A client lands a story on the evening news. The team shares it. Friends and colleagues send congratulations. Someone asks the question every PR professional should be ready to answer:
“That’s great—but did it work?”
The answer depends on what the story was supposed to do.
Maybe the goal was to introduce a company to a new market. Maybe it was to establish its founder as an expert. Maybe the client needed people to show up, donate, apply, buy tickets or remember a message that could keep their dogs safe on a summer walk.
Each of those goals calls for a different measure of success. At Knoodle, we believe clients deserve to see the numbers behind their PR—and understand what those numbers actually mean.
First, decide what success looks like
Before pitching a story, we ask what the client wants people to know, feel or do.
That sounds simple, but it changes how we evaluate the work. If a business wants to become better known among homebuilders, a feature in a publication those builders read may be more valuable than a mention in a larger outlet with the wrong audience. If a nonprofit needs volunteers for an upcoming event, awareness matters, but sign-ups matter more.
The goal also gives us a starting point for comparison. How much attention was the topic getting before the campaign? What does the client’s website traffic usually look like? How many people attended last year? Without that context, even an impressive-looking number can be hard to interpret.
There is no single score that fits every PR campaign. A useful report should tell you what the campaign set out to accomplish, what happened and what the available evidence suggests about the connection between the two.
The numbers the PR industry tracks
Most PR reports begin with outputs: the things a team produced or secured. These might include the number of media stories, interviews, broadcast segments, newsletter mentions or speaking opportunities.
Those counts have a purpose. They show whether the story made it into the world and whether the team earned attention from the outlets it targeted. We also look at where the coverage appeared, how prominently the client was featured and whether the story included the message we wanted people to hear.
Then there are estimates of reach, often based on an outlet’s circulation, audience or traffic. Reach can help put a placement in context, but it is easy to misunderstand. A publication’s total readership does not mean every reader saw one particular article. A broadcast station’s audience does not mean every viewer watched one segment.
Social engagement, referral traffic, search activity and inquiries can bring us closer to understanding how people responded. Still, each number answers only part of the question. A click shows interest. An inquiry may show stronger intent. Neither should be confused with a completed sale or a change in public opinion.
The industry increasingly encourages communicators to look beyond what went out and examine what audiences understood or did afterward. We agree. That is where the most useful conversations with clients begin.
Why the biggest number isn’t always the best result
It can be tempting to rank coverage by audience size. After all, a million sounds better than ten thousand.
But consider two possible stories. One is a brief mention in a large publication whose readers have little connection to the client. The other is an in-depth interview in a smaller trade outlet read by the exact people the client wants to reach.
Which one worked harder?
For a company trying to build relationships in that industry, the second story may do far more. It gives the audience time to understand the company’s point of view, provides a credible source to share in future conversations and can put the client on the radar of potential partners.
The same principle applies to local campaigns. A television segment that tells families where to pick up free dog booties can lead to action in a way a broad but vague mention may not.
We pay attention to audience fit, story quality and the opportunity the coverage creates. Was the client central to the story? Was a spokesperson quoted? Did the outlet explain why the issue matters? Was there a clear way for an interested person to take the next step?
Those details rarely fit into one large number, but they make a difference.
A practical dollar figure for earned media
Clients also reasonably ask another question: “What would that coverage have cost if we’d bought the space?”
To help answer it, Knoodle uses an advertising equivalency estimate. We look for the cost of comparable advertising space or airtime in the outlet where the earned story appeared. We then multiply that amount by three to reflect the additional value we assign to coverage an independent outlet chose to give the story.
If comparable ad space would cost $1,000, for example, our reported estimate for that earned placement would be $3,000.
It is a straightforward way to put the scale of a press hit into familiar terms. It can be especially helpful when a client needs to explain PR activity to someone who is used to reviewing advertising budgets.
The calculation also needs a clear label. The three-times multiplier is Knoodle’s reporting convention, not a universal industry standard or a scientifically measured credibility premium. The resulting figure is an estimate of media value. It is not revenue, profit or proof that the placement persuaded three times as many people as an ad would have.
We include it because it gives clients a useful point of reference. We put it beside other measures because no dollar estimate can tell the whole story.
What an ad equivalent can—and can’t—tell you
Advertising and earned media work differently. With an ad, a brand pays for space and controls the message. With earned media, a journalist or outlet decides whether the story is worth sharing and how to tell it.
That independent decision is part of why a press hit can carry weight. A client is appearing in a conversation it did not simply purchase. But the distinction also makes a perfect dollar-for-dollar comparison impossible.
