration. Then I grew very, very angry, remembering meetings about messaging and training game developers how to stay on message for hours and hours before trade shows and media tours. Then I laughed because my dog was trying to hump my other dog. Then I grew sleepy. And so the weekend passed, and I’m finally getting around to writing this post.

I don’t remember which of the handsome Mobcasters said it, but he cited an example of a PR rep being visibly upset during an interview in which some sports guy or developer just wouldn’t use the exact phrasing the PR team had decided on prior to the press event. Whether you see it or not, this happens all the time — PR reps around the world are probably about to blow a gasket at this very moment because their finely crafted corporate messages are being shredded by staff who — how dare they — just don’t get how important it is to executives.

Allow me to explain briefly for those unfamiliar with the concept of messaging: when a company is getting ready for any sort of press engagement — a product launch, trade show, media tour, press conference, investors meeting, etc. — the executives and the PR team — or the PR team alone — will sit down to come up with “key messages,” which will then be used to draft a guideline for responses to queries. These usually use very specific wording about a product’s features and why they’re important, the company’s stance on a controversial issue, corporate plans or any number of other topics. Straying from the exact wording often means not sticking to the message and is frowned upon.

Establishing key messages is an important part of any PR plan, and while it might seem like fiendish megacorporation territory, sticking to those key messages in most cases is also very important. Most importantly for those outside of the organization, it allows the product/company to maintain a consistent brand, so that consumers aren’t confused. I’ll invent a conveniently relevant scenario: imagine a movie studio promoting it’s latest film based on a Stephen King novel. In one interview the producer says the movie will be a suspenseful thriller. At a simultaneous press junket across the country an actor calls it a bone-chilling horror flick. If those people had both stuck to the message, the consumer who’s seen both interviews wouldn’t be confused. That’s a very simplified example, but I think you get the point.

When someone doesn’t stick to the message and an unapproved and often somewhat incorrect statement hits the enthusiast news scene, the PR team has to scramble to resolve the confusion. Maybe that person talked about a feature that hadn’t yet been announced — the always-awesome unintentional leak — and the execs need to start getting involved. Particularly in a publicly-traded company, the ramifications of someone straying from established messaging can be rather significant.

I’ve eschewed the virtues of messaging enough; it’s not all Skittles at the end of the tasty rainbow (what?). Most “corporate” companies — you know the ones, most commonly associated with fearlessly arrogant fancy-pants executives and utter inaccessibility — take “sticking to the message” to extremes. I’ve gone through email interviews written by game developers, for example, into which I’ve been urged by execs to insert more key messages to ensure the company’s brand is sufficiently represented. Whether we actually answered the question or not was, ultimately, irrelevant, as long as most of our company’s core philosophies, competencies and product features were presented at every single opportunity.

I think that if you have a good relationship with a journalist, you should feel comfortable straying from the company line once in a while, though (almost) never on major company issues that could cause harm. If those off-the-record comments make it to print, you’re screwed. In a trusting relationship, though, the journalist will appreciate the difference between something that is fair to print — a more subjective version of the message or a freely shared inside scoop — and a bit of knowledge that could cost someone their job.

Messaging won’t go away. I’m sorry, journalists, but if you’re in an interview with one of my clients, I hope they’re sticking to the message. They can have opinions, you guys can talk all day long about some unrelated topic… but as soon as you start asking questions about business practices, why our product is better than the competition or whatever, I want them to say what they’re supposed to say. If they stray from messaging and it’s wrong, I’ll speak up right there — I may ask you not to print something because it’s a feature we haven’t talked about. If you still print it, you’re a jerk. But then I have to deal with that. And I’ll probably be upset because some guy just couldn’t stick to the message.

It’s time for another entertaining installment of PR Shorts, our highly informative — if somewhat basic and embarrassingly infrequent — look at a particular aspect of this job we do. Today I’ll discuss the daunting task of pitching a journalist.

The last PR Short touched on the press release, a vital weapon in the PR rep’s arsenal. The press release, however, is ultimately a rather passive way to secure media coverage; yeah, you have to do some legwork with follow-ups, but you’re really just carpet-bombing media with a subject you hope they’ll find interesting. You’ll largely end up sitting at your desk, drinking coffee, updating your Corey Feldman fansite and waiting for responses and inquiries. The pitch, on the other hand, requires a different approach.

Be relevant

With a press release you can sometimes get away with topics that are only tangentially relevant to the writers receiving it — though it’s worth noting that you can quickly piss off even the most patient of journalists by constantly sending them irrelevant press releases. Your pitch, however, has to be highly relevant to the writer and the publication you’re pitching, or else you’re just going to a) not get the coverage, and b) look like an idiot.

Put yourself in the journalist’s shoes. Is the story you’re pitching actually interesting to the publication’s audience? Did you pitch the right person? It’s important to actually read past articles from the writer; don’t just assume that “Tech Writer” means the guy (or gal) is interested in every little tech story. Maybe even more importantly, read recent articles — the writer’s interests may have shifted, he may have been assigned a new beat, whatever. You can show that you’ve done your homework by citing a recent story from the journalist — this won’t guarantee coverage, but it’ll reduce your chances of looking like an idiot, and will also increase the chances that the writer will pass along your pitch to the right person if, by chance, the one you pitched isn’t interested.

