In response to David Jone's comments and invitation, I' ve had a chance to poke around a bit in the new Media Relations Points web site -- the proposed standard currently being pushed by the Canadian Public Relations Society and I kind of like it -- as far as it goes. It's simple, relatively customizable to an organizations specific needs and you can't argue with a template that is free. The circ data provided by Canadian News is provided at a good discount. The rejection of multipliers and the emphasis on standardized methods of counting eyeballs is laudable and you can' t quibble about the price when something is free.
While I don't take back any of my rant against the simplification of PR measurement to media terms, if you want to measure media, this isn't a bad way to do it --IF (and that's with a very big IF) you're a Canadian organization. As one of my fellow measurement commission members just pointed out to me --the number of different publications in Canada is a tiny fraction of what it is in the US, never mind the rapidly growing influence of on-line publications and blogs for which we really don't have good numbers yet at all. So don't expect a US version of the MRP standard anytime soon. That having been said, there are several standard metrics in the MRP that we've been using for years and would love it if everyone adopted them.
We thank the CPRS and all the people involved for doing this and adding to the measurement conversation. Now what are we going to do about standards for on-line eyeballs?