By Jordan Baker, Founder of Fair Public Relations and former UK national journalist
Imagine two businesses trying to get into the media.
The first has just completed a genuinely significant acquisition. There is a confirmed deal, meaningful figures, named executives, a clear announcement and a reason why people across its industry may need to know about it. The company wants the information circulated accurately and widely.
The second business has nothing major to announce. Its founder is, however, an experienced workplace psychologist who could give credible insight into stories about burnout, management, hybrid working and employee wellbeing.
Those businesses do not have the same PR need.
The first may have a legitimate reason to issue and potentially distribute a press release.
The second may get substantially more value from becoming a useful expert source for journalists.
That distinction matters because press release distribution and expert commentary PR are not interchangeable ways of buying media coverage.
Distribution puts information into circulation.
Expert commentary PR tries to connect genuine specialist knowledge with journalists who may actually need it for a story.
And direct journalist pitching sits somewhere alongside both. A press release can be pitched personally rather than distributed through a wire, while an expert comment can be packaged proactively and sent directly to relevant journalists.
The right approach depends on what you actually have to offer the media.
What is press release distribution?
Press release distribution means taking an announcement or media release and circulating it through a distribution service, newswire, press-release platform or other publishing network.
Depending on the service and package, that may mean the release is sent into a large distribution network, hosted online, syndicated to partner websites or made available to journalists and other users of the service.
There is nothing inherently wrong with that.
Professional communications guidance still recognises wire services and electronic distribution as legitimate ways of circulating news releases. At the same time, sending a news release does not oblige an independent newsroom to turn it into editorial coverage.
That second point is where expectations can become muddled.
A press release appearing on a distribution network is an output of distribution.
An independent journalist deciding that the underlying story is interesting, interviewing somebody, checking the information and publishing their own editorial article is a different outcome.
Businesses should know which one they are buying.
Is a distributed press release the same thing as earned media?
Not necessarily.
If you pay a distribution service and the release is automatically hosted or syndicated across participating websites, that publication happened because you bought distribution.
That can still have a legitimate purpose.
Perhaps the organisation wants a permanent public record of an announcement.
Perhaps it wants investors, partners, customers or searchers to be able to find the release.
Perhaps the story has been offered to journalists already and there is no particular editorial appetite for it, but the company still wants the announcement publicly accessible.
Perhaps broad trade circulation itself is useful.
What I would not do is blur that into:
"We earned 150 pieces of press coverage."
If those 150 pages are automated or syndication-based copies of the same paid-for release, they should be reported as distribution or syndication, not as 150 independently commissioned newspaper articles.
Fair PR is deliberately careful about that distinction.
Did I use newswires when I was a journalist?
I do not have a useful personal newsroom story about discovering articles through paid press-release distribution services.
That was not really how I worked as a journalist.
My experience was much more around information being sent directly to me, sources being put forward, relevant pitches arriving and deciding whether something was useful for the publication or story I was working on.
So I am not going to pretend I used a particular newswire every morning when I did not.
My own view of paid release distribution comes much more from the PR side.
It can be a relatively cost-effective publishing and distribution mechanism if somebody specifically wants an announcement circulating online.
But that is different from what I consider organic earned-media PR, where a journalist independently decides the story or source is worth using.
Both can exist.
They should simply be described accurately.
What is Expert Commentary PR?
Expert Commentary PR starts from a very different asset.
Instead of asking:
What has the company announced?
we ask:
What does this person genuinely know that could help a journalist?
A journalist writing about a tax development may need an accountant.
A careers writer discussing AI recruitment may need an experienced recruiter.
A homes editor covering a design trend may want an interior designer.
A national newspaper covering a medical subject may need an appropriately qualified clinician.
An employment journalist may need a lawyer or HR specialist, depending on the question.
The expert does not necessarily need a major company announcement.
Their professional knowledge is the contribution.
Fair's Expert Commentary PR service is designed around that.
