"Controlling the narrative" is dead. News moves in minutes. 60% of journalists check social media before filing. You can correct false information. That's critical. But when the narrative is true and moving against you? You're King Canute, shouting at the tide to halt.

63% of marketing leaders now face increased CFO pressure on budgets. Only 22% feel they can answer "What impact is [marketing] having on our business?" That gap is where budgets get cut. Tech PR needs to better surface and explain the correlation between PR and business impact.

48% of all AI citations in branded queries come from earned media. Not your website. Not paid content. Media coverage. If you're retooling for GEO and ignoring PR, you're ignoring the single largest source of what AI actually references.

Most PR analytics either barely exist or are too complicated to reach the C-suite. Busy execs want two things: "Are we winning at PR?" and "What impact is it having on the business?" If your reporting doesn't answer those clearly, it's functionally useless.

Earned media accounts for 48% of all AI citations when people ask about your brand. 82% for review queries. If your CMO is wondering why GEO matters, the answer is already in your PR program.

Most tech PR RFPs are useless. Company background from the website, objectives so broad they could apply to anyone, and ChatGPT probably wrote it. Documents rarely elucidate the real problem companies are trying to fix, but actual conversations do. More chat, less ChatGPT please.

Should your tech company be talking about the Iran conflict? Depends. If your CEO's already taken a public stance, the org follows that slipstream. If your company is directly impacted or you're in energy, logistics, or supply chain, silence is unwise. For everyone else, the longer it drags on, the harder silence gets.

Personal profiles on LinkedIn generate 5x more engagement than company pages posting identical content. Your CEO's personal brand isn't separate from your company brand. It's your main channel.