Be concise

Alright, I’ve been guilty of channeling Tolstoy in my pitches, with an endless cascade of words I was sure would woo the writer into loving me — and by extension, the story I was pitching. Then I smartened up and realized that journalists, like me, don’t like reading novel-length emails. Get to the point — you can get your story idea across in a few sentences, and if a writer just isn’t interested, she’ll know within a few sentences.

It’s sometimes difficult to provide evidence that a story is compelling in such a short amount of time — particularly if you’re working with a relatively unknown company or product — but if you absolutely must include lengthy details, be sure to get your most important info out within the first paragraph. You can always provide more information later, but it takes years of training at imaginary schools I made up in my head to learn the telepathy skills necessary to force a journalist to read a crappy, long-winded pitch.

Be timely

There’s only a brief window in which a news story is interesting; once you’ve crossed that invisible line, you’re going to have an incredibly tough time getting useful coverage. Keep time lines in mind when you’re pitching — particularly if you’re working with print publications, you need to push your stories early to ensure that you have enough time to coordinate any interviews or product viewings, and to let the journalist actually write the story. If you sent out a press release two weeks ago about a product launch and only then start pitching writers on a related story, you’re not likely to get a bite. The perception of exclusivity — the notion that the writer is finding out about something before anyone else — will only help your cause, and even if it’s somewhat obvious that you’re simultaneously pitching multiple writers, the fact that you’re giving them some lead time will always be appreciated.

Be realistic

This is somewhat related to relevancy as cited above, but it bears repeating: you have to be realistic about your expectations. While you feel your story about — oh, I don’t know, your new underpants technology — may be relevant to the people who read Popular Science, is it realistic that you’ll get coverage? If you have a good story, pitch it; there’s no harm in that. But think about how realistic the odds of getting coverage are; if it was a long shot, don’t pester the writer and beg for reasons why the story wasn’t written.

Let’s take GOG.com — it’s an amazing site with the noble and ambitious mission of creating a DRM-free marketplace for digitally distributed games. I think that the very concept of the site is relevant to Wired, for example. I’ve pitched them, too. However, being realistic with my expectations, I anticipated that the writers there — who spend a lot of time talking to big-wigs at global industry players like Microsoft and Google — might not see things my way. While I was disappointed to fail in my quest for coverage, I didn’t cry about it. Instead, we’ve focused a lot of energy on more realistic media hits, and things have gone well. At some point in the future the situation may change, and I’ll revisit the idea of pitching Wired.

There’s certainly a lot more to be said about pitching, but these things are supposed to be short. Err… mission failed. If there are topics you’d like to see covered in future PR Shorts, just leave a comment, send me an email or hit me up on Twitter!

For years, big-name PR agencies — and sadly, most game publishers, movie studios, record labels, plywood manufacturers, etc. — have focused most or all of their publicity and marketing efforts on scoring the big kahuna: coverage, big or small, in top-tier media. A small column on the fifth page of USA Today‘s Money section was — and still is, to some extent — a glorious achievement, to be pursued at any expense.

Quick digression: the Internet’s been around for a while. I remember having a Geocities site back in 1997 or something. Since the birth of the hideous Dancing Baby there have been countless sites run by enthusiasts — for free, simply maintained out of love for the subject matter. You could say these guys were the low-fi ancestors of today’s blogging elite. There were chat rooms, message boards (BBS anyone?), and generally a ton of places where consumers gathered to learn about products, talk about them and share their love for them.

Is that really any different than the current situation?

Even today, a lot of — if not most — PR departments spend all of their time chasing rainbows with those top-tier outlets, sacrificing a huge potential audience. We’ve long been taught that, while quantity of coverage is important, the quality of that coverage is of the utmost importance. So let’s think about this for a second: if you’re a major player in your industry or have a truly exceptional new product, then it’s quite possible for you to get great placement and positive editorial tone — high-quality coverage. If you’re repping a company that doesn’t have those things — that could still be an excellent company with a tremendous product, but one which may not be interesting to the mainstream audience — you’re going to be in for a tough climb to get to the peak of media notability. I’m currently focusing a lot of my time on GOG.com, which is in just that sort of situation: it offers an amazing product — a slick website, a great offering of games for a particular audience, and a fairly revolutionary outlook on digital distribution (DRM-free and all that jazz). However, can we really compete for media coverage with companies like Activision, with their billion-dollar-and-then-some revenue?

So what do you do? Well, back in the day we’d focus heavily on enthusiast media, and that’s definitely still the case today. You’ll always have better luck with journalists who are active in the industry in which you’re operating. But even back when I first got into the PR game with BioWare — at a time when the company was still working hard to make a name for itself — in 2000 or so, I realized that we could work with the websites and other outlets that didn’t necessarily get a million hits a month — the ones that were usually overlooked by bigger companies and agencies — to not only secure a significant amount of coverage, but also to ensure that coverage was incredibly positive.

