- Over-controlled messaging leads to ‘performative PR’
- Weak narratives damage media relationships and long-term brand trust
- Effective PR requires trust in strategic expertise and collaboration
- PR success now depends on credibility, not just visibility
- There is a growing trust gap in brand communications
In today’s landscape, attention is currency and PR looks nothing like it did a decade ago. Newsrooms are flooded with a constant stream of brand announcements, launches and ‘news’, all while operating with significantly fewer journalists than a decade ago. The bar for earning coverage has never been higher, which means brand communications need to do more than just exist – they need to matter.
There’s a growing disconnect in the PR industry, one that’s less about capability and more about trust. Brands are investing in expertise, yet the outcomes often don’t reflect it.
Data shows that 82% of journalists distrust brand narratives that feel overly controlled or inauthentic (Cision State of the Media), meanwhile, 63% of PR professionals say their strategic counsel is often overridden by internal agendas (PR Week Global Survey).
The result? Just 28% of consumers trust what brands say about themselves, while 66% place their trust in earned media (Edelman Trust Barometer).
The space to lead
On their own, these are just statistics. Together, they point to something more telling: Brands are investing in PR expertise, that part is clear. But, increasingly, they’re holding back the very thing that makes that expertise valuable in the first place: The space to lead.
Briefs come in with clear intent: Build credibility, shape a strong narrative and get meaningful media traction. On paper, everything aligns but somewhere between strategy and execution, something shifts.
The edges get softened. The messaging gets refined. Risk is quietly removed. Before long, what started as a story with real potential becomes something far more controlled – and far less effective.
The data may quantify it, but it doesn’t fully capture the outcome because what’s emerging isn’t just ‘safe’ PR. It’s something closer to performative PR which is work that looks right, ticks the boxes, but ultimately lacks the substance and credibility needed to land.
Hard to ignore
In today’s media environment, that gap is harder to ignore than ever. Newsrooms are smaller, journalists are under constant pressure. There’s less time, less patience and significantly less appetite for anything that feels like it’s been overworked or over-controlled. If a story isn’t clear, credible and genuinely relevant to that audience, it doesn’t make it through.
“When PR strategy is diluted, stories lose their edge. What could have been a narrative that resonates beyond the brand quickly turns into something self-referential – more about the company than the context it operates in and at that point, it stops being a story. It becomes an ad – and journalists don’t publish ads,” says Kirsten Roos, managing parter at strategic communications agency, Pulse Communications.
There’s also a longer-term cost that’s often overlooked: Media relationships, for PR professionals, aren’t transactional – they’re built over time, through consistency and credibility. When PR teams are expected to push messaging that feels exaggerated, unclear or simply not newsworthy, it chips away at that trust.
At a brand level, the impact is just as significant. PR isn’t a once-off output: It’s an ongoing process of shaping perception. When that process is disrupted, like when strategy is repeatedly adjusted to meet short-term internal comfort, it leads to fragmented narratives that don’t quite stick.
Weak narrative
The irony is that, in trying to maintain control, brands often dilute the very outcomes they’re investing in.
Part of the misunderstanding lies in how PR is perceived. There’s still a tendency to see agencies as channels for distribution, rather than strategic partners, but the reality is that PR sits much closer to reputation than it does to messaging.
“When a weak or over-engineered narrative goes out, it doesn’t just reflect on the brand, it reflects on the agency that put it forward. Increasingly, agencies are becoming more conscious of that and more protective of it, even.
“We’ve had to turn down work in the past because the narrative didn’t align with our expertise and could compromise our media relationships,” adds Samantha Thomas, managing partner at Pulse Communications.
Depth of insight
The most effective work still comes from collaboration – that hasn’t changed. Brands bring depth of insight into their business and industry and agencies bring an understanding of how stories land, how media works and what resonates.
But, for that relationship to work, there has to be trust on both sides. Not just in capability – but in judgement, because if PR is reduced to executing pre-approved messaging, its role becomes limited by design and in a media landscape defined by scepticism and noise, that’s a missed opportunity.
Credibility isn’t something that can be engineered through process or approval cycles. It’s built through clarity, relevance and a willingness to let the story stand on its own, and more often than not, that requires letting the experts lead.
Image left to right: Samantha Thomas and Kirsten Roos, managing partners at Pulse Communications
Pulse Communications is a lean, agile communications agency built for speed and seamless integration. The agency delivers end-to-end solutions across public relations, influencer engagement and stakeholder outreach. With a collaborative, no-silos approach, Pulse Communications prioritises efficiency, accountability and results-driven execution. The agency brings cross-industry expertise spanning a range of industries, operating in South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia and The Netherlands.