We identify relevant opportunities, establish whether they actually fit the expert's credentials, gather genuine input, develop useful commentary, pitch appropriate journalists directly, follow up and manage the surrounding media process.
Where there is a genuinely newsworthy expert angle, the service can also include up to two proactive expert-commentary releases in a month.
But the purpose is not to distribute generic company news.
It is to make a credible professional more useful and accessible to the media.
What is the difference between distributing a release and pitching a journalist?
The easiest way to understand the distinction is to look at what actually happens.
| Area | Press release distribution | Direct journalist pitching | Managed Expert Commentary PR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Main purpose | Circulate an announcement or release | Convince a relevant journalist that a specific story/source is worth considering | Build media opportunities around a credible specialist's expertise |
| Starting point | A release or announcement | A defined story, product, source or opportunity | Genuine professional knowledge |
| Targeting | Depends on distribution service/package | Selected journalists chosen for editorial relevance | Relevant journalists, subjects and opportunities identified over time |
| Journalist relationship | May be indirect | Direct | Direct |
| Editorial control | Business controls its submitted release; syndication may reproduce it | Journalist controls whether and how the story is used | Journalist controls whether and how the expert is quoted |
| Typical output | Distributed/hosted/syndicated release | Potential independent journalist interest or editorial coverage | Potential quotes, interviews and expert-led editorial coverage |
| Ongoing research | Not necessarily | Required for good targeting | Core part of the service |
| Expert input | May not be required | Depends on story | Essential |
| Founder/client workload | Often concentrated around preparing/approving announcement | Research, writing and pitching may sit with client or PR | Fair handles execution; expert provides authentic knowledge and approvals |
| Best suited to | Genuine announcements that need circulation | Businesses with a specific credible media story | Credible individuals who can contribute regularly to media subjects |
| Main limitation | Distribution does not itself guarantee independent editorial interest | Good pitching cannot make a weak story newsworthy | Expertise alone does not guarantee a journalist will use it |
These routes can overlap.
A company might distribute a major announcement and have its PR team personally pitch the strongest journalists.
A specialist may respond reactively to journalist needs and have proactive commentary pitched around a timely topic.
PR is not a choice between mutually exclusive buttons.
What makes direct pitching different?
Direct pitching requires judgement.
Someone has to decide:
Which journalist is actually relevant?
What do they cover?
Why would their audience care?
What is the strongest angle?
What information should be in the email?
What supporting material is available?
Should the journalist be offered an interview, data, photographs, samples or a spokesperson?
And is now actually the right time to contact them?
A distribution platform can send information to an enormous number of destinations.
It cannot make an irrelevant story relevant simply by increasing the size of the list.
That is why I have always been sceptical of PR discussions that focus primarily on "reach" as though the biggest database automatically creates the best campaign.
I would rather pitch 50 genuinely appropriate journalists than send something to 50,000 people with no real reason to care.
When does press release distribution make sense?
There are perfectly legitimate situations.
A sizeable business announcement may need broad circulation.
A listed or regulated organisation may have formal disclosure requirements, although the appropriate regulatory and legal process should obviously be determined by its advisers rather than a general PR article.
A trade organisation might have information intended for a very wide sector audience.
A company may have a public announcement that deserves to exist online even when it is not especially attractive to mainstream journalists.
Or a business may simply decide that a cost-effective distributed release serves one particular communications objective.
In those cases, distribution can be useful.
My objection is not to the tool.
It is to misdescribing what the tool did.
Can a newswire guarantee coverage?
It depends what somebody means by "coverage".
A distribution service may contractually provide publication or syndication within parts of its own network.
That is very different from guaranteeing that an independent journalist at a newspaper, magazine or broadcaster will decide to cover the story editorially.
Professional media-relations guidance is clear that sending information to news organisations does not guarantee publication.
So whenever somebody promises "guaranteed coverage", ask the next question:
What exactly is guaranteed?
An independently written story?
A syndication placement?
A hosted release?
Advertorial?
Sponsored content?
