Written by: Andrew Healy
PR has always had a slight obsession with big numbers. A media list with 500 reporters feels more impressive than one with 25. A pitch sent to 300 people looks more productive than one sent to 8. And big reach, especially when placed prominently in a nice-looking report, gives everyone a win to point to.
I get it. Clients want to know their stories are being seen and agencies want to show activity. But after more than 20 years in PR, I’ve seen firsthand that an average pitch doesn’t suddenly become better just because you sent it to another 500 people.
If that sounds like an argument for quality over quantity, it is. Success in media relations isn’t about the size of a database, it’s about cultivating real relationships.
More Outreach Doesn't Mean Better Results
According to Muck Rack's 2026 State of Journalism report, 86% of journalists said at least some of their work began with a PR pitch. Good news for us.
But here’s the catch: Cision's 2026 research found 72% of journalists consider less than a quarter of the pitches they receive relevant, and the same share said they may block PR professionals who repeatedly get it wrong.
Journalists don’t hate PR pitches or PR professionals (ok, they may hate some). They simply hate lazy, dumb pitches that waste their time and make it painfully obvious the sender is simply spraying-and-praying and hasn’t taken the time to understand what would be helpful to them.
AI makes it easier to build bigger media lists and send personalized pitches at scale. But inserting a reporter's first name and referencing their last headline doesn't make a pitch relevant. It simply lets bad PR pros send more bad pitches to the wrong reporters, thus making their inbox even more crowded. Not a good way to earn their trust.
And if that feels like an overreaction, check out what Diane Brady of Fortune said in a recent newsletter: “I now get multiple AI-generated PR pitches every day. The format is comically uniform, from the greeting to the bullet-point topics, and I think it’s a disservice to the person being pitched.”
I usually describe AI slop as having the same painfully obvious visual language, but I may need to start borrowing her “comically uniform” phrase.
Relationships Aren’t The Same as Access
When PR people talk about "relationships," it often sounds self-serving, as if knowing a reporter means they'll write about our client because we bought them a coffee once. That's not how it works.
A media relationship doesn't guarantee a story (it’s called “earned media” for a reason). In fact, in many cases, it gets you a faster “no”. But there’s real value there that smart PR people can use to benefit their clients. Having trusted relationships leads to more honest and direct feedback, which we can use to sharpen our thinking and media strategy and increase the chances of securing coverage that will make the client happy.
Don’t get me wrong: I love when a reporter says yes, but earning the trust of a reporter who will take the time to explain why they’re passing is often more useful to a client in the mid and long-term than a short-term placement that reaches the wrong audience.
Good media relationships are built through a series of pretty ordinary interactions: some thoughtful emails, a coffee, a useful introduction, a conversation about what a reporter is hearing in the market. None of that looks especially dramatic in a monthly activity report. It does, however, make the next conversation with them more informed and the next fundraising pitch more relevant. And that’s where the value for client kicks in.
Do Your Homework
Clients and prospects understandably ask which reporters and outlets we know. It’s an entirely fair question and good way for brands to gauge whether an agency has experience with the outlets that matter most to them. But the more important thing for them to ask is what we know about them:
- What is the reporter interested and turned off by right now?
- Who is their audience, and what do they actually care about?
- Where does a client's expertise fit into a story that's already forming (if it even does)?
- And will we tell the client honestly when a pitch isn't strong enough yet?
A media database can tell you a reporter's title and email address, but it can't tell you what they're tired of covering (hint: probably AI), which angles are getting more interesting, or whether the timing is simply wrong. That understanding comes from listening, reading and staying connected when there's nothing immediate to pitch. Want to earn a reporter’s trust? Take them to a 15 min coffee downstairs from their office without pitching a single client. Just connect and ask them what they’re interested in. Play the long game.
At Water & Wall, we're working to formalize this. Our team regularly connects with reporters, including through informal conversations and coffees, and everyone shares what they learn internally. The purpose is to understand what journalists are working on, what they need, what they don’t need, and look for where our clients can contribute something genuinely useful. If our clients can help them, that’s huge. And if they can’t, then we leave reporters alone. They get enough pitches.
Does that guarantee coverage? Of course not. Any agency promising guaranteed earned coverage is lying. But what it does provide is better judgment about if and where a story fits, how it should be framed, and whether it should be pitched at all.
Reach still has a place
Broad outreach isn't always wrong. Major announcements, proprietary research, significant transactions, and time-sensitive news may genuinely be relevant to a larger group of reporters, and sometimes 100 or more of them should hear about it.
The problem starts when volume becomes the default strategy and activity gets confused with effectiveness. "We sent the pitch to 700 reporters" isn't automatically an impressive statement (and a smart client may actually feel the opposite). It also calls the agency’s strategy into question: “You struck out 700 times?”
The strongest media programs still generate reach. They just earn it through relevance and trust instead of manufacturing it through distribution and vanity metrics.
Reporters Don’t Forget
Reporters remember the PR people and agencies who waste their time, but they also remember the ones who make their jobs easier:
- Who provides the right source on a tight deadline
- Who sends credible data instead of spin
- Who answers questions directly
- Who aren’t afraid to say "I don't know, but I'll find out" instead of bluffing
Over time, the media gets a sense of who respects their time and who doesn’t. A reporter may still give you a no, but your email gets a real look because the last several times you sent one, it was worth their time. That's the advantage a real relationship creates: trust.
Our industry is changing rapidly but reporters’ needs and expectations have remained pretty consistent. If you want to get a fair look, you just have to earn it.
