That shift has led many clients to forego one of the oldest tools of PR – the op-ed. After all, why would you create content that someone else might change (without permission), fight to get space, and then possibly have to get through a paywall to make it matter?

This was the topic for a recent Cracking the Comms Code show. And what three op-ed editors said is that their audiences, from local to industry to nationally political, still see tremendous value from what many people mistakenly think of as a dinosaur tactics. 

Here’s what they said – as well as how editors evaluate submissions, what makes pitches succeed or fail, and the important role editorial judgment plays even in an age of unlimited self-publishing.

Third-Party Validation Matters – Especially to New Audiences

One of the clearest takeaways from the discussion was that publication in an established outlet still carries weight with readers in ways self-publishing often does not.

As David Mills, former deputy opinion editor at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, explained, readers understand intuitively that an op-ed published by a newsroom has passed through an editorial process. Someone evaluated the argument, assessed the quality, and decided that the writer had something worthwhile to say.

Audiences today live in a world flooded with content. Anyone can post opinions online or launch a newsletter. The new addition to this landscape is AI generating endless commentary. But earned publication still signals credibility because it reflects outside judgment rather than self-selection.

For emerging executives, niche experts, or organizations trying to establish authority quickly, that editorial validation remains enormously valuable.

Washington Technology senior reporter Ross Wilkers also emphasized that self-published content often circulates only within existing networks. Op-eds, on the other hand, allow communicators to move beyond their core audiences and enter broader industry conversations.

There is a “quality” difference here (reach), and also a “quality” difference (legitimacy). A LinkedIn post may reinforce existing relationships — fine. But an op-ed in a respected publication can introduce an executive or organization to entirely new audiences.

That mirrors broader industry trends. Research from Cision found that storytelling and media relations remain among the most valuable PR skills despite the growth of AI and digital publishing channels.

Editors Want Useful Arguments, Not Corporate Messaging

The panelists repeatedly returned to one issue that frustrates editors across every vertical: advertisements disguised as a submission.

Communicators often have clients or bosses who approach op-eds with a marketing mindset. The people at the top want to announce a launch, highlight a product, elevate a spokesperson, or promote an initiative. Editors, however, are evaluating a different question: will readers care?

David explained that overtly promotional submissions are often rejected immediately because they prioritize a client’s goals over what the editor and his publication need to deliver to their audience. Readers will go to the grocery store circular if they want somebody to sell them something. 

Carl Cannon, White House Bureau Chief for Real Clear Politics, said the same thing happens in political opinion essays. Those who have an overtly partisan agenda are often saying the same old things, but dressing them up as something new. 

The editorial page is for something else entirely.

The strongest submissions frame organizational expertise around broader issues affecting readers. A technology company — or the agency representing it — should not write an op-ed saying its platform is innovative. Rather, it should explain a cybersecurity challenge reshaping the industry, describe implementation lessons learned, or explore emerging risks organizations are failing to address.

In other words, the best op-eds educate, and inspire interest, first. Then, if there’s time, space, and audience buy-in to promote, they promote.

Fairness and Intellectual Credibility Matter More Than Outrage

The editors also highlighted an issue increasingly relevant in the social media era: the difference between attention and persuasion.

Online platforms often reward emotional intensity, ideological certainty, and outrage-driven commentary. Editorial pages generally do not.

Carl argued that editors are drawn to writers who engage opposing viewpoints honestly rather than caricaturing them. One of his central standards is simple: an op-ed should treat the opposing argument with as much respect and rigor as if it were the writer’s own position.

From an audience perspective — and thus from the editor’s perspective, too — intellectual confidence beats exaggeration and personal attacks every time. The latter might be easier to dash onto a page and send out the door. But editors do not have time to salvage pieces that begin with ad hominem language and emotionally charged rhetoric. They’ll move on.

Ross noted that strong op-eds often resemble strategic briefing documents. They anticipate skepticism and respond to likely objections. Communications professionals can take note: thought leadership has to be more than simply asserting expertise. Showing that we did our homework is what makes an editor look twice.

The Best Pitches Begin With Understanding the Publication

Another recurring frustration among the editors involves poorly targeted outreach.

Carl noted that many pitches reveal immediately that the communicator does not actually understand the publication he’s contacting. Editors, overwhelmed with submissions especially in our age of mass-produced content, can’t spare time or energy for amateurish research.

Examples abound for communications professionals looking to start editor relationships on the right foot. Regional newspapers prioritize local relevance. Trade publications focus on helping professionals navigate operational challenges. Political outlets emphasize policy and public debate. A pitch that ignores those distinctions is unlikely to succeed, regardless of writing quality.

Finally, there is relationship management — going beyond good outlet research and good (human-centered) writing, and remembering that the editor himself is a human being, too. For example, editors are overwhelmed with email, which makes follow-ups necessary, because pitches genuinely get missed. But then there is a line between persistence and pushiness, and sometimes it’s a thin one.

Professional communicators succeed when they recognize editors as partners serving audiences, not gatekeepers standing in the way of promotion.

Artificial Intelligence Is Increasing the Value of Human Perspective

No discussion about the world of editorial would be complete with addressing the elephant in the room: artificial intelligence.

