Beyond the Media Pitch: How to Secure Better Coverage in Today’s Noisy Market

Jun 24, 2022

5 min

Peter Evans

At our webinar earlier this month, we were joined by Wilf Dinnick, a communications and media professional with more than 25 years of global experience as a journalist working in national broadcast, digital and early-stage startups. Wilf has covered major stories for news networks including ABC News, CNN, CBC News and Al Jazeera and is a past winner of the prestigious Edward R. Murrow Award. This vast experience on both sides of the camera has given him a keen understanding of what it takes to secure media coverage in today’s environment.



Here are 3 key takeaways you missed:


#1 The Odds of your Media Pitch Resulting in Coverage are Disappointingly Low - And the Trend is Not Good



Wilf Dinnick discussed the sobering stats from a study of over 400,000 pitches conducted by Propel media that reveal that only ⅓ of emails sent to journalists are opened. But equally disappointing is the fact that only 3% of pitches result in coverage and this trend appears to be continuing. What Dinnick went on to explain is that “journalists see many pitches as an interruption as most fail to clearly demonstrate relevance to the stories they want to publish for their audience.



#2 Journalists are Busier than Ever. So You Need to Connect with Them In Places they are Going for Story Ideas and Expert Sources



Dinnick also shared some important data that reveals how journalists are spending their time. Where they get their story ideas and how they search for experts. This helps explain the diminishing rate of return on traditional media pitches. For instance, Twitter remains dominant as a platform used by journalists to quickly discover trending stories. So making your story ideas more discoverable with appropriate hashtags on social is an important way to promote your experts in the flow of the conversation as a story is breaking or emerging.


Wilf also highlighted the importance of dialling into the daily news cycle by looking in the same areas journalists are going for their ideas. The latest research reveals that journalists find newspapers and magazines most valuable. Why? Sites such as the Washington Post, CNN, BBC, New York Times and Axios are well funded and resourced to develop the longer format, well-researched stories. They often focus on exclusive stories and break important news that is echoed through other outlets. And they set the pace of the news cycle as it echos through regional news outlets where journalists look to localize the story for their audiences. Closely monitoring these sites allows you to be in touch with the key stories and offer clear value to journalists, by offering your experts who can help explain key developments in the context of their research or localize the story for a regional audience.


#3 There are Ways to Beat the Odds and Improve your Media Coverage by Following Proven Best Practices When Pitching


Despite the poor odds when pitching journalists, there is hope for media relations and PR pros. Dinnick unpacked a number of important best practices that can substantially improve your odds. Drawing on research from a number of media organizations that track journalist engagement, he laid out a number of guidelines that you should be following when putting together your media pitches. Some of these included:


Timing Your Pitch


Journalists are more receptive to pitches early in the day between the hours of 5am and 11am. This is when the stories are breaking and work is being assigned - and journalists are looking for expert sources. Also, there is evidence that pitching earlier in the week on a Monday or Tuesday yields better results.



Keeping it Brief


The research Dinnick presented on the profound changes that have been happening in Newsrooms and the overload that journalists are experiencing underscores the importance of being to the point with journalists. That begins with understanding how journalists are spending their day - glued to mobile devices. “This impacts how you need to write subject lines that generate curiosity and fit into mobile devices, given the limited set of characters they can display,” said Dinnick. He also shared stressed research that shows the body copy of a pitch should be under 200 words.


Mind the Links


Loading a journalist up with lots of links to research, videos, and media coverage in the body copy of your pitch may seem like a good idea to help them evaluative a story idea But this is a no-no. It creates unnecessary clutter and detracts from the key messages you want them to focus on. Instead, journalists report they want as few links as possible. Wilf Dinnick recommends 1-2 links max. It’s important to note that this will present a challenge if you don’t have your content organized into comprehensive expert profiles which include important information that journalists want to see such as past media and speaking appearances, research, publications, education/credentials, affiliations etc.


There was a lot to take away from this session which was jam-packed with research and best practices for media relations and PR pros. However, perhaps the most important lesson was how to ”flip” the traditional approach to pitching 180 degrees - starting the pitch process by first developing “owned” content that gets published to your website.


As Wilf Dinnick stated, “you have to think like a journalist” as you approach the story ideas you want to pitch. Start with owned content and publish stories that focus on your experts which clearly show them to be relevant and credible while making their work more engaging and human through visual media helps “set the table for the journalist.” If it’s well structured and engaging, it gives journalists the added context they need to immediately understand how your pitch is relatable to their audience.


What’s most powerful about this approach is that it helps media relations and PR pros avoid the “earned media trap.” Instead of being overly focused on coverage, we can think more strategically about the value we bring to the organization as storytellers to create quality “owned” content that boosts search engine (SEO) authority and PageRank as well as site engagement with visitors to boost reputation, relationships and revenues. It was clear from the many examples shared by healthcare organizations, universities and associations that this approach is where the real gains can be made. And how media relations and PR pros can show more tangible value to their organizations.


Stay tuned for more on this topic of owned content and how it helps improve your media coverage as we explore this in our next post.


To see the entire webinar, make sure to sign up for BrightTalk to watch the full webinar here.







Connect with:
Peter Evans

Peter Evans

Co-Founder & CEO

Recognized speaker on expertise marketing, technology and innovation

Media TrendsThought LeadershipMarketingTechnologyInnovation
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ExpertFile

Who Owns the World Cup? featured image

2 min

Who Owns the World Cup?

A plan to sell minority stakes in the commercial business surrounding FIFA competitions has triggered a major confrontation with European soccer. UEFA and its 55 national associations have reportedly agreed to boycott FIFA competitions while the proposal remains active. The dispute touches on sports governance, private investment, legal authority, media rights and the growing commercialization of the World Cup. Writing a story around this unprecedented event?  Connect with leading experts below for insight and commentary. Matthew Robinson — University of Delaware Robinson specializes in international sports governance, sport diplomacy and global sport development. His work is particularly relevant to the power struggle between FIFA, UEFA and national associations—and what a coordinated European boycott could mean for FIFA’s authority. Thomas Smith — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Smith studies sports economics, finance and the business of entertainment. He can provide insight into the financial thinking behind FIFA’s proposal, including the trade-off between receiving capital now and sharing future World Cup revenues. Tim Derdenger — Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business Derdenger studies sports markets, sponsorship and the commercialization of major sporting events. His research is relevant to the potential effects on broadcast value, sponsors, fan interest and the overall World Cup brand. Klaas Baks — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Baks specializes in private equity, alternative investments, mergers and acquisitions and business valuation. His expertise can help explain how investors might value FIFA’s commercial assets and what they would typically expect from a minority investment. Andrew Brandt — Villanova University Brandt’s expertise spans sports law and sports business. That experience is relevant to questions about FIFA’s authority over its members, the legal consequences of a boycott and the potential impact on players, sponsors, broadcasters and host countries. Tim DeSchriver — University of Delaware DeSchriver researches sport finance, economics and marketing. His work can help frame the broader financial question: Is FIFA unlocking the value of its competitions, or giving up a share of long-term revenue in exchange for immediate funding? Reach out to these experts now for your next story.  All inquiries are monitored to ensure time-sensitive request and deadlines are met. For more FIFA and WorldCup information visit our World Cup Expert Hubs.

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth featured image

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value.  Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns featured image

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts?  Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

View all posts