All right already. Enough is enough. It is a tremendous help to me, as a ski writer, to receive press kits from American ski areas every year, but it hurts to think of how much promotional money—money that could be spent more effectively elsewhere—is being used to send over-sized, over-produced, uselessly-filled press kits to every name that appears in anything bearing the sacred (hence, unexamined) title of press list.
It is a case of too much, going to too many, too late.
I am afraid that I helped launched this ocean of wasted prose and I am genuinely sorry about that. A few SAM marketing-issues ago, I itemized the materials the press would find useful if ski areas sent them to us in press kits. I tried to list all the things that would be useful.
I didn’t know you were all actually going to go out and produce humungous kits and send them to me and every other name on your press lists, regardless of whether we were photographers in Vermont, broadcasters in California or jacks-of-all-media-trades in the Rocky Mountains.
I feel like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, as portrayed by Mickey Mouse in “Fantasia.” I started a flow I can’t turn off and it is threatening to engulf me and everyone else who writes about skiing. Because I feel guilty, I would like to offer some thoughts on how the tide can be stemmed and/or improved.
The superfluous is already driving out the useful. Instead of eagerly opening each kit, I sometimes shove new arrivals aside if the contents look familiar or if I recognize the sender as one who habitually provides non-information. (That is risky on my part; I might be missing genuine news.)
I think the time has come for ski areas to take a giant step backwards. Think about the tasks you are asking the kit to perform. What has to be left in? What can be excluded? Are the photographs the kind you ever see being used by media or are they ego photos of top personnel? Send smaller, more effective kits to those people most likely to need the information. And send them before it is too late for the material to be used.
Most of the kits I get require $2 to $3 postage. I would guess that the paper, printing and photographic printing alone represent another $2 to $5 per kit, to say nothing of the cost of taking the photos, researching and writing the copy and handling the production. If all costs are figured in, a fat, photo-stuffed press kit costs $….. per kit. (Fill in your own figure.)
These figures cross my mind whenever I get a duplicate press kit, which is very often. Some areas hand them out like business cards. Others mail them out to various lists without checking to eliminate duplications. For areas that buy lists, some duplication is probably inevitable. For the many areas that maintain their own lists, the duplication is shameful.
So is duplication of information within the kit.
It would be instructive for the area’s Kitmaker and the Budget-approver, to visit a few media people and see how few items those of us on the receiving end find useful.
I think it would be equally instructive for each area’s marketing people to ask themselves these questions:
WHO? Most people who cover skiing, regardless of their home base, want to know about the major national and international resorts where their readers (or listeners or viewers) might take vacations. Most want to know about the resorts, small or large, in the regions where their readers customarily ski. Only a handful of people who work with nationwide ski media want to know about small resorts far from their homes.
The list-maker has to know the individuals as well as the media. Most newspaper stories about skiing are written by people who do not work at newspapers, or at least not in the sports or travel department. Many magazine pieces are done by freelancers who make a specialty of skiing. It is vital that the kits are not simply addressed to Ski Editor. There probably isn’t a Ski Editor. Instead, there probably is a Music Teacher or Dairy Executive who writes the paper’s ski column after hours, at home. The U.S. Ski Writers Association directory provides clues as to their whereabouts. The Society of American Travel Writers’ directory can be useful, too. (Also, see “Press: The Lazy Lists” in SAM, July, 1984.)
WHEN? Most magazine pieces about skiing are finished by August, although some late-closing books are still accepting copy in October. The all-important pre-season newspaper supplements are usually locked up in the fall. However, newspaper ski columns and ski broadcasts do not usually start until mid-November, even later. If the press kit is going to be your major message to the world, it might be better to mail it in two waves, in June—yes, June—to press oriented to magazine and supplement work, in October to columnists and broadcasters.
WHERE? Should the kit go to home or office? The directories usually reveal the recipient’s preference. If not, considering the cost of each kit, it is worth phoning or writing the prospective recipient to get a correct address.
WHAT? This is the most important question of all. Some kits look as though it has never been asked. Many look as though they had been prepared because everybody else does it and not to perform a set of specific functions for the specific sender.
A press kit is not an annual ritual but a container for the sender’s news—new facilities, new price scale, new means of access. Such news is traditionally accompanied by useful background material—a fact sheet, the consumer brochure, trail map, lodging list—and by photographs that either illustrate the news stories or can be used by the recipient to illustrate other articles. To be usable, every photograph must bear a caption giving the names of the people and the specific part of the area in which they were photographed.
Whole volumes have been written on the subject of publicity photographs. Basic to all is the need for interesting subject matter (action, panoramas, smiling people doing something) and clear, sharp reproduction. Destined for the wastebasket are head shots of managers and ski school directors, shots of massive groups, shots of unidentified people and places.
Most newspapers use black-and-white photos. Some newspapers and magazines use color; you should know which, and tailor your kit accordingly. Radio people don’t use photos. What the TV people in your area can use is a subject important enough to be pursued individually, not via a press kit.
Maybe you don’t need a press kit altogether. Maybe you can bring the press up to date on your area with a simple press release, accompanied by your latest brochure, trail map and a sharp, lively photo (not of your manager, not of your new chairlift towers, but of smiling human beings enjoying your facilities).
Even if your current crop of news and information-bearing materials warrant making a concerted splash, the press kit doesn’t have to be a press kit at all. A fancy folder with a jazzy illustration and your logo? It helps writers identify the folders once they have been merged into the tottering piles on their desks (writers and editors do not have secretaries or file clerks), but apart from that minor task, a folder per se has small value. A rubber band will do, or a simple manila folder. The folder money might be better used to improve the quality of photo reproduction.
During the years I have been writing about ski resorts, I have seen an awesome increase in the sophistication of their public relations activities. I would love to see one more leap, in the direction of skinnier, earlier, more usable press kits.
