It's a real tough one to call, really. Sometimes stuff sent with press releases just looks too gimmicky and you immediately think that the actual news value of the press release can't be up to much if they're resorting to doughnuts and condoms.
Another way through this is to send the gimmicky stuff but not as an accompaniment to a serious press release. For example, Sky TV sent in a clove of garlic and a set of plastic Vampire teeth when England played Romania at football a couple of years ago... there was no actual press release with it, it was just done to raise a smile from journalists. Which it did. Whether said journalists went on to think fondly of Sky TV when they sent their next serious press release, who knows?
So perhaps say you were promoting a play. Let's say it's Waiting For Godot. Maybe you should send in the first instance a postcard, possibly with an image from the play on the front, and just bare details on the back: Waiting For Godot by the Cocknob Players, June 15 2012.
Then a week later send, oh, I don't know, a Rubik's Cube with nothing more than a ticket attached which reads: "Something to do while you're Waiting for Godot".
Then the week after that, send in the full monty press release, professional and serious. If all that was sent to me, I'd probably like that. You get something to play with and a proper story, but it's not all jumbled up together.
Oh, and another point: Make an effort to find out the name of whoever you're posting the press release to. Just "Features Editor" or "Arts Editor" is impersonal and makes it quite clear you haven't done your homework; even worse is referring to an out-of-date database and putting the name of the previous incumbent of the job on the envelope. All it takes is one telephone call to ask: "Who should I address a press release about a new theatre production to?" |