Who Is the Real Star of a Press Release?

For years, communications professionals have answered the question “How do you write a good press release?” with a list of technical requirements: the inverted pyramid structure, the news hook at the beginning, quotes from the spokesperson, and contact information at the end. All of these elements are correct, but today they’re insufficient, because the problem with press releases that don’t work rarely lies in their form, but rather in the perspective from which they’re crafted.

1. The problem isn't the format

The press release is not in crisis because it is an outdated format. Journalists continue to prefer it over other forms of communication, according to data collected by Cision in its annual report. The problem is that the vast majority of press releases that arrive at the newsroom every day are written from the same perspective: that of the company telling its own story.

This approach produces texts in which the grammatical subject of every sentence is the brand, the verbs describe actions performed by the organization, and the results are listed as proof of the writer’s value. The reader is treated as a passive recipient of an advertisement, not as an active participant in a story. The journalist who receives that press release must therefore do double the work: read the information and then figure out, on their own, what might interest their readers. Often they don’t do this because they don’t have time, so they move on to the next press release.

The main reason why editorial proposals are rejected has nothing to do with the quality of the writing, but rather with their lack of relevance to the interests of the recipient. Relevance is another way of saying, “This text was written with you in mind,” not just with the person who wrote it.

2. The Hero's Journey Applied to Media Relations

Over time, fiction has developed a set of principles regarding how a story works to hold the attention of readers or listeners. One of the most well-established principles is the one formulated by Joseph Campbell in his analysis of myths: in almost all the stories that human beings tell, the protagonist is not the one who creates the story but the one who experiences it—the hero who faces an obstacle and tries to overcome it.

When applied to corporate communication, this principle has an interesting implication: in the most effective brand stories, the company is rarely the hero, but rather the ally, the facilitator, and the guide who helps someone else overcome their obstacle. Apple doesn’t portray itself as a major tech company; it tells stories of people who do extraordinary things thanks to its technology. Nike doesn’t focus on the features of its shoes; it tells stories of athletes pushing their limits.

For those working in PR, this principle changes the starting point for writing. Before writing a press release, you need to answer three questions: Who is the real protagonist of this story? What is their obstacle? And how does the company or project we’re promoting fit in as an ally on that journey? Only after answering these questions does it make sense to open a document and start writing.

As we had noted in the article PR for personal brand and positioning in public debate, developing a recognizable perspective requires, first and foremost, understanding who you are trying to reach and why that person might find the message useful or interesting. The same reasoning applies to any format, from press releases to interviews to editorial content.

3. What changes when you move the starting point?

In practice, starting with the reader rather than the company results in texts with a different structure. A press release written from within the company almost always begins with the results achieved, describes them in order of importance to the organization, and concludes with some information about the industry to provide “context.” A press release written with the reader in mind begins by observing a phenomenon or problem that the reader is already aware of, positions the company within that phenomenon as a solution or contribution, and uses data and results as evidence to support an argument that has already been established.

The change seems almost imperceptible, but it has a significant impact on the text’s effectiveness. In the first case, the journalist must do the work of interpreting the text: figuring out what, in that press release, might interest their readers. In the second case, that work has already been done by the person who wrote the text. The journalist can therefore focus on how to develop the story, without having to wonder whether it’s worth telling.

The same principle applies to email pitches, which are often even more prone to the problem of the wrong perspective. A pitch that opens with “We are writing to inform you that” has already started off on the wrong foot. A pitch that begins with an observation about a story the journalist is covering—and then positions the client as a part of that story—starts from the reader’s perspective, not the writer’s.

4. The Antagonist as a Narrative Device

One of the most interesting observations that emerges from the study of narrative structures is that the most compelling stories always have an antagonist. Not necessarily a villain, but an obstacle, a opposing force, something the protagonist must contend with. Without an antagonist, there is no tension; without tension, there is no story; without a story, there is only a list of facts.

In corporate communications, the antagonist is often omitted for reasons of caution: companies don’t want to appear confrontational, they don’t want to come into conflict with anyone, and they prefer a neutral, institutional tone. The result is that press releases become bland, predictable, and indistinguishable from one another. No company ever claims to be doing something irrelevant: all press releases tout innovative products, exceptional results, and cutting-edge initiatives. When everything is extraordinary, nothing really is, in the eyes of the reader.

Identifying the antagonist in an organization’s narrative does not mean attacking a competitor, but rather being honest about the problem you’re trying to solve. The antagonist could be a widespread habit that the brand aims to change, an industry standard that is being challenged, or a technological limitation that the brand is trying to overcome. Oatly, for example, builds its entire public narrative in opposition to the dairy industry’s production paradigms: it doesn’t attack individual competitors; it attacks a system. Where there is no antagonist, you must find one, because that is where you’ll find the reason why the story is worth telling.

5. From Report to Pitch: Different Structures, Different Effects

Narrative identifies certain recurring forms in business storytelling. A report organizes facts according to a specific criterion: the reader comes away with a little more information than before, but has not had an experience that changes their understanding of something. An explanation takes the reader from point A to point B, deepening their understanding of a specific topic. A pitch starts with a problem, builds tension around that obstacle, and resolves it through a solution: the reader emerges in a different state than the one they entered in.

Most press releases are almost like reports: orderly lists of information, written correctly but lacking a structure that builds tension or provides a resolution. The shift from a report-style structure to a pitch-style structure requires identifying the problem that the company, product, or initiative being promoted helps solve, and building the text around that problem rather than the results.

It’s not about eliminating data, but about placing it where the narrative needs it to move forward. A number presented as evidence for an argument that has already been established has a completely different effect than the same number presented at the beginning as the first piece of information to be processed. In the first case, the data serves a narrative function; in the second, it is merely a piece of information.

6. How to Create a Reader-Centered Narrative

The process of crafting a reader-centered narrative can be broken down into several recurring steps. The first is reconnaissance: who is reading this text, what are they observing in their own work or industry, and what is the problem or question around which they are shaping their editorial decisions. For a journalist, this stage requires reading their recent articles—not just knowing which publication they write for. For a broader audience, it requires understanding what conversations are already taking place within the target segment.

The second phase is that of integration: at what point in that ongoing story does the company or project being communicated fit in? As we described in the article Communicating Healthcare: How PR Professionals Bridge the Gap Between Science and Information, even in the most technical and highly regulated sectors, effective storytelling starts with a real and relatable problem, not with a list of product features.

The third phase concerns continuity. A reader-centered narrative is not limited to a single press release; it is built through a series of consistent releases over time, each of which adds an element to the overall story. A journalist who, over the course of months, receives press releases that consistently adopt the same perspective and address related topics learns to recognize that source as reliable and relevant. 

This is why a press office’s reputation is built over time through the quality of its relationships—it cannot be achieved with a single well-written press release.

Read also: How Internal Communication Shapes External Reputation e PR for personal branding and positioning