ibp News

“

IBP’s Face to Face event at The Building Centre proved a spectacular success, with a number of In house and consultant PR’s enjoying unique access to some of the most influential editors and journalists in the sector.

The brainchild of IBP CEO Gerald Bowey and Willmott Dixon director of communications Andy Geldard, Face to Face gave PR’s the chance to book 10 minute ‘one to one’ slots with editors on a first come basis.

The fact that all slots were booked up within 48 hours of Face to Face being launched showed just how popular the format was, providing a chance for PR’s to have quality time with journalists without interruptions or deadline pressures getting in the way! The PR’s taking part also made individual donations to the Journalists’ Charity, raising £250.

The stellar cast of journalists taking part included: Giles Barrie, Property Week editor in chief, Claer Barrett, news editor London desk at the FT, Rebecca Evans, Construction News editor, Martin Hilditch, Inside Housing deputy editor, Deirdre Hipwell, property writer at The Times, Elaine Knutt, Construction Manager editor, Christine Murray, AJ editor and Sarah Richardson, Building deputy editor.

In house communication managers from Mott MacDonald, Shepherd Construction, Nightingale Associates, Purcell Miller Tritton architects were joined by PR consultant executives from ING Media, Ash Communications, Aylwin Communications, Edelman, London Communications and TTA amongst others

Gerald said, “It was fantastic that the journalists were able to commit time to meet so many companies and give them a level of access that they have not had before; the PR professionals that thought out of the box and committed to this ‘new’ IBP initiative were able to see instant benefits in their exchange with the journalists. It was a good way to exchange ideas and provided in the space of a few hours the type of networking with our sector journalists that it can take years to build up. This sort of event is exactly what IBP is all about, bringing together the PR industry with journalists’. You will see more of this type of event from IBP in the future, but they will only be available to members that react quickly to these innovative exchanges and can see the real benefits.”

Second successive victory for journalists at annual cricket match with PRs
– but a close run game with good sportsmanship and plucky resolve from both teams.

The journalists notched up a second successive victory in the annual IBP hacks v PRs cricket encounter, sponsored by stone specialists Szerelmey, at Thames Ditton.. But it was a high-scoring, closely fought affair which owed as much to the PRs’ good sportsmanship as it did to the journos’ plucky resolve.

On account of a few last minute drop-outs, illnesses and other excuses, the journalists’ team arrived at the ground in pleasant, sunny conditions unsure of how many names they could attach to the team sheet, never mind in what order. But as it turned out, PR skipper Andrew Geldard kindly offered two players to level the sides, both of whom made significant contributions with bat and ball – and in one case, gloves.

The skippers strode out to the middle for the toss – Taylor armed with local knowledge supplied by a Thames Ditton ‘ringer’ bowler that the greenish track had a tendency to keep low. That was enough to convince him to ask the PRs to bat once the coin came down heads, but the hacks began to wonder if this was the right policy as the classy PR openers Max McGhan and Andrew Lewin plundered runs from alarmingly difficult-to-fill holes in the field placings.

Helmeted McGhan went on to make 31 untroubled, stylish runs before having to retire (such are the rules) for a return at a later date. Lewin likewise kept the scoreboard – if there had been one – ticking along nicely with much élan, until he likewise had to witdraw, to more applause. Two other retirees making 30 – Mark Tant and free-hitting Mazar Masud, really tightened the screw. Ben Roskrow turned a little of the tide back in favour of the hacks with a tricky spell of economical bowling which returned two wickets, and, in a significant moment, a fiendishly quick (ahem) ball from Taylor reared up and split Andy Cassie’s finger.

There would be no spin from this particular spinner, nor a batting performance from the now-grimacing Cassie. James Dilleigh, Stuart Hamilton and Tim Collins also turned their arms over to good effect. At half time, however, it was the PRs team which bounded into the dressing room with a confident smile on its collective face; the journalists slightly quaking at the prospect of chasing 181 off 30 overs. Gulp.

Tea was as ever a splendid affair, sponsored by Szerelmey, enriched by highly fattening delicacies plus a bowl full of fresh pineapple. A classy touch.

With the sun still making an appearance, journo openers David Nicholson and Taylor took to the challenge with gusto, finding the outfield perhaps even quicker than it had been earlier. Dilleigh got into the action with an assured 30, Taylor joined him in the retirement home, and Tim Collins punched a useful, combative 27 before holing out. Roskrow lent some comedy to proceedings by requiring a runner when his hamstring pinged, and no one quite know what was going on.