The editors acknowledged that AI tools are already reshaping publishing workflows. Newsrooms are experimenting cautiously with automation, drafting assistance, and workflow efficiencies. At the same time, editors remain deeply skeptical of overreliance on AI-generated content.

That skepticism reflects a broader industry concern. As AI-generated material floods inboxes and content platforms, editors are increasingly looking for qualities that feel distinctly human: lived experience, authentic perspective, original framing, nuanced judgment.

Ironically, the rise of AI may strengthen the strategic value of thoughtful op-eds. Low-quality AI-generated thought leadership may increase output volume. But more output is only as good as the willingness of editors to accept it. More often, editors are getting tired of generic content, and also getting better at sniffing it out.

The firms that stand out will have invested in authentic expertise, sharper storytelling, and unique perspectives. These commodities will rise in value as AI slop tsunami keeps on rolling in, and the value of an editor’s judgment will rise with them. Comms professionals who give up on this still-valuable system in favor of greener AI pastures may find that the grass over there doesn’t taste so good.

See the entire panel conversation below.

But here’s the thing: these one-time wins mean nothing if you can’t show up to a meeting on time, don’t communicate difficult news cycles, or have a habit of sending clients surprise invoices. That’s because the best PR campaigns are built on more than just the headline. The more important foundation is the backstage work that nobody sees, but shows up in how you show up.

Two recent episodes of Cracking the Comms Code laid out what’s most important for agencies and consultants to bring to the table. The first was from the client perspective and featured 

• Dan Ring, SEON’s Head of Communications,
• Susan Powell, Marketing Director for Interstate Moving Relocation and Logistics, and
• Amanda Coffee, who ran global comms for PayPal and other corporate giants.

The other brought experienced agency executives and consultants to the conversation:

• Jen Becker, founder of JB Comms Consulting and wearer of many comms hats,
• Julie Murphy, president of Sage Communications, and
• Rod Hughes, president of Kimball Hughes Public Relations.

They all agreed: it turns out that the “boring back end” of a business often determines whether clients stay, grow, or walk away.

The Hidden Half of Client Service

Most agencies focus heavily on the front-end of communications work. This means media strategy, messaging, thought leadership, pitching, and interview prep. But a reliable operation makes as much of an impression on clients, and they’re looking for that every day of your contract.

•   Did the proposal arrive when promised?
•   Did the invoice match the agreed amount?
•   Did team members show up to meetings on time looking worth the money?
•   Did onboarding feel smooth?

Administrative details? Sure. And that can translate to “boring.” But “boring” leads to “predictable,” and “predictable” leads to “reliable” – and that leads to the exciting stuff like uncovering a great narrative, landing the surprise piece of media coverage, and getting paid. 

These agency, consultant, and in-house experts described how operational consistency directly impacts client confidence. A missed payment record, a confusing invoice, or a delayed response can quickly create friction even when the actual communications work is strong.

For smaller agencies especially, professionalism can become a competitive advantage. Many less-known boutique firms can compete successfully against larger agencies precisely because they provide a smoother, more attentive client experience.

Clients Don’t Care about Your Internal Chaos

One of the strongest themes from the discussion was simple: Clients generally do not care what internal systems or challenges an agency is dealing with. They care about outcomes and the ease of working together to reach them.

Clients want smoothness, and they expect it, too. Anything less calls into question an agency’s or consultant’s competence, which too often is a client’s first step toward the door.

This becomes even more important in family-owned businesses or smaller organizations making their first investment in PR. It’s enough of a challenge to justify the budget to leadership. Throw in a few operation mistakes, and that uphill battle becomes Everest without a Sherpa.

There’s enough organizational chaos out there, but that should stay behind the curtain. Without clarify, there’s friction – and not the good kind. An agency that communicates clearly and has its administrative ducks in a row will stand out, and build trust. This is part of client service, and a bigger part than most communicators acknowledge.

What to Do with All that Tech

Modern agencies now rely on a growing ecosystem of tools for contracts, accounting, project management, collaboration, CRM systems, communication platforms, invoicing, and AI-powered workflows. That’s fine, provided all this tech supports good processes.

As Amanda described, many small businesses face the temptation to sign up for endless free trials without fully considering long-term operational implications. Once financial records, invoices, and client data are embedded into a platform, switching systems becomes painful.

The smarter approach is to ask these questions when a tool looks tempting:

• Does this solve a real operational problem?
• Will this scale as we grow?
• Does it integrate with my other systems?
• Does it integrate with client systems?
• Will it make life easier for the team or just create more complexity?

This is especially important as corporations look to have many specialty agency partners. If you love Slack and can’t handle Teams, you might be out of luck. Dan works with firms in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. The sooner an agency in Arizona or Alabama can standardize systems and collaboration tools across time zones and offices, the better.

Transparency Versus the Bait-and-Switch

Especially with all the unscrupulous (or even amoral) AI out there now, clients are doubling down on transparency as a top priority. Honesty has always been the best policy, but now it’s taking center stage.

Take upselling as a prominent example. If an agency believes that additional services could help achieve business goals, clients generally want to hear about it — as long as the recommendation is thoughtful and clearly tied to outcomes.

Upselling becomes problematic only when it feels disconnected from strategy or business priorities. But when agencies explain

• the opportunity,
• how it supports the client’s mission,
• its potential measurable value, and
• the additional cost,

clients are often receptive.

