Lot of hoopla this week about a prep document apparently put together by Microsoft's PR agency (Waggener Edstrom) on handling a Wired reporter. (see Wired ) This involved a seres of feature stories, including a case study by Wired's Fred Vogelstein of Microsoft's blogging initiative. Focus of the article is pretty positive, about Microsoft's open blogging culture under the theme of corporate "transparency." It also focused on Channel 9, a big success reaching over 4 million unique visitors a month. The 6,000 word document (posted here ) goes on and on with background on Fred, how he might think, and where he might be looking for dirt ("...digging for tension where it doesn't exist..").
I don't see anything new or amazing here--this is what PR firms do, manage the message, prepare the execs, and do their best to tilt the article their way. The real truth is most magazine writers have figured out their angles a long time before contacting the company or agency. The best the agency can do is put a little more positive spin on it around the edges, provide stats and other ammunition to make the case and craft some good sound bite quotes. One note to this agency: hire an editor. This is too LONG. 6000 words? Would any exec. read this much? At least have an executive summary.