How the Government Screwed Up the Use of VNRs
I was having dinner on Monday night with some friends and mentioned the launch of this blog. One friend got really excited and related a story about being on vacation and seeing, what was clearly a video news release (VNR) used by the news channel but not identified as such. He told me that the woman “reporter” was talking about the pros of the mining community and her last name even was “Cavern”.
Yes, a VNR distributed by some organization in favor of mining and they actually used a spokesperson to do the reporting and gave her a name that coincided with the story.
Unbelievable? Yes! True? Unfortunately.
So much destructive spin fodder here! I’m almost giddy.
Early last year, following a March 2005 New York Times report on the use by government of VNRs, White House spokesman (at the time) Scott McClellan was asked at a media briefing whether their use was “legal and legitimate…without disclaimers that they’re government productions, as long as they meet some standard of factual basis?”
He replied with, “First of all, we’re talking about informational news releases. And the Department of Justice has issued an opinion saying that as long as this is factual information about department or agency programs, it is perfectly appropriate.”
We all know how that ended — and it caused a huge stir within the public relations industry.
At FADS, we believe if you want TV stations to cover a news story, either invite them to shoot it themselves (even in
More on destructive VNRs this week.






September 14th, 2006 at 8:40 pm
That’s definitely one of the challenges that faces both the PR and new industry. What a farce that news organizations would neglect to identify VNRs (especially such self serving stories) and now turn the other cheek, swearing them off altogether. It’s up to smart, ethical PR people to carry the torch with campaigns that get the job done.
September 27th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
I just read some academic and trade articles on this. News people blame the “shifty” PR people, and the PR industry blames lazy journalists. Some say VNRs used as news stories are the product of understaffed newsrooms. Others say news consumers have a responsibility to become “media savvy” and discern between a VNR and hard news. It damages the level of trust between viewers and journalists, and between journalists and PR. Both relationships have to exist, so what’s the use of laying blame?
October 3rd, 2006 at 1:04 pm
I’m certainly not laying blame. I feel the same way about VNRs that I do about advertorials - I think they suck. What I would like to see is the PR industry become a little more inventive in terms of what can and can’t be sent to news stations. And I’d like the government and big corporations to quit pushing the envelope and play by the rules the rest of us play by.