A lab sends its press office a five-page writeup, full of technical detail and grant-application-style framing, hoping it’ll turn into a news story. Most of the time it doesn’t — either the press office rewrites it entirely from scratch after a lengthy back-and-forth, or, more often, it sits unread because nobody has time to extract a story from that much material. A press release that’s actually structured for a press officer’s workflow gets used far more often than a comprehensive one.
Lead with the plain-language finding, not the background
Press officers are looking for one thing first: what happened, stated in a sentence a general reader could understand without prior context. A draft that opens with several paragraphs of background and motivation before getting to the actual result makes the press officer do the work of finding the lede themselves, which is exactly the step a lab-written draft should be doing for them. Whatever sentence would headline the story is the sentence that should open the draft.
Keep it to half a page
A press officer is going to condense whatever’s sent regardless of length, so a long draft doesn’t produce a longer story — it just means more material gets cut, and the cuts aren’t always the parts the lab would have chosen to lose. A tight half-page draft with the finding, why it matters, and one supporting detail gives the press officer less to cut and a clearer sense of what the lab actually considers the core of the story.
Write the quote yourself
Every release includes a quote from the researcher, and it’s far better for the lab to write that quote out in full, in the PI’s actual voice, than to leave a placeholder for the press office to draft later. A press officer unfamiliar with the specifics often writes a technically vague or slightly inaccurate quote under deadline pressure; a quote written by the researcher and lightly trimmed is both more accurate and faster to finalize.
Not every result needs this treatment
A press release makes sense for a finding with a clear takeaway and some relevance beyond the immediate subfield — the kind of result a general audience could plausibly find interesting once it’s explained. A narrower, more technical result is often better served by a direct post to the lab’s own channels, aimed at the audience that will actually care, rather than routed through a press process built for broader appeal it doesn’t really have.
Timing matters more than most labs expect
The single most common reason a press office doesn’t cover a paper isn’t that they decided against it — it’s that nobody told them in time. Reaching out a week or two before publication, or right at publication, gives the press office room to actually plan coverage. A note sent a month after the paper is already out is far less likely to turn into anything, since the news, from the press office’s perspective, has already happened.
Have the basics ready before you reach out
Once a press office is interested, they’ll often ask for a photo and a short bio within the day. Having a media kit already assembled — current photos, a plain-language lab description — means that ask can be answered immediately instead of becoming the thing that stalls the story while someone tracks down a usable headshot.
The relationship compounds
A lab that sends the press office clean, well-structured, appropriately-sized drafts becomes a lab the press office is more inclined to prioritize next time, simply because working with them is easy. That reputation, built release by release, does more for a lab’s long-term press coverage than any single well-written draft.
Common questions
Does every paper need a press release?
No. A press release is worth the effort for results with a clear, explainable takeaway and some broader relevance beyond the immediate subfield. A narrow, technical result that mainly matters to specialists is usually better served by a direct post to the lab's own channels than by a formal release.
How long should a draft sent to the press office be?
Half a page, at most a full page. A press officer is going to compress it further regardless, so a long, comprehensive draft creates more editing work rather than less, and often more of what gets cut is the part the lab most wanted included.
Should the draft include quotes from the PI?
Yes, one or two, written out in full rather than left as a placeholder for the press office to draft. A quote in the researcher's actual voice, even if lightly edited afterward, is more usable and often more accurate than one written by someone unfamiliar with the work.
What's the most common reason a press office skips covering a paper?
Often it's simply that they didn't know about it in time. Reaching out before or right at publication, rather than weeks later, is one of the highest-leverage things a lab can do to actually get covered.