Stuart Hamilton knocked the ball around freely, but wickets were now falling ominously, mostly due to the expert contribution of Max McGhan, who returned figures of 2 for 25. By this late stage, after almost 60 overs of tense, high quality cricket, fingernails were being bitten on both sides. All that remained was the denouement. One wicket for the PRs to get, two overs for the hacks to scramble the remaining 7 or so runs. As it was, Dilleigh greeted a rising ball from eventual man of the match McGhan in the penultimate over, guiding it with the full face of his bat down to the late cut boundary. The hacks were home and dry.

Following photos and presentations of trophies including the Alan Hughes memorial trophy for McGhan’s man of the match performance, many remarked that this had been perhaps the most enjoyable and certainly one of the highest scoring encounters between the two sides in the history of the fixture. Thanks as ever to IBP ‘Don’ Gerald Bowey, David Helsen and all at Thames Ditton Cricket Club, and sponsors Szerelmey. It’s now 8-5 to the journalists in the all-time IBP standings, but cricket was the real winner. Bring on next year!

Multiple IBP Journalism Award Winner Claer Barrett, writing for Investors Chronicle, demonstrated yet again her passion for the subject of her articles and received two top Awards at the IBP Awards presentations co-hosted with Resolution Property at the House of Commons.

Multiple IBP Journalism Award Winner Claer Barrett, writing for Investors Chronicle, demonstrated yet again her passion for the subject of her articles and received two top Awards at the IBP Awards presentations co-hosted with Resolution Property at the House of Commons.
Her writing in the Feature Writer of the Year category covered an array of highly topical subjects, and her style demonstrated a passion for the subject, Barrett is “an outstanding and deserving winner, her entries demonstrated a strong determination, she gets quickly to the point and fully covers all the angles,” the judges enthused.
In the IBP Journalist of the Year Category the judges compare the winners of each individual Award, and are thus faced with the dilemma of comparing the excellent with the brilliant. “Although the articles covered a wide range of styles, content and publications they together illustrated the strength of architecture, property and construction journalism in today’s media and the ingenuity and resources employed by the best writers in a sector which is more in the news, and warranting critical analysis, than it has been for many years? the judges said.

The judges praised Barrett’s outstanding article on the pitfalls of buy-to-let. “Claer showed her depth of knowledge and understanding of the subject and has clearly made herself an expert,” the judges commented. They praised her on the ground research and visits to seminars that provided her with the tools to write such a colourful and informative article. The judges were unanimous in declaring Claer the overall winner of the IBP 2009 Journalist of the Year Award.

Discussed the changing role of journalism in a multi-media world…

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the changing role of journalism in a multi-media world, to look at threats to and opportunities for high quality work, and to discuss IBP’s stance. We also looked at the IBP annual awards and the judging criteria. Present were editors, news editors and online editors from leading publications in the construction and property markets. There were also observers from the NUJ and the CIOJ.

Bright prospects
Generally the mood was optimistic. Journalists were having fun, learning new skills. Journalists are not confined to their offices since they can file stories from their Blackberries. They love the immediacy. Skills acquired increase opportunities for future careers in national newspapers or even television.

Horses for courses
For some audiences, interactivity and video were seen as the goal. thers were more interested in data. For other, especially web-only, operations, the essential was to sift the large amount of material available, and present what was most valuable.

Paying for it
There seemed to be general consensus that where publishing houses had gone wrong was in their embracing the concept of ‘free content’, of giving everything away. That the future for specialist publishing would be in presenting a complete package for subscribers, offering online and offline content. Many sponsors and advertisers see online as an essential part of the service they are offered. Many of the most ambitious online offerings are only made possible by sponsorship. There was a clear belief that this was not affecting editorial integrity – and confidence that this dependency on sponsorship was just part of the economic climate, and not a cause for concern.

Doing less
What did journalists do less of, to find time for this new activity? Certain long features were being cut back in recognition of readers’ decreasing desire to read long pieces. Double working was eliminated – stories being written once for the web and once for print.

Working harder?
The overall feeling was that journalists were working hard, but not too hard. Slack days after press day had disappeared, early starts were common. But this is after all ‘the best job in theworld’ and working hard was seen as reasonable. There was warning however from the NUJ representative that in regional newspapers demands were often unreasonably high and that there were not the resources for proper journalism.

Role of the web editor
There was some concern that this role was in some cases ill defined and often unrewarding. Web editors too often were seen as having responsibility without power – sometimes finding it difficult to exercise authority over staff who did not report to them directly. Also in some
cases the role of web editor was seen as being made too technical and insufficiently creative.

IBP AWARDS
This meeting moved into a discussion of IBP Awards. There were two concerns.
1. The nature and standing of web award
2. The desire for a multi-media award.

Web award
There was some concern, although not universal, that this is seen too much as a reward for the technology and design, and not for the quality of the journalism. It is vital that this award is judged on all criteria, as is the print journalism award, and that there is an appreciation of the different aspirations of different sites – they should be judged by how they fulfil their users’ requirements, and not as a beauty parade.

