Continuing the conversation: More on PR measurement

Shortly after I posted here about measurement, I noticed that KD Paine had updated her blog with new information about a metric her firm is using with clients to measure the value of media relations.

While her PR Value Ratio is different than advertising equivalency values, it's still just a number that doesn't really mean anything.

For starters, you can't accurately measure how many people read or viewed any media story. Circulation tells you how many people receive a publication, but readership -- especially of a particular article -- is a different animal altogether.

Second, you can't accurately measure how many people -- of those who DID read your story -- understood the key message you wanted to convey.

Third, most earned media is not one-sided. So there are likely to be competing views in the same story.

Finally, you can't accurately measure whether those who did understand the key message believed it, remembered it or cared about it.

In other words, values and ratios barely scratch the surface of measuring effectiveness, and thus are often meaningless to executives.

Update: More opposing thoughts ...

Kami Huyse: Measuring PR value

Shel Holtz: Katie Payne invents a new PR metric

Technorati Tags: Public Relations, PR, Measurement, Media Relations, Corporate Communications