Here’s another example of where transparency is key: the pitch process.

Agencies benefit from adopting this rule, or at least something like it, when presenting themselves for a client’s evaluation: Every team member who will actually work on the account must participate in the pitch process. The alternative is all too common: a bait and switch where the agency presents senior executives during pitches, only to replace them with junior staff once the contract is signed.

Clients understand that agency teams evolve over time, but changing the team immediately after winning business is a trust-killer. Clients should be important, not just feel important for the first five minutes of the relationship. So sell the team you actually plan to staff.

Success Starts with Operational Excellence

If you want a good reputation in the industry, start internally. Delivering a smooth experience will wow clients more effectively than fireworks from an inconsiderate or unresponsive team.

“Flashy” is fine, but “dependable” is better. (Better still if the client can get both.) Agencies with reliable systems, clear communication, transparent billing, and collaborative processes often retain clients longer, even in highly competitive markets.

PR professionals have a lot of good stuff to sell. If they lose sight of operational excellence as part of the package, they’re going to have trouble closing on anything else.

Both panel conversations are below.

The client perspective

Agency and consultant best practices

In a trilogy of Cracking the Comms Code episodes, we convened industry experts and thought leaders to explore how PR professionals can level up their skillsets to drive the greatest possible impact. Here’s what they told us.

Elevating your PR skillset

Our panelists agreed that although sector knowledge can be a genuine advantage in specialized fields, core skills matter more than narrow experience. PR professionals with strong fundamentals — writing, storytelling, media relations, audience awareness — will always be in demand across industries. What matters is whether you’ve handled similar challenges, not whether you’ve worked for an identical company.

Bringing the right mindset is just as important. That means showing up curious, coachable, and prepared to ask the right questions so you can learn quickly. Understanding how your client’s business works is critical. PR professionals need to know what leadership cares about, how the company makes money, the challenges it faces, and how communications can move the needle.

When speaking with decision-makers, avoid slipping into jargon. Translate your value into business language. Tactics like placements and outputs are only part of the story — what matters is how they connect to a broader strategic goal. The role of a strong PR advisor is to guide leadership and speak credibly to the C-suite. Dig deeper into this conversation with Amanda Coyle of Resilere Partners, Ted Merz of Principals Media, and Executive Communication Strategist Trish Nicolas.

Getting it right from the start

Too many PR campaigns fail before they’ve even begun. Teams build in isolation, protect the “big reveal,” and then wonder why nothing lands. The smarter approach is simple: Test early. Float ideas with a small group of trusted reporters, gather real feedback, and refine before committing.

Relationships matter here. They won’t save a weak story, but they do provide signal — faster replies, honest reactions, and a clearer sense of what will resonate.

Execution then becomes about removing friction. Make the reporter’s job easy. Offer your spokesperson, but also offer multiple angles. Package assets in a way that works for the particular reporter you’re courting. Coverage is far more likely when you’ve laid the groundwork.

It’s also important to think beyond attribution. Getting your client named could be “a good start” instead of the victory. Shaping the broader narrative — and being included as a credible voice within it — often matters more.

None of this works without a clear understanding of the client’s business. PR decisions should reflect commercial reality, internal politics, and leadership priorities. Talk to senior stakeholders early, and make sure your ducks are in a row before you make a push. Many “PR problems” are, in reality, internal clarity problems.

When engaging media, keep it sharp. Pitches should be brutally concise. You don’t need to be comprehensive to garner interest, and you don’t need company boilerplate. If the first line doesn’t land, nothing else matters.

Finally, operate in the world as it is today. There are fewer journalists, with more noise and tighter competition. AI is accelerating output, but the quality isn’t keeping up. That makes targeting, relationships, and judgment more valuable. Chris Piedmont of Slide Nine, Adam Brooks of Candor, and Chase of METATHEORY break-down some of their tips and tricks for PR practitioners here.

From activity to outcomes

The shift PR agencies need to make is straightforward: stop obsessing over doing things, and instead obsess over accomplishing things.

That sounds simple, but it’s harder in practice. It means validating ideas early, aligning internally, executing cleanly, and focusing on influence over volume. Clients won’t be impressed if you tell them nothing but how busy you are. They care about what changed.

The starting point is clarity. Define success upfront in plain terms — revenue, reputation, influence — and work backward. Explain your impact in business language, or else you won’t make the case.

From there, strip out the noise. Drop jargon and long reports. A clear one-pager linking actions to outcomes will outperform any bloated deck. And remember whom you’re really serving: not just your day-to-day contact, but the C-suite above them. If your contact can’t easily explain your value internally, the chopping block is just down the road.

Execution works only when it connects to the wider business. PR amplifies marketing, sales, and positioning. Or at least it should. When it doesn’t, results will always fall short. In this panel discussion Lynda Carlisle of CS-Effect, Melissa Havel of Turnitin, and Ashley Dennison of CommsConsultants.com share their expertise on driving real client outcomes.

Truth-telling and meaningful metrics 

It’s also critical to be honest about what PR can and can’t do. You can’t guarantee coverage — and pretending you can erodes trust. What you can guarantee is consistency, direction, and a steady build of presence over time. That shift from chasing hits to building momentum is where many teams founder.

