The joys of PR, part 94

Obiter has often wondered about the point of many external public relations companies, beyond irritating us beyond words with ceaseless follow-up calls along the lines of 'Did you get our press release? Are you going to use it? Can I facilitate a conversation with a partner you could just as easily call yourself and charge mightily for the privilege?' (they don't actually say that last one).

However, last week one company played a role in bringing together several legal journalists (including your own correspondent) and PR bods at various big corporate law firms for a roundtable to discuss how each side's life would be so much easier if the other didn't exist.

There was much talk of building bridges etcetera (so much so that one suspected Allen & Overy's representative had been briefed to plug its construction expertise), but the upshot of it all - and this is just a rough summary - was that legal journalists are too demanding and too unscrupulous, while PR people are generally useless.

However, it was decided that if we could all learn to love each other and believe a word the other side said, then the world would be a happier, more informed and less inaccurate place.

It might also help PR people if nannying partners let them do what they are good at.

Seeing the way the wind was blowing, our hosts wisely ducked away from asking outright about the advantages of external PR companies, except to invite the assembled hacks to say a word or two about why their particular company was different.

The silence, dare one say, was deafening.

There is, of course, an arrogance on both sides.

The PR people want to be able to manage the news, the journalists want to show that they cannot be managed.

It's a battle of professional pride, but as one fellow participant muttered to Obiter, often not much more.

Nobody dies, and few people care/remember, if a partner unknown outside of his immediate family moves from megafirm X to megafirm Y, however many clients he takes with him.

The opinion persisted throughout the evening that this was a conversation - however interesting from an intellectual point of view - fit for an ivory tower.

Undoubtedly, there are some things happening in the big firms which are important, but many do not stack up, for example, against the ramifications for criminal law solicitors and the public at large of legal aid contracting.