You see, people who aren’t used to being treated as “special” — and no, I’m not talking about that kind of special — appreciate the effort that much more. I’ve long believed that, through personal attention and caring about everyone’s needs and desires, you can effectively create a massive network of evangelists to help spread the word about your products. This general concept birthed “viral marketing,” which became a big bullet point on big agencies’ service offerings a few years ago when YouTube rose to prominence and when ilovebees put Halo on the map.

Even then, a lot of marketers didn’t catch on. They pushed out some half-assed attempts at engaging fans on a more individual level. And they still spent most of their time chasing the holy grails of coverage — magazine covers and whatnot. Don’t get me wrong — that coverage is still important. But should you sacrifice close interaction with your most vocal supporters — the people who pay for your products, love them and are loyal to your company?

With the recent rise of Twitter and Facebook and other forms of social media, once again companies are hopping on the “individual people are awesome” bandwagon. They still don’t “get it,” though, and spend most of their time simply pushing info to consumers without realizing that it’s a two-way road. Check out this short post by Derek Sivers about companies’ inability to use social media effectively, equating a bad date with many companies’ social media policies. Get with the program, folks — people (as opposed to media) have always been the primary influencers. When Jimmy started his Geocities site in 1997, the 20 people who visited his site were still there to hear what he had to say. When I hopped on an IRC network in 1998 to talk about Diablo II, I was still talking to people who were passionate about the product and gaming in general. Social media has simply offered a handful of convenient and well-publicized places for individuals to convene in order to discuss their lives, their passions and their favorite products and companies.

“Public relations” isn’t “media relations,” folks. The definition of PR seems to have moved away from its literal meaning — relating to and interacting with the public. If I focus my attention on individuals — or any number of “second-tier” websites and blogs (or third-tier or fourth-tier or even the guy who only gets 3 hits a year) — I can reach a massive audience. Those individuals appreciate even a moment of your time — particularly if you’re working for a company they adore — and will become extensions of your PR efforts (not necessarily your media efforts, of course), telling their friends, Twitter followers, and everyone else about your company and its products. They want to help you succeed. Let them do that. It just takes a bit of your time.

I’m going to try to put together a series of brief posts about PR practices, and thanks to my current diet of cold medication and coffee the best name I could come up with is PR Shorts. I know that sounds like a pair of cut-off jeans that will never give you a straight answer, but maybe you guys can suggest something better… or I’ll wait until the medicine wears off.

Today’s PR Short is about press releases. There’s definitely an accepted standard for the format of a release, so let’s talk about that quickly. In most cases your press release should look something like this:

Title
Subtitle

Intro paragraph

Detail paragraph(s)

Quote(s)

Boilerplate

The Title should grab the journalist’s attention. Usually you’ll want this to quickly explain the main point of the release, but in some cases you may want to just put a potential story headline in there. Let’s say you’re pushing a new emergency-diaper technology that cleans the baby’s butt if it drops a deuce (again with the underpants theme… curse you, medicine). Your title could be, “Hankypants Introduces New Diaper Technology to Avoid Poopy Accidents” (the straight-forward one) or, “Never Clean Baby Poo Again” (the less direct option). I probably could have avoided a poop joke there.

The Subtitle is optional, but I’d recommend making use of it. It allows you to briefly offer more info about the announcement. If you were to use the Never Clean Baby Poo Again header, for example, your subtitle could be something like, “Hankypants Introduces New Diaper Technology that Cleans Infants’ Bottoms.” A lot of journalists will really only read your title and subtitle; if they’re not interested at that point, they’ll likely just move on, so you may as well give them as much info as possible in those lines.

The Intro Paragraph gets to the point. It will usually begin with “Edmonton, AB, Canada – September 9, 2009.” — the location and the date of your announcement. Then you’ll want to explain what the announcement is about — “Hankypants, the leading creator of leading-edge diaper technology, is excited to announce its latest model, the PooFree 3000.” You can provide a bit more info, including availability, pricing, etc.

The Detail Paragraph(s) will just include some more info. In some cases you may not even want to provide more info — your intro may have already provided enough detail, but I’d recommend using this space if you can. It allows you to talk more about the product itself, your company, unique features of the product, etc. Don’t get overly verbose with this or any other paragraph, though — the more you write, the more time the journalist has to just stop reading.

The Quote is also optional, but it allows you to show off your executive team to the world and to push your corporate messaging a bit. Particularly if you’re announcing a partnership of some sort, quotes might allow you to include an external perspective on your company. Having someone else (preferrably someone reputable) in your release saying, “We’ve evaluated the PooFree 3000, and the product is, without a doubt, the pinnacle of diaper technology” will add some legitimacy to your announcement, and makes it a bit less about patting yourself on the back.

Your Boilerplate is just a description of your company. Talk about past products, your strengths, corporate ideals, etc. And be sure to include a URL for more info.

Pretty simple, right? If you have any questions about writing effective press releases, feel free to comment or email me!