This week, I read an article entitled “7 reasons why it’s time to retire ‘pitch’ and ‘pitching’.” In this article, published by Regan.com, Andy Beaupre argues that “pitching” is a prehistoric process that harms the public relations industry.
Although I agree that “pitching” an idea can seem one-dimensional at times, I think crafting a pitch is still a vital and important process for a PR professional that creates a foundation for a lasting relationship with clients.
Unlike the message that Beaupre portrays, I think it is important not to assume that PR professionals blindly chuck thoughts at clients who are ambiguous to new ideas. In reality, I think PR professionals are simply creating a two-way exchange that combines the benefits of input and feedback in order to better establish cohesiveness.
As a strategic-communication major, I strongly desire the opportunity to use persuasion to my advantage. It’s about finding the correct medium for an audience, and supplying that audience with knowledge and research to help them better understand my vision.
Instead of dismissing “pitching” as a whole, I argue that the PR industry is reaching an era where the term is evolving. I think using older tactics, such as basic pitching, combined with the supplementation of social media, online newsrooms and links to online press kits are just some of the ways the term “pitching” has changed.
Instead of elimination, PR professionals should combine a variety of elements to their advantage in order to promote ideas with the clients’ best interest in mind. Like providing pictures within a storybook, PR professionals are telling a story that uses different channels to engage an audience.
I do not dismiss everything Beaupre argues, but I will agree that we have different views on the concept as a whole. Where he sees an annoying and cliché process, I see the opportunity to connect with individuals and refine my craft. We can always modify the word “pitching”, but its process and terminology will never change.