One text, sent to people doing different jobs
A brand issues a press release. The same one, unchanged, to a business journalist, a luxury writer, a trade specialist.
The text is written in the brand’s own codes: craft, product, heritage. Each of its readers is looking for something else — the angle that fits their section. The trade press knows how to decode it and runs the story. The others have nothing to hang a piece on.
The problem isn’t the quality of your release. It’s who it was written for.
A press release isn’t a message. It’s raw material. An announcement, an embargo, a set of verified facts. From there, as many tellings as there are recipients. The facts never move. The opening, the angle, the length and the vocabulary do. The principle fits in one line: we don’t tell a journalist what to write — we write in their language.
Same information, same embargo, a different telling for each recipient.
The method, in four stages
Corpus
The articles actually published under their byline. A minimum of eight per person. Not their biography, not the title’s stated editorial line: what they have written.
Editorial profile
Format, dominant angle, tone, register, sources quoted, how much historical context they give, whether they pass judgement. Dated, sourced article by article, versioned.
Pitch brief
The profile becomes a working instruction: a document any human can read and amend, which governs the angle, tone, length and vocabulary for that one target.
Variants
The release is written in as many versions as there are targets, ready for review, each with a draft covering email.
The fifth stage: a freshness check
Before every production run, three questions
- An article published but never analysed?
- A profile that has moved without the brief following?
- A claim the underlying figures no longer support?
Journalists change sections, formats, preoccupations. A profile without a date is an opinion.
What the system does not do
It sends nothing. It produces drafts. A person decides.
It invents no figures. Where a data point isn’t available, the text carries an explicit placeholder rather than an approximation.
It doesn’t adapt the facts. It adapts the telling. That is the line between this work and spin, and it isn’t negotiable.
It works only from public material. Articles published under a byline, nothing else. No private data, no sensitive data, no inference about the person. A single declared purpose, entry in your company’s record of processing activities, a defined retention period, and removal on request for any journalist who asks.
What you keep at the end
Documents, in plain text: sourced profiles, writing briefs, variants. They belong to you and remain readable without us. Your press office can take them over, correct them and maintain them.
We don’t hand you access to a tool. We hand you an editorial asset.
The pilot
A Swiss watch brand, used as the case study for Sofia Mestre’s diploma project, with no mandate from the brand. Four journalists profiled across general business, luxury and specialist watch media. Thirty-two articles in the corpus. Every analysis cross-checked by two separate language models, so that one model’s agreeableness is never taken for a conclusion.
Three journalists were dropped from the panel for lack of a usable corpus.Turning a profile down is part of the method: a profile built on three articles wouldn’t be a profile, it would be guesswork in a nice format.
Beyond the press
A journalist is only one case of something more general: someone who publishes under their own name. An analyst publishes notes, an awards jury publishes its shortlists, a major account publishes its reports. Wherever a signed corpus exists, the method applies.
In focus
A one-hour scoping session. Bring three journalists you’re targeting and your most recent release. We’ll tell you which of them can be profiled, which can’t, and what the method would change about that specific text.
