NHS PR costs

[fadeaway]

Media complaining the NHS employees people to answer all the questions the media keeps asking the NHS.

Awesome!

Seriously, the NHS 1). needs to respond to, and try to manage, news stories relating to it and 2). it's got to play the game/fight its corner in the political & media worlds as well

[Mojooo]

London424 said:

Mojooo said:

ralphrj said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-217629...

In 1981 there were 8 Press Officers employed across the whole NHS.

In 2012 there were 82 Press Officers employed in the NHS in London alone at a cost of £9.7m for the last 3 years.





Edit: to correct spend over 3 years

Edited by ralphrj on Wednesday 13th March 12:52

Might that be because there are a lot more media demands than there were 22 years ago?

I am sure the NHS could stick with 8 press officers but I daresay the media would complain that they cannot get a response from the remaining 8 overworked staff.

Does the NHS need PR staff? Why are they talking to the media in the first place?

Surely their sole function is to treat people.

Someone else has responded better than I can.

Are you suggesting the NHS does not respond to the media?

[McWigglebum4th]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Check out the graph on this link to see how much the NHS has grown since 1981

http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/data-and-charts/hi...

But if they reform the NHS all they would do is exclude anyone who has a job

[ninja-lewis]

captainzep said:

'PR' is the sort of misleading term you'd expect from the BBC.

I suspect the article refers to 'Communications' teams that deal with a range of stuff.

Would these teams be involved in education and awareness campaigns, or are these carried out a higher level in the NHS? The 'Act F.A.S.T' stroke campaign cost around £10 million for two years I think, covering TV adverts, print adverts and various other avenues. But it saves the NHS far more by raising public awareness, leading to more and earlier calls in cases of suspected strokes and thus better chances of recovery for patients, saving money in the long term.

[mph1977]

ninja-lewis said:

captainzep said:

'PR' is the sort of misleading term you'd expect from the BBC.

I suspect the article refers to 'Communications' teams that deal with a range of stuff.

Would these teams be involved in education and awareness campaigns, or are these carried out a higher level in the NHS? The 'Act F.A.S.T' stroke campaign cost around £10 million for two years I think, covering TV adverts, print adverts and various other avenues. But it saves the NHS far more by raising public awareness, leading to more and earlier calls in cases of suspected strokes and thus better chances of recovery for patients, saving money in the long term.

Act FAST etc. is across the NHS as a whole as Acute trusts and the Ambulance Service will be involved in local campaigns etc. and will be providing the people to appear on local radio and regional TV...

[Pulse]

mph1977 said:

Act FAST etc. is across the NHS as a whole as Acute trusts and the Ambulance Service will be involved in local campaigns etc. and will be providing the people to appear on local radio and regional TV...

Correct.

As has been mentioned above, there is a big difference between PR and Communications. The majority, if not all organisations in the NHS will have a communications department.

Communications departments do get involved in more local level PR type activities, and in some cases things which are national but commissioned/delivered locally.

Additionally, you have regional initiatives and/or coordination.