The same applies to targeting. Reach is easy to inflate and largely meaningless. Relevance is more elusive, and far more valuable. A small, engaged audience that reacts is worth more than a large one that barely knows you. Step away from the vanity metrics and measure what actually matters: message pull-through, meaningful engagement, and inbound signals.

At a higher level, the role itself needs to evolve. Strong practitioners act as partners. They push back, refine ideas, and stay close to the market. They provide activity, certainly, but the real value lies in their judgment.

That becomes even more important as AI accelerates output. Everyone is tied now in the race to see who can produce the most, but there’s still competition for who can think the best. Used properly, AI helps you move faster, not think less. Average content is now abundant. Insight is not.

In the end, everything comes down to one question: Did this PR campaign change anything that matters? Unless the answer is yes, clients have every right to be unhappy.

Watch each panel below.

Communications leaders know this because they’ve watched in horror as their carefully crafted LinkedIn posts are mocked in the comments or inadvertently sparked a social media pile-on after sharing what seemed like an innocuous, brand-safe message.

(Just ask McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinksi, whose simple effort to chow down on his company’s food didn’t sit well with a lot of observers.)

With trust so hard to win and massively easy to lose, creative communicators aren’t just looking for spokespeople on the board, in the company’s Slack channel or through an Indeed job posting. Instead, they are finding the right people whose voice will resonate with ordinary people: physicians who spend their days saving lives, parents whose sick kids are made sicker by bad policy decisions, entrepreneurs who have built – or rebuilt – their businesses brick by brick. 

These individuals can tell stories that customers understand and believe. But they aren’t easy to find, and their message isn’t as simple as a Yelp review or a corny ad. 

Elevating third-party voices is a powerful way to build trust while reducing the risk of turning C-suite executives into lightning rods. Here’s how to do it.

1. Pressure-test the narrative

Before seeking outside voices, make sure the story itself can withstand scrutiny. That means clarifying objectives, challenging internal assumptions, and, at times, telling clients or leadership that their preferred message will not land.

Start with alignment: What is the goal? Who needs to be persuaded? What evidence supports the case?

When we helped place everyday Americans in national and top state outlets in 2025, campaigns did not begin with pitch emails. They began with difficult conversations, rigorous research, and refining a narrative that an independent person could stand behind without compromising their integrity. 

If the story only works when delivered by a paid executive, it is not strong enough.

2. Find voices with real standing

The most effective outside voices are not mouthpieces with clean-cut success stories. They are people whose lived experience aligns naturally with the issue and who hold credibility with the intended audience.

That might mean individuals directly affected by policy, business leaders with firsthand market experience, or someone with a relatable human story. A plainly told account from someone without a grand title often carries more weight than commentary from someone with the letter “C” in their job description, because audiences assume they are less self-interested.

Sourcing these voices requires a disciplined search process. Identify individuals whose backgrounds genuinely support the narrative, conduct thorough interviews, and confirm alignment before drafting anything. The aim is credibility rooted in reality, not over-orchestration.

3. Build for multiple audiences

Once you have the right voice, approach the process like a journalist, not a marketer. Conduct an in-depth interview with the person to ensure they are on board with:

• The organization behind the curtain.
• The narrative you’re pushing.
• Their story’s alignment with the narrative.
• Putting themselves into the public eye.

Record the conversation, then transcribe it. Identify the emotional core and supporting evidence, before shaping the media content to work for four audiences: your organization, its stakeholders, the author, and the media gatekeepers (op-ed editors, reporters, producers, etc.) who will decide whether to feature this voice.

This is where many efforts fall short. Content may please the client, but ignore what editors actually run. Or it may lean heavily on data while flattening the author’s voice. Strong placements require disciplined editing, revision, and fact-checking. The same rigor applies whether targeting a national newspaper or a trade outlet. And remember that, often, regional publications deliver meaningful impact with lower reputational risk.

4. Train for discipline, not performance

A credible third-party voice is powerful, but unmanaged authenticity creates the risk that someone will fly off the handle, take advantage of their 15 minutes of fame, or have a tangential point of view that undermines the entire narrative. 

This is why media preparation is so important. Clarify the core message. Define off-limit topics. Rehearse responses to difficult questions. Align on key facts. In a crisis, independent validators can counter misinformation more persuasively than paid representatives – but only if they are properly prepared.

Preparation ensures that authenticity strengthens your position rather than undermining it.

5. Build relationships before you need them

Third-party credibility should be treated as infrastructure, not a one-off tactic. Develop relationships with experts, community leaders, and customers well before controversy emerges. 

After campaigns conclude, review what worked, be honest about what didn’t, and refine your approach.

In today’s information environment, narratives move quickly. Organizations that perform best can mobilize trusted voices without hesitation. That only happens when the groundwork is already in place.

This article was originally published as part of a sponsored partnership between Proven Media Solutions and Meredith & The Media.

Proven Media Solutions explored how AI is altering the media landscape and driving the emergence of a new answer economy across two episodes of Cracking the Comms Code, featuring:

• Five Blocks CEO Sam Michelson, Scale Without Chaos founder Samantha Riel, and Zen Media founder and PR strategist Sarah Evans on AI’s impact on the PR industry.
• Meredith & The Media founder Meredith Klein, Friday Reporter Public Affairs founder and host Lisa Camooso Miller, and Sources of Sources founder Peter Shankman on what’s next in corporate comms. 