Multi-media award
There is a hunger for this award, which would recognise specifically the efforts of journalist working across a range of platforms.

CONCLUSIONS
It was encouraging that the general feeling was so positive. Generally the press is embracing opportunities. Areas of concern: It would be wise to keep an eye on the role of web editors, on workloads, and on the pressures of sponsorship.

A meeting was held on the evening of 25th January 2010 at the FT’s office to informally discuss:

• How the IBP can better serve (and attract) younger journalist and PR members
• How it might seek to achieve this
• What kind of networking events would appeal

The following individuals were present:

Claer Barrett, Investors Chronicle (chair)
Sarah Richardson, Building
Hardeep Sandher, Property Week
David Doyle, Property Week
Lydia Stockdale, Inside Housing
Mike Phillips, Estates Gazette
Alasdair Reisner, CECA
James Carnegie, Aylwin Comms
Naomi Galt, FD
Claudia Robinson, FD
Sarah Keltie, FD
Gemma Shah, Jones Lang LaSalle
Sam Kidby, London Communications Agency
Niki May Young, World Architecture
Michael Webster, Gorkana
Polly Roberts, Gorkana

All are happy to meet again to discuss further, or organise an event

Conclusions of discussion:

• There is strong support for IBP events aimed at young people
• The IBP Futures group would be happy to organise these
• Evening is the best time, with drinks (which could be sponsored)
• The venue does not need to be “posh” – a central London pub is fine
• There has to be a theme – it should not just be a piss up
• Initial focus should be journalistic skills; a “big name” talking about how they made it
• How to get on the nationals is the hot topic (sorry editors!)
• Trade journalists want to network with those on the nationals
• PRs are happy to come to gain access to journalists, regardless of event content
• PRs present expressed interest in sponsoring events
• Having people from industry there is less important, but could come later
• Being introduced to people at events would really help (maybe by board members?)
• The events should not be too large (40-60 people max)
• Entry should be controlled (names on a list)
• In principle, people would be happy to buy a membership / ticket for these events
• Editors cannot be relied on to spread the word. Each magazine needs a young IBP contact who can tell colleagues about the event (everyone in the room put themselves forward)

Additionally…

• With the cache of IBP Awards, we have more to offer than competing networking groups
• To attract younger members, the IBP needs to be better at its own PR
• The website needs to offer better information for new prospects
• PRs who were members of IBP found application process difficult
• Gorkana would be interested in JV / link up in some way
• All future IBP events can be advertised (for free) on Gorkana
• There was strong support to Ruth Slavid’s suggestion that we should reach out to young journalists and PRs made redundant / job seeking / freelancing, and advertising events on Gorkana is probably the best way to reach these groups.

Discussion points of interest:

Current perceptions of the IBP were rather mixed. Several
were members as a result of having been entered for awards. However, few had
been to an IBP event other than the awards. Those who came to the summer party
really enjoyed it. There was awareness of IBP events that had been e-mailed
to members, but were considered “expensive”. How will the news be
delivered was mentioned as something that sounded good, for example, but only
one person had attended. Those who had attended events described them as “old
school” with people talking to people they already knew. In conclusion,
a lot of young members / potential members feel IBP events are “not for
them”.

The cache of the IBP awards is our greatest weapon. I was
surprised to hear about the large number of networking groups targeting young
journalists, and from within the built environment sector. They don’t have an
awards ceremony, but we do – and there lies our USP. The IBP has the potential,
and the membership database, to offer something unique. As an aside, several
people mentioned that “What the IBP Awards judges are looking for”
could be a good basis for an event. Having links to award winning articles on
IBP website was also viewed as desirable. People know winning an award boost
your career – and even more so in tough times!

Suitable “big names” in journalism for an event were discussed.
The obvious candidates are Andrew Marr, Robert Peston or Nick Robinson – newspaper
journalists who have made it on TV. Getting someone like this for the first
event would be a real coup – but we shouldn’t limit ourselves to media stars.
Dominic O’Connell, the new business editor of The Times, and Richard Fletcher
were mentioned, to general murmurs of approval.

Understanding “What’s in it for me?” is the key to getting
a good response. For trade journalists, how to get a job on a national – and
how others have done so – is an obsession. This may be hard for editors to stomach,
but if we are running a networking event then we need to be aware of this. In
general, career development is the thing most journalists AND PRs are most bothered
about.

The format – most preferred a Q&A format, with “two chairs on a stage”
with someone like Giles Barrie asking the questions. Then, there would be questions
from the floor. This way, the guest speaker does not navel gaze too much, and
attendees also get to observe interview technique.

