Gail Nelson
For marketing pros, especially those with PR responsibility, the quantity of news is mushrooming. Reading everything you need to know about your clients and products, along with everything you want to know about the industry, takes more time than ever before.* 

In such frenetic circumstances, we’re all asking ourselves how we can best set priorities. One approach many PR practitioners are taking is to communicate in formats such as Twitter. In fact, last week I put out a Twitpoll asking my Twitter followers the source of their PR news. It’s hardly a scientific endeavor. So it’s no surprise that as of this writing, the Twitpoll indicates that communication professionals get most of their PR-related news from Twitter. But content is not on Twitter – it surfaces as links to the sites of content producers. (I recommend reading Monica O’Brien’s recent post on “The Resourceful Marketer” to streamline the process of striking it rich in content on Twitter.)

I’ve been thinking about how many of the concerns facing the macro world of media hold for news purveyors in the PR industry. Can the quality of the content hold up? As you may know, PRWeek is changing its delivery model – switching from a weekly print publication to an email publication and requiring an annual subscription. A new monthly feature magazine will appear in the product line-up, along with a re-launched daily email blast.

In, “It’s Still Called PRWeek, but It’s Going Monthly,” a New York Times article published on April 26, author Stephanie Clifford postulates that it may be too confusing to dub a monthly print publication PRWeek. I contend PRWeek is a bankable brand and produces a range of products – such as webinars and live events. (As head of marketing for BurrellesLuce, I purchase sponsorships for these products, and must say I am impressed by the way the publishing staff is handling the change.)

PRWeek is betting that people will be willing to pay for content on the web that was previously available free of charge. PRWeek’s move is a brave one, especially if it is looking to expand its subscriber base and not merely slash production costs. I am hoping it comes out ahead. People trust its content, and its journalists know how to break and communicate news.

So, what do you think? Where are you getting your content? What are you willing to pay? And will the new PRWeek model take hold?

*  This is why a holistic monitoring service – one that delivers content from both traditional and social media – delivers so much value these days.