Here are the most important takeaways.

Visibility is being rewired

Perhaps the most counterintuitive insight was also the most commercially important. Despite widespread industry assumptions, the sources shaping AI-generated answers are often not traditional earned media.

Practitioners tracking thousands of prompts across major large language models are finding that owned content, such as corporate websites, structured brand information, and even open press releases, shapes responses the most. Earned media still matters, but it is operating more as a reputational validator than the primary informational input.

This distinction changes how communication value should be sold and measured.

If audiences are asking AI tools to synthesize recommendations or explain markets, they may never click through to coverage at all. It might not be enough anymore for an organization to be mentioned in a piece of earned media. Instead, the organization needs to be “front of page” as the answer to the question searchers are asking.

In practical terms, strategy must evolve from media placement to something closer to answer engineering, which means mapping the questions stakeholders ask and ensuring authoritative brand content exists to address them.

Productivity gains are buying back time

AI is making certain work faster and more efficient. What’s good about that is the time communicators now have on their hands to take care of higher-level tasks. But it also means higher expectations.

On the one hand, teams are already using AI to turn live conversations into content pipelines, transform messy strategic thinking into structured plans, and accelerate operational decision-making. On the other hand, an employee who once generated $120K of annual value may soon be expected to deliver multiples of that. 

On both hands, the takeaway is that AI amplifies the need for human judgment. Used well, it gives thinkers and doers the bandwidth to think and do, with good results up and down the company. Used badly, it takes over uniquely human functions and industrializes mediocrity at every level.

The most effective practitioners treat AI like a junior colleague – training it, correcting it, and refining outputs. Organizations expecting one-line prompts to replace expertise may find that AI-hallucinated strategies are simply fancier ways to put themselves at the back of the line.

Corporate crises now burn hotter and faster

Attention cycles in corporate communications are collapsing, meaning crises can erupt and disappear within minutes — or go on a long rampage, and someone has to know which kind we’re dealing with from moment to moment.

In a media environment where a geopolitical conflict, a viral customer complaint, and a celebrity meme can appear in the same social feed, audiences process outrage differently. Often, they move on fast — even before corporate responses clear legal review. This creates a paradoxical new discipline: knowing when not to respond.

Strong organizational values remain the most reliable compass. Companies grounded in consistent messaging and clear principles are better able to weather episodic storms. Preparation is therefore less about predicting specific events and more about stress-testing core positions in advance. 

Clarity is still king — both in how crises are handled and in how organizations present themselves both to outside consumers and inside team members.

Trust is fragmenting – again

Perhaps the most provocative shift involved in the AI answer economy is social rather than technological.

Audiences are increasingly bypassing institutional voices in favor of smaller, more familiar ones: local journalists, niche creators, subject-matter experts, and micro-influencers embedded in real communities.

Research and practitioner experience both suggest that local media retain disproportionately high trust. A recommendation from a neighbor or respected specialist may drive more behavior than a national campaign reaching millions. Meanwhile, mega-influencer credibility has eroded as it’s become harder to hide that the big guys are just trying to sell something.

For communications buyers, this creates a difficult recalibration. It’s cheap to reach the masses but more expensive than ever to persuade them.

The craft is still everything

One important point to remember is that the same skills that drove success in the 20th century remain relevant today. Narrative still matters. So do third-party validation and consistent positioning. What has changed is the mechanism through which these strengths are discovered and acted upon.

AI-mediated discovery will reward organizations that carefully and thoroughly stock their content libraries. Corporate volatility will reward those with pre-agreed value frameworks and faster internal decision pathways. Fragmented trust will reward communicators who cultivate authentic advocates rather than chasing vanity metrics.

Above all, the impact of communications must increasingly be demonstrated in business terms. Board-ready metrics like visibility in AI outputs, influence on purchasing pathways, and contribution to revenue will shape future budgets — so professionals need to be prepared to chase these numbers and prove their achievements. 

A new brief for buyers – and the industry

For organizations investing in communications services, the takeaway is not that PR has become obsolete, but that the definition of effective PR has expanded dramatically. We need more than just coverage, more than just speed, more than just scale.

Buyers should now demand strategies designed for how information actually moves: integrated owned-and-earned ecosystems, measurable visibility in AI discovery, influence rooted in credible voices, and productivity models aligned to real business outcomes.

For communications professionals, the message is sharper still. AI is exposing where the discipline was never applied rigorously enough. The opportunity ahead is enormous, but only for those willing to stop optimizing for impressions and start competing to become the answer.

Dive deeper into the full conversations in the videos below.

In countries like Iran, speech the government doesn’t like results in the speaker being threatened, jailed, and/or killed. But it doesn’t stop there. The people who facilitated the speaker often end up in the same circumstances, as do their families.

America’s speech laws aren’t perfect. Some people opposed the Biden administration’s jailing of two dozen pro-life activists, while others will point to the recent deaths surrounding Minnesota protests against immigration enforcement.

But the fact that millions of people can publicly protest, spread awareness on social media, and advocate for change through the media and to their elected representatives means that our speech is still mostly free.

Contrast that with Iran, where in the last few months tens of thousands of people were slaughtered for the crime of protesting against their government. 