Gorkana events team believed said “big names” would do it for free, if approached
by a young person, as they would want to “give something back”. They offered
to help recruit. However, people felt the IBP website should
be given some attention before we start pitching to people, as it doesn’t yet
reflect the “young” ethos, or have an easy-to-find “about us” section. The first
thing “big names” will do is put IBP into Google, so we need to look our best.

The idea of having a “big name” from the property or construction industry
appealed less – it was seen as too specific to a publication and not the wider
group. Also, you are surrounded by competing journalists, so unlikely to be
of any use as a story (I was surprised by this!)

A good point made – in a recession, in-house training budgets
are non-existent. Some of the basics of reporting are not properly covered nowadays.
Legal issues, what you can get sued for, and what you can get
away with, could be a very popular event. “Not having the confidence to tackle
legally challenging stories will lead to weaker journalism in the long run”.
Investigative techniques, as taught by Peter Gilman, were also
favoured.

Editors are not considered to be the best way of conveying information about
IBP events. It was proposed that each publication (there aren’t many) should
have a “young” point of contact to receive info about IBP events and circulate.
Everyone present nominated themselves.

Other networking groups / events we should be aware of:

Gorkana does breakfast events for PRs (where an editor speaks
about deadlines, what stories they want, scope of their publication etc) These
are quite formal and businesslike, but work. They have also held panel discussion
format events with several journalists They tried a quiz night format with journalists
and PRs, but it descended into a piss up and people “found it hard to make meaningful
connections”. Ditto cocktail making – fun, but just a “piss up”. Deputy chief
executive Michael (name) – who looks in his early thirties – is very keen to
discuss a potential joint venture with the IBP on these events.

Profile (which is an EG spin off) follows a similar PR breakfast
format. Both charge hefty subscriptions, and pay journalists for participating.
Only of use to PRs.

European Young Professionals (EYP)

Free to subscribe, this organisation is for all professionals and holds a monthly
London event which some of the panel had attended. It costs £5 entry but is
“very corporate” and “hit and miss” what industry professionals you might meet.

Schmooze and Booze

Organised by a young sub-editor on the Daily Mail, this is a new networking
event for all PRs and journalists in London – but with more of a consumer than
business focus. You have to pay for your own drinks. Comment from someone who
went to one: “It was quite big, but difficult to find useful people, and there
were all sorts there.”

Property4Media

Spun out from the website, they organise quarterly drinks events in fairly
swanky London venues. It is invite only, to selected group chosen by them. Sponsors
pay for drinks, but in return you must sit through dreary speech and presentation
(often about building or interiors products).

Young Entrepreneurs in Property (YEP)

We think, now defunct, but in its heyday was getting 200+ to its events. Problems
arose when membership became too open (“It was open to everybody, so you would
end up talking to people who made floor filters and did glazing”). Similar to
the “curse of the BCO” which suffers same problem with industry people being
preyed upon by sales teams from lift companies!

City University

Have a big name journalist come in every Monday night for journalists to interview,
they submit questions beforehand. People come and speak for free, which is encouraging.
Linda Christmas would be a good person to get onside for our events.

Other event ideas:

Wine tasting is good – but very expensive.

“Speed networking” – like speed dating but with journalists / PRs/ industry
contacts was suggested, but would have to be very well organised to work.

How to use Twitter as a journalist

Blog night / talk from famous bloggers

Consider running an event online, instead of in an actual venue – a webinar

What the PRs want from an event:

“A relaxed atmosphere to meet journalists and get to know them – certainly
not to push stories, but to find out more about them and what they cover.”

“I can tell my boss I’m going to this to meet journalists and really impress
them”

“A small charge would be fine – at any rate, it’s much cheaper than a lunch
and you will meet more people.”

Both groups agree – you have to feel you’re getting something out of the event
personally, in terms of career development / opportunities, as you are leaving
work to go to an event.Of our group of 16, four were returning to the office
/ taking work home with them after the meeting finished. Long hours are part
of the job more than ever in a recession.

“You have got to be able to justify two hours at an event”

Notes on the website:

There is no obvious “about us” section, people said they could not find it
quickly

“It is really hard to work out how to become a member on the website. It took
me over 15 minutes”

“The most valuable thing the IBP has is its members. As a member, I should be
able to log in to the website, and search for other members and their contact
details, just like I can on other networking sites.”

“There should be pointers and tips on how to enter the IBP awards”

Other comments:

Disappointment over dropping of Housing category.

Frustration that web journalists are not recognised in awards when so much of
content is now digital / video / interactive. Should the IBP move with the times
a bit here?

More young members would be generated by the awards entries for these categories!

Ditto, awards for blogs. They are a part of journalistic life now, so why not
recognise them?