A partner site?
Those can all be legitimate products.
They are not the same product.
Does Fair PR use paid newswire distribution?
Not as part of our normal PR model.
Fair's approach is journalist-led.
We develop material, identify appropriate journalists and pitch them directly.
There have been occasions when a client has specifically asked us to arrange paid press-release distribution. We have done that and passed the cost on.
But I would not then describe the resulting paid syndication as organic earned PR.
It is distribution.
If the same story subsequently leads to an independent journalist writing about it, that is a separate earned-media result.
Transparency is more important than trying to make every communications output sound more impressive than it really is.
When is expert commentary the better approach?
Expert commentary becomes particularly interesting when the business does not have a meaningful company announcement but somebody inside it has credible knowledge.
Imagine an accountant.
They do not launch a revolutionary new accounting service every Tuesday.
That does not mean they have nothing useful to say.
They may be able to explain:
why a particular economic development matters to small businesses;
what business owners regularly misunderstand about cash flow;
how certain financial pressures affect hiring;
or what a new official announcement means in practical terms, provided the subject falls within their genuine professional remit.
The same applies to a recruiter.
They may have no corporate news whatsoever.
But they may know a great deal about AI screening, interviews, candidate behaviour, salaries, remote work or workplace expectations.
That can create an entirely different kind of media opportunity.
A weak company announcement versus a useful expert angle
Consider this hypothetical pitch:
Weak promotional announcement
New recruitment consultancy launches innovative candidate advisory service
Smith Recruitment Solutions is delighted to announce the launch of its innovative new candidate advisory service, designed to revolutionise the recruitment experience and help candidates achieve their career potential.
For the company, this may feel significant.
For a journalist, there is very little there yet.
"New service launches" is the story.
There may be no evidence that the service is unusual.
There may be no wider reader consequence.
There is no obvious reason it needs to be covered now.
Now imagine the founder has 15 years of recruitment experience and is seeing a genuine change in how candidates prepare for AI-assisted interview screening.
The pitch becomes:
Expert-led angle
Recruiter: The three interview habits experienced candidates need to rethink as AI screening becomes more common
The founder can then explain what they are observing, where candidates misunderstand the process, what has genuinely changed and what applicants should consider.
The business may still receive attribution.
The founder may be identified as the managing director of Smith Recruitment Solutions.
But the journalist-facing value has moved from:
"Please tell readers my company has launched something"
to:
"Here is relevant knowledge that may help you explain a subject your readers care about."
There is no guarantee the second pitch gets published either.
It simply has a clearer editorial reason to exist.
Can you distribute expert commentary as a press release?
You can.
Sometimes a timely expert-led release is a useful format.
For example, if an official announcement has just created an obvious media question and an expert has a strong, well-supported view, a concise commentary release can give journalists usable material.
Fair's specialist Expert Commentary service allows for up to two proactive commentary-led releases in a month where there is genuinely something worth saying.
But we would still normally think about who should receive it.
Writing a good expert release and then dropping it into an enormous untargeted distribution network misses a large part of the value.
Can businesses use both distribution and journalist pitching?
Absolutely.
Imagine a larger business has acquired another company.
The corporate announcement itself may justify formal broad distribution.
At the same time, the CEO might be available to talk about consolidation in the industry.
The direct journalist campaign could therefore offer interviews and context to selected business reporters.
A few weeks later, another executive could contribute expert commentary on a related market development.
Three communications activities have happened:
the announcement has been distributed;
selected journalists have been pitched directly;
and expert commentary has continued after the announcement.
There is no rule saying you must select only one.
The important thing is knowing what each is supposed to achieve.
What are you actually paying for?
Distribution fees largely buy distribution infrastructure and whatever publication, hosting, syndication, targeting or additional features are included in the chosen service.
With managed journalist outreach, much of what you are paying for is human work.
Research.
Editorial judgement.
Angle development.
Writing.
Journalist selection.
Timing.
Client briefing.
Fact-checking.