As you go back to your day, please take a moment to read our piece above, or to watch a few minutes of our panel conversation with Iran International journalist Negar Mojtahedi about the freedoms we cherish in the West and hopefully will see flourish in Iran. 

Platforms like LinkedIn provide measurable metrics for success, giving teams something tangible to point to like impressions, engagement, follower growth, and reach. In a world obsessed with dashboards, that kind of feedback feels reassuring.

The quiet risk in today’s marketing ecosystem is that brands have allowed social media to crowd out other tools that build trust more deeply and often more effectively.

On a recent episode of Cracking the Comms Code, Dustin Siggins (Proven Media Solutions) sat down with Will Greenblatt, a public speaking and storytelling coach who helps founders command rooms, and Renée Lynn Frojo, a former journalist turned content strategist who advises service-based leaders on trust-driven growth.

No one disputed whether social media works. (It does.) The question was whether we’ve accidentally treated it as the whole answer — when for many organizations, it’s only part of the equation.

Optimizing for applause instead of authority 

Scroll through any feed, and you’ll see polished posts, clever hooks, and hot takes engineered for engagement. Marketing teams celebrate impressions. Executives snap screenshots of follower growth, and their agencies report on reach as if it were revenue.

Meanwhile, the pipeline stalls. Sales cycles lengthen, and trust erodes.

In 2026, social platforms still dominate mindshare, and the visibility they enable creates a dangerous assumption: If a campaign is loud, it must be effective. If everyone is on a platform, it must be the best place to build a brand.

The truth is that however good a tool social media (or, frankly, AI) might be, it can’t be the whole strategy. And for many organizations, it’s dramatically overvalued relative to other channels that build deeper, more durable trust.

The traffic trap: when visibility distracts from value

Renée framed the core mistake with precision: most leaders confuse a traffic business with a relationship business.

If you sell a commodity, a low-ticket offer, or something impulse-driven, traffic is oxygen. You need scale, volume, and constant visibility. Social media is structurally designed to serve that model.

But if you sell expertise, advisory services, high-ticket consulting, enterprise solutions, or anything involving long buying cycles, the dynamic changes. You don’t need 10,000 anonymous impressions. You need 20 highly qualified decision-makers who trust you enough to bet on you.

That will turn the focus fast from volume to credibility.

The problem is that social media metrics are seductive. They’re public and immediate, creating the illusion of momentum. But impressions are not influence, and engagement is not endorsement. You can “win” the algorithm and still lose the deal.

For communicators advising complex organizations, this distinction is critical. You must ask: are we optimizing for reach, or are we optimizing for relevance? Those two goals rarely align perfectly.

In-person events: compressed trust in a distracted world

There is something almost unfashionable about saying this in 2026, but it remains true: in-person events work. Not because digital failed, but because human attention functions differently in a physical space.

A social post competes with dozens of other posts. A keynote competes with nothing except the speaker’s own ability.

When a leader stands in front of a room and delivers insight with clarity, confidence, and coherence, the audience assigns authority in real time. There is no scroll. The algorithm has no power. 

During the podcast, Will made a point that deserves to be repeated. A few hundred impressions online are not equivalent to a few hundred people listening to you speak. Being on stage confers legitimacy. It signals that someone, somewhere, believed you were worth hearing.

That shift matters. It accelerates trust and shortens sales cycles.

For communicators, this means that investing in the skill of speaking is effectively building strategic infrastructure. A CEO who can hold a room, field tough questions, and articulate a clear narrative will outperform a CEO who only posts.

Like any other skill, getting there takes work. It requires reps. Panels. Industry events. Roundtables. Even local meetups. The best seed bed to compound authority is exposure.

Earned media: credibility you can’t manufacture yourself

Earned media remains one of the most misunderstood — and under-leveraged — branding tools available.

A social post says, “We believe this.” An earned placement says, “Someone else believes we’re worth publishing.” That distinction is enormous in markets, particularly where trust is fragile.

Renée, drawing from her journalism background, emphasized that earned media works best when it is genuinely audience-driven. The strongest placements aren’t self-promotional. They provide clarity, context, or expertise that the outlet’s readers actually need.

For smaller brands, this is especially powerful. You may not have brand recognition or a massive following, but a well placed byline in a respected trade publication or a substantive appearance on a relevant podcast can reposition you overnight in the eyes of the right audience.

And unlike a social post, earned media becomes a durable asset, supporting search presence, fortifying sales conversations, and showing that you’re serious.

Partnerships: distribution without desperation

Strategic partnerships allow you to borrow trust rather than manufacture it alone. When two organizations serve the same audience from complementary angles, collaboration becomes a multiplier.

This can take many forms: co-authored articles, joint webinars, referral agreements, bundled offers, shared event appearances. The mechanics matter less than the principle of aligning with someone your audience already trusts.

That alignment reduces friction. It will also expand reach without diluting your position, turning distribution into a relationship enterprise rather than the bland fruit of an algorithm.

For communicators, partnerships require discipline. They demand clarity about your audience and humility about your own reach. But executed well, they outperform isolated content strategies every time.

Social media is a storefront, not the machine room

None of this is an argument to abandon social media. In many industries, it functions as the new front door. Prospects will check your profile. They will scan how you think to decide whether you appear credible or incoherent.

Yes, social matters. But it should reinforce a broader system, not replace it.

