We’ve been having more and more conversations of late with colleagues, clients and prospects about how we as an industry can better measure and evaluate PR. In many ways, it’s the question we’re getting asked by prospects who, facing budgetary pressures, need/want to better justify and communicate the value of PR.

We know that the media landscape has changed (and continues to change on a daily basis). Our sources of news, how we interact with it, digest it and share it have changed beyond recognition. Read Steven Berlin Johnson’s excellent article which goes into much more depth on this topic.

Yet, on the whole, we continue to use the same tried and tested methods of measurement and evaluation — a pile of clippings neatly analysed around key messages and pull through. Over the years, I’ve had many conversations with clients about how to improve measurement. But at the end of the day it all comes down to cost vs value.

The question I’ve been pondering is whether we should even bother pursuing this idealistic view of demonstrating PR value? We all know that PR has influence – that’s undoubtable.

Should we therefore be content with existing evaluation methods and put the debate to bed? Yes, it’s an uncomfortable thought and counter to everything that the industry’s been trying to achieve over the last ten years, but if you believe in the media revolution