Pitching.
Responding to journalists.
Following up.
Monitoring.
Reporting.
And, in a broader campaign, ongoing account management and strategy.
That distinction is particularly important when comparing cheap distribution with an agency retainer.
You are not comparing two prices for the same task.
Where does Fair's Expert Commentary PR fit?
Fair's narrower Expert Commentary PR service is currently priced at £397 per month in the UK, US$497 per month in the United States and CAD$747 per month in Canada.
It has an initial three-month commitment, followed by Fair's agreed notice provisions.
It is for credible specialists whose expertise itself provides the media opportunity.
It does not include a complete company PR campaign, product launch programme, business announcement strategy or ongoing founder-positioning programme.
For those broader needs, Fair's Standard PR service remains £797 per month in the UK, US$997 per month in the US and CAD$1,497 per month in Canada.
Standard PR is wider because the work is wider.
How should you choose?
Ask yourself five questions.
1. Do I actually have genuine news?
If yes, a press release may be appropriate.
Then decide whether you need distribution, direct pitching or both.
2. Do I have credible expertise?
If there is no major announcement but somebody can legitimately help journalists interpret ongoing stories, expert commentary may offer more sustainable media potential.
3. Who genuinely needs to receive this?
A broad public announcement may benefit from distribution.
A specialist consumer-health story may need 30 carefully selected writers.
A niche B2B subject may need five particularly relevant trade journalists.
Size of list is not the same thing as quality of targeting.
4. Who will do the actual PR work?
Some business owners enjoy researching journalists and writing pitches themselves.
Others want a managed team.
Calculate the internal time as well as the external fee.
5. Is the need occasional or ongoing?
A one-off corporate development may only justify one announcement.
A credible expert may have something useful to contribute repeatedly.
A growing company with products, founders, customers, expertise and regular business developments may require a broader PR campaign.
The bottom line
Press release distribution is useful when you have information that genuinely needs distributing.
Expert Commentary PR is useful when a credible person's expertise can repeatedly help journalists.
Direct pitching is the human editorial process of working out which journalists may actually care and approaching them appropriately.
These things overlap.
They are not synonyms.
A bigger distribution list does not automatically create more meaningful editorial coverage.
And paying an agency does not make weak information newsworthy.
Start with the asset you actually have.
Then choose the communications route that matches it.
Frequently asked questions
Does press release distribution guarantee media coverage?
It can guarantee certain forms of distribution, hosting or syndication where those are part of the provider's product, but that is not the same as guaranteeing that an independent journalist will write an editorial article about the business. News organisations retain editorial control over what they cover.
Can I get quoted by journalists without issuing a press release?
Yes. Journalists frequently use expert sources, interviews and direct commentary without a formal company press release. A credible source can be pitched directly in response to a relevant story or proactively around a timely subject.
Is Expert Commentary PR suitable for a small business?
Potentially, where somebody within the business has genuine, demonstrable expertise that journalists may find useful. It is not a cheaper route to general company publicity, product promotion or launch coverage.
When would I need full-service PR instead of expert commentary?
Broader PR is normally more suitable when you need strategy around the business itself, including founder positioning, product or service launches, company announcements, customer stories, wider thought leadership or several campaign routes operating together.
Have expertise worth sharing, but no major announcement?
You do not need to invent company news every month to have media potential.
If the strongest asset inside your business is genuine professional knowledge, Expert Commentary PR gives suitable specialists a managed route to direct journalist outreach.
If you need a wider campaign around your business, founder, product, service or company developments, Standard PR is the broader option.
You can also compare both through Our Services or contact Fair PR with the actual objective. We will tell you which scope makes sense.
About the author
Jordan Baker is the founder of Fair Public Relations and a former UK national journalist with more than a decade of experience in journalism, PR and media relations. He writes about earned media, journalist pitching, press releases, expert positioning and how small businesses can choose PR activity that matches what they genuinely have to offer.
View Jordan Baker’s media expert profile