The brands that will win in 2026 are not those posting the most. They are the ones building trust in multiple environments, including

• physical rooms, where attention is undivided;
• respected publications, where credibility can grow;
• through partnerships that expand reach intelligently; and
• in conversations that get down to brass tacks.

Social media is loud. It is immediate and addictive. Trust is a slower burn, and it’s harder to measure, but it builds the loyalty that drives revenue. 

Communicators who recognize the difference — and have the courage to rebalance accordingly — will outpace those still chasing applause.

Then they go home, close their laptops, and leave their own LinkedIn profiles untouched for four months.

That contradiction was at the center of a recent episode of Cracking the Comms Code, where Proven Media Solutions founder Dustin Siggins sat down with Brendan Watts, Director of PR and Communications at Storyblok; Jacqueline Martinez, President and Chief Communications Officer at Digital HQ; and Noah Greenberg, CEO of Stacker. 

The topic was how PR professionals can build their personal brands and the uncomfortable finding was that most aren’t doing it.

The skills transfer perfectly

Jacqueline said it directly: “You already know what to do. You’ve just always done it for everybody else.”

Think about what a strong LinkedIn presence actually requires. A clear point of view. Consistent messaging. An understanding of your audience and what they want to hear. The ability to turn an insight or an experience into something worth reading. The discipline to show up regularly. PR professionals develop all of these skills on behalf of clients. Why not apply the same skills to their own career?

Dustin made a similar point from his own experience. When he transitioned from political journalism to running his own company, he had no idea what to post about. His father’s advice was simple: write things down throughout the day as they come to you, then once a week, sit down and pull out the best ones. That’s a content strategy. It’s also exactly what communicators do when they’re building a messaging calendar for a client.

What “building your brand” actually means

One point the panel was quick to correct: personal branding on LinkedIn is not self-promotion. 

Brendan’s most-engaged posts have nothing to do with his employer. They’re about how he thinks about his work – the process behind a campaign, an observation about the industry, a lesson from something that went sideways. “People sense they don’t want you to sell them,” he said. “But if I talk about how we planned a campaign rather than promoting it, it pops off.” Noah’s top-performing post of all time was a breakdown of how he’d approach getting a product’s first hundred customers – actionable, generous, no pitch attached.

PR professionals constantly write thought leadership for clients. They ghostwrite op-eds, develop executive voices, and shape how a CEO comes across in an interview. The same instincts apply on LinkedIn – the only difference is whose name goes on it.

Jacqueline’s framing was useful here. A client of hers in the public sector had built a consistent LinkedIn presence around his work and his thinking. When he walked into the governor’s office to meet the chief of staff for the first time, that chief of staff pulled out a book the client had recommended on LinkedIn weeks earlier. The client came back to Jacqueline, saying he was walking into rooms where his reputation preceded him. “We are warming these rooms for our clients,” she said. “Why wouldn’t we be warming these rooms for ourselves?”

The mechanics are the same, too

The tactical elements of LinkedIn success map almost exactly onto what communications professionals already practice.

The hook – the first two or three lines before someone hits “read more” – is a lede. Noah said it deserves as much attention as the rest of the post combined, because it determines whether 100 people see the content or 1,000. Any PR professional who has written a pitch email or a press release knows how to write a lede.

Commenting on other people’s posts is relationship-building and source cultivation. Jacqueline makes 10 to 15 substantive comments a day, not to drive traffic back to her own profile, but to stay connected, add value, and keep relationships warm. That’s account management. Noah noted that a thoughtful comment shows up in connections’ feeds – it’s essentially a post with lower stakes, and it’s a natural starting point for anyone not yet comfortable publishing original content.

Content planning is already in the toolkit. Brendan keeps a running text document – currently over 560 items – of observations, one-liners, and passing thoughts that he draws from when it’s time to post. It’s a source list. PR professionals maintain those for clients all the time.

Even the question of what to post answers itself through a PR lens. Dustin described a lobbyist whose organization had just secured a White House meeting on a low-profile bill. The instinct was to announce it. The better post, as Dustin reframed it, was: “Here are five things we did to get a White House meeting that had nothing to do with Venezuela, immigration, or government shutdowns.” Don’t just report the win. Explain the strategy behind it. That’s the difference between a press release and a story – and PR professionals know how to tell stories.

Why it matters now

The stakes are real and getting higher. Brendan is about to hire two PR professionals. Before he opens a job description, he’s already on LinkedIn. What he’s finding is that 95% of candidates have profiles that are effectively empty – recycled company posts, a CV-style about section, nothing that shows how they think. He said: “You’re being hired to do this for your execs and your company and immediately I have a bad taste in my mouth.”

Noah told us that for every hiring manager doing this consciously, there are probably a hundred doing it without realizing it. People posting regularly have built familiarity and credibility before the first conversation happens. The people who aren’t posting start at a disadvantage that they may not even know exists.

PR professionals have spent careers making other people visible, credible, and worth listening to. The tools are the same. The platform is the same. The only thing that needs to change is realizing who the client is: themselves. 

Catch the full conversation in the video below.

Hosted by Proven Media Solutions founder Dustin Siggins, the show featured Erick Woods Erickson, nationally syndicated talk radio host and former Fox News and CNN contributor; Glenn Kessler, longtime Washington Post reporter and former Fact Checker; and Dave Levinthal, senior editor and investigative reporter at NOTUS.  