An ad equivalent cannot tell you whether the audience liked the story. It cannot tell you whether the coverage reached the right decision-makers, changed anyone’s mind or caused a customer to call. A prominent interview with thoughtful quotes and a passing mention might occupy similar space while serving very different purposes.
The comparison gets even less exact across formats. A print feature, a digital article and a broadcast interview each have different advertising options and audience behaviors. Rates can vary by placement, timing and negotiated agreements.
That is why we treat the estimate as one reporting tool. It helps answer, “What might it have cost to buy comparable exposure?” It does not answer, “What was the total return on this campaign?”
For that, we have to look at the campaign’s goal and the evidence around it.
Follow the story after it runs
A press hit is often the beginning of its useful life.
Does the outlet link to the client’s website? Do people visit the page mentioned in the story? Does the client hear from prospects, donors or potential partners? Does a reporter return for another interview? Does the coverage give the client’s sales team a credible example to share?
Some of these responses can be tracked directly. We can look at referral links, traffic patterns, registrations, inquiries or attendance. Others require a little more legwork: asking callers how they heard about an event, recording when a new connection mentions a story or checking in with a client’s front-line team.
Timing matters, too. If an event sees a jump in sign-ups after a story airs, that is useful evidence. But if ads, email and social posts were running at the same time, we should recognize that several efforts may have helped. PR rarely acts alone, and a credible report should not claim every result for itself.
The aim is to build the clearest picture we can. Sometimes we can show a direct path from a story to an action. Other times, we can show that coverage contributed to momentum. Both can be valuable, as long as we describe them honestly.
Measure what the coverage said, not just where it ran
Not all press hits communicate the same message.
Suppose a client wants to be known for its expertise. Ten mentions that list the company’s name may create visibility. One interview that lets a leader explain a complex issue clearly may do more to establish authority.
We review the substance of the coverage. Did it carry the main point? Did it include the facts people need to understand the issue? Did it feature the client as a credible source? Was the tone accurate? Could the client use the story when introducing itself to someone new?
This matters particularly when a campaign is meant to build trust over time. A thoughtful story can become something a client shares in a proposal, posts on LinkedIn or sends to a potential partner. A reporter may also remember a source who was helpful, accessible and clear.
Those benefits do not always produce an immediate spike on a dashboard. They still deserve attention. Part of measuring PR is noticing when a single placement creates a useful opening for the next conversation.
Cause for Paws: When the result is bigger than the clip
Fulton Homes’ Cause for Paws campaign offers a good example of why we need more than one measure.
The campaign helps Arizona dog owners protect their pups’ paws from dangerously hot pavement. In 2026, the message stayed in the news from May through August. More coverage helped spread the word about the program and its pop-up events.
We can count the press hits and estimate the advertising value of that coverage. Those figures help show how widely the message traveled. But they are not the most memorable evidence of what happened next: lines formed at all eight pop-ups, and every pair of protective booties was distributed.
The campaign had a practical purpose. It was about getting an important safety reminder in front of people during the hottest months and giving them a way to act on it. The media coverage, event response and bootie distribution together tell a much fuller story than any one number could.
We would still be careful about saying a particular article caused a particular person to attend. People may have heard about a pop-up through a friend, a social post, a broadcast segment or several of those at once. What we can say is that earned media helped keep the issue visible while the campaign reached people in the community.
That is the kind of result we want clients to be able to see and understand.
Make the report useful for the next campaign
A PR report should do more than document what already happened. It should help answer what to do next.
Which story angle got reporters interested? Which outlets reached the right audience? Did a spokesperson’s explanation make the message clearer? Did coverage arrive early enough to help an event? Was there a simple next step for someone who wanted to learn more?
The answers can improve the next pitch, the next campaign page and the next community activation. They can also reveal a missed opportunity. If a story attracted attention but few people knew what to do afterward, the lesson may be to make the call to action clearer. If an outlet consistently connects with the client’s target audience, it may deserve more attention than its audience size alone suggests.
We want clients to know what they received for their investment. Just as much, we want them to know what we learned.
That means reporting the press hits and their estimated media value, then putting those numbers in context: the message conveyed, the people reached, the response we could observe and the questions still worth exploring.
So, did the PR work?
We should be able to answer that question in plain English.
We can show where the story ran and estimate what comparable advertising might have cost. We can explain why an outlet and its audience mattered. We can look for signs that people paid attention, took action or began to see the client differently.
Sometimes the answer is visible in registrations, inquiries or a line at an event. Sometimes it is a new relationship, a reporter who calls again or a respected publication willing to give a client’s perspective serious attention.
Good measurement leaves room for all of that. It gives the numbers their proper place, then asks the question that matters most:
What changed because the story got told?