Unfortunately I think you missed the point of the post on the Holistic Blog. It wasnt a pop at the role of PR, merely an observation that this shouldnt be an us vs them, as with modern day reputation management - a response is multi-faceted - of which online may be a part of that response.

I personally will nearly always say PR experts are in a far better place to understand tone of voice, and the holistic reputational picture (online and offline), however that doesn't necessarily mean that they grasp the nuances of the online environment, and that is where online (and SEO as one part of that jigsaw) play an important part.

As regards 'dodgy SEO practises', it is unfortunate you have that opinion, given the synergies between search and PR....

I actually should have been asleep but was instead lucky enough to catch the debate - LIVE!

In the effort of adding another point in support of your reasoning that ‘SEO results from good PR will be better and more long-lasting than dodgy SEO practices’, I’d like to point in the direction of a parallel discussion happening on P2PR that emerged from the same late night PR vs. SEO debate on Twitter.

In this discussion @jamie247 makes an additional argument that in my opinion resonates lots. His point starts by asking: “when the search engine becomes redundant, what does SEO as we know it today matter anyway? Sure this won't be happening tomorrow but for some subject matter I use my network on Twitter / Delicious as a search / information finding tool over Google already. The reason is because my network has filtered out all the SEO spam and the relationships are built on degrees of trust.” He goes on to say that “...this isn't because of suspicion but time spent invested into info hunting’ - which I also concur with.

I also (admittedly since not long ago) only use my networks/twitter/delicious as search and info finding tools. If my network or community doesn't come up with an answer, then I use google search. I in fact find a lot of what I need using the search on gmail - Why? Because it helps me find emails containing relevant info that were sent by none other than someone that is part of my network (P2P) and therefore, more relevant to me than simply (and maybe even corrupted) search. Of course most people (older demographic I'd suspect) will continue to google search for some time. However, it is only a matter of time for when the tables favor P2P given that as @jamie247 describes ‘P2P filters out all the SEO spam because the network relationships are built on degrees of trust’, or as you say, ‘good online PR connects with audiences on the basis of shared interests’.

How much time will it take for P2P searches to outweigh outright google searches? Well, isn’t that the billion $$$ question?!?! I do think that the important thing to focus on now is for us (online PR) to be sure to ride out the trend, and in the process determine the right mix of PR + SEO given the specifics of the product and audience, while never losing sight of what we do best which is build meaningful online relationships.

Great post Marshall. The SEO/PR debate is really hotting up. I'd like to see people talking about 'communications' in the round, of which PR and SEO are both parts (particularly if you take the view that Google listings can contribute to - or damage - a company's reputation, depending on what appears in them). PR in some circles is still too closely associated with media relations, in my view only a single part of the communciations mix.

These are considerations that I would never expect an SEO firm to consider. Their providence is specific and narrow. Ours must be broader and more complete.

If you don't expect it from a Search/SEM firm (not necessarily just SEO), perhaps that person has chosen the wrong team to do business with.

As with any type of marketing discipline, if the marketer (in this case, an SEO) does not take into consideration the client's goals and audience, the strategy and tactics will not be on target.

Too often, marketing siloists feel that their trade is more valuable because its more strategic. However, the holistic, inbound marketer knows and values each piece of the puzzle and must determine where and when to implement that as part of the strategy... and SEM firms (and PR firms) are filled with those types of people.

Just as SEM firms are, as Stuart puts it, offer services "that are traditionally part of the public relations toolkit" many traditional, large PR shops are offering rudimentary versions of SEM.

The goal of SEM, as I see it, is not how to boost rankings. The goal is to be where your customer is looking for you at the time and place they are looking for you, and that is not necessarily on a search engine.

If we prefer to be more practical, the SEO results from good PR will be better and more long-lasting than dodgy SEO practices. So hire a good PR firm, and sack your expensive SEO agency.

Dodgy SEO practices: yes.
Responsible, strategic SEO practices:it depends.

Perhaps I'm missing something in this discussion, but at no point did I feel Peter Young's article made it into an SEO vs. PR argument. Yet, I feel that this entire blog post was trying to boost PR at the expense of SEO (or something else).

As someone who's done both (worked at a PR firm and now in SEM), there is so much overlap that I am hard-pressed to determine when one begins and one ends.

Nice post Marshall, I agree that PR is really helpful for the prospective clients in making a decision of selecting their SEO firm. But its not the only thing, there are some sites that outperform the good PR sites in the search engine results.

What I want to stress is PR is not the only factor that determines the quality of SEO, though I would also like to say that it carries a good weightage and kind of a barometer of measuring the site reputation.

Surely comparing good PR to bad SEO is unfair?

Couldn't the same argument be made that bad PR agencies just care about getting your name in the papers whereas good SEO companies consider all elements of company vision and build appropriate strategies and tactics off that?

It feels to me that just as many sins have been committed over the years in the name of PR as SEO.

And the ironic thing is that underlying it all both are so much more powerful (if done correctly) when done together...

Pls excuse typos. Writing this on small mobile keyboard!