The headline lesson was simple: “left vs right” is rarely the real problem. The real problem is that comms teams often pitch as if all media work the same way.

They don’t. And the wider the spectrum you’re trying to cross — from local to national, blog to newsroom, talk radio to fact-checkers — the more your success depends on understanding what the outlet is built to do.

Pitching partisan outlets without sounding fake

Partisan media are best understood as audience service. They exist to meet a specific reader’s or listener’s expectations, sticking to values, language, and framing that feel familiar. That doesn’t mean it’s inherently unserious; it means it operates under a strong “audience contract.”

This means two rules apply for PR pros.

First, sound native. If you use language that reads as though it was copied from the other side’s talking points, the pitch comes across as not “balanced,” but manipulative. A conservative outlet receiving a pitch full of progressive-coded phrases will assume you’re either trying to bait it or that you don’t understand its audience. A liberal outlet seeing loaded right-coded phrasing may assume you’re bringing a culture-war fight, not a story.

Second, offer something real. Partisan outlets still reward the same things traditional outlets do: exclusivity, credible sources, hard facts, and specificity. “Here’s an issue” is less valuable than “Here’s a local example, a human story, or documentation that proves this isn’t just an opinion.”

When comms teams struggle here, it’s usually because they treat partisan media as a checkbox: “We need conservative coverage” or “We need progressive coverage.” That mindset produces generic, over-engineered pitches. What works is the opposite: tailored framing, clear relevance, and substance that stands up to scrutiny.

Pitching media styles, not just politics

The most useful way to think about “the spectrum” is as a difference in media format. The same story can be pitched in completely different ways depending on who’s receiving it, because each format has different constraints and incentives.

For instance, investigative editors and reporters want leads, not copy. They’re looking for material that can support reporting, such as documents, patterns, conflicts of interest, wrongdoing, or hypocrisy that can be proved. The strongest pitch to this style of journalist is not a polished narrative. It’s the building blocks of a story with a clear “why now.” 

If you’re pitching an investigative reporter, aim for

• a specific claim that can be tested;
• evidence (documents, filings, credible witnesses);
• a clear conflict or discrepancy; and
• a short explanation of why it matters to the public.

What usually fails is “PR theater”: sweeping statements, big adjectives, or pre-packaged articles. Good investigative journalists don’t want to paste your story. They want to own it, because ownership is what protects credibility.

Talk radio and personality-driven media run on attention

A talk show host is not a newsroom assignment desk. Even when they care about facts, their job is to hold attention. That changes what a successful pitch looks like.

Here, a pitch works when it is

• relevant to the host’s existing interests,
• sharply framed (the hook needs to land fast),
• deliverable in the host’s voice,
• not overly scripted or “campaigny.”

A common mistake is sending talk radio the same thing you’d send a policy reporter: dense, careful, document-heavy material with no immediate spark. A host needs a reason to talk about a topic right now, not a thesis statement. 

This is where relationships become unusually important. Hosts are inundated and operate with ruthless filters. The people they already trust rise to the top.

Reaching traditional reporters 

Reporters are allergic to spin. The easiest way to lose them is to package a pitch as a conclusion rather than a question.

As such, the most effective stance is “Here’s what was said. Here’s what we believe is wrong. Here’s the supporting evidence.”

If you’re pitching a reporter, you’re essentially inviting scrutiny. That’s the point. The reward is credibility. If you’re right, you get powerful validation; if you’re wrong, you learn — perhaps painfully, but quickly. 

Handling negative coverage like a professional

One of the most useful parts of the conversation, especially for PR practitioners, was how political operators respond to negative media. There’s a lesson here that transfers perfectly into corporate comms: don’t take it personally.

What separates strong comms teams from fragile ones isn’t whether they avoid negative stories. It’s whether they can respond without emotion getting in the way of judgment.

Here are some practical takeaways:

• If you’re wrong, correct cleanly and quickly. Don’t litigate.
• If you’re right, don’t gloat. Support your position with evidence and calm repetition.
• Avoid “pleading” with journalists. It reads as insecurity and rarely works.
• Don’t demand friendly language from an outlet whose audience expects different framing. Translate your message without losing its substance.

The deeper point is that the media aren’t there to protect your self-image. They’re there to serve their audience. Once you accept that, pitching becomes less stressful and more strategic.

Relationships matter, no matter the politics

The final takeaway was the oldest one, and still the most ignored: relationships matter.

Not in the cheesy “I know a guy” sense. In the professional sense, the reporters and editors who have learned that you don’t waste their time, you don’t send irrelevant garbage, and you don’t spin them into embarrassment are far more likely to read you when it counts.

That trust is built through

• relevance (you understand what they cover),
• restraint (you don’t spray-and-pray),
• honesty (you don’t hide bad facts), and
• consistency (your tips don’t collapse on inspection).

The era of mass pitching is ending — not because PR people stopped doing it, but because the media environment has become too noisy. Signal, credibility, and attention are scarce.

If you can pitch in a way that respects those constraints — tailored to format, rooted in evidence, framed for the outlet’s audience — you can still land coverage across the spectrum. But you have to stop treating “the spectrum” like a list and start treating it like a set of distinct worlds.