“I’m excited to get up every day and be in my office,” says freelance journalist Karen Asp. “If I won a million dollars, I’d still do what I’m doing.” Asp chose to specialize in the topics she loves: fitness, health, nutrition, travel and pets. And this zeal regularly earns her bylines in many consumer publications, including Better Homes & Gardens, SELF, USA Today, Runner’s World, Woman’s Day, as well as cover stories in Shape and Real Simple.

When she’s not busy writing, pitching to editors, co-authoring books with Harvard doctors, and living on the front lines of modern health and fitness developments, Asp is answering emails… lots of emails. Among the hundreds of messages a day flooding her inbox are pitches from PR pros hoping she’ll run with their story.

Below, Asp shares her tips for standing out in a crowded inbox, and pitching the angles and sources that enable her to keep doing what she loves.

What should PR professionals know before pitching you?

PR professionals don’t have to know me in detail, but they should know what I cover and what magazines I write for (it’s why I have a web site!). So many PR people send me a pitch and the first thing they ask is, “Who do you write for?” Don’t ask me that. Do your homework.  Something that will get my attention even more? Make the pitch personal by saying something like, “I read your article in Health Magazine.

I get so many pitches that are not relevant so I focus on building great relationships with PR people who know my specialties. These are the pros who hook me up with great people, like experts, authors, and sources who are newsworthy and relevant to my interests. In fact, something PR people might not know is that I’m open to just receiving sources. You don’t necessarily need a hard pitch. Send me the source’s bio, not just the news angle, and I’ll add them to my file of experts.

What do you look for in a story?

Is there a new study that came out on a particular health threat? Or a new product that will interest readers?  Do you have a fresh angle? Is the story relevant right now? Tell me why your study, product, or story is important today. For example, it helps if the story is tied to a disease awareness month.

But a story doesn’t have to be pegged to something completely new. If there’s a hot market for a particular story, I’ll cover it more than once. For example, a good pitch would be: “We saw the article you wrote on posture in Real Simple magazine. We have a new product to improve your posture.”

Who is your ideal source?

You may think that the most highly credentialed person would be my best source but only if that person can talk to a consumer audience. I prefer speaking with experts who are conversational and can convey a practical take-home message from their study or talk about how readers can apply new information to their daily lives.

It also helps if someone understands that I’ll have follow up questions and is willing to take the time to answer them. If they can work with me after the interview, if they’re there when I email questions (I try not to bug them on the phone) and can get back to me in a timely manner, it makes my job much easier.

What should PR pros do when they haven’t received a response to a pitch?

I very much value PR people and have some great relationships with pros who I’ve worked with for years.  But remember, I’m inundated with hundreds of emails a day. I’ve read that for every one journalist, there are four PR people. And these things can take time, so I may be genuinely interested, but the pitch may remain in my files – or my editor’s files — for months before I move on it or even have a home for it.

Be realistic about your follow up. I’ll get an email with a press release at 10am and by 2pm I get a follow up call saying, “Karen I haven’t heard from you yet.” I won’t respond any more if a PR person stalks me. I rarely answer my phone.  Your best bet is to give me all the info you can in the pitch. If I’m interested, I’ll ask for more info.

I recently attended the StartX & StartX Med Demo Day where more than 30 founders presented new products. From a company that protects windshields using nanotechnology to a new smartphone app that replaces the stethoscope, StartX accelerates the development of innovative products by Stanford’s top entrepreneurs.

I caught up with Deven Soni, co-founder of a StartX company called Sprayable Energy. Sprayable Energy makes the world’s first topical caffeine spray, formulated to give you energy and alertness without the downsides of coffee and energy drinks. The product was developed by father and son biochemists Ben and Chongxi Yu, who partnered with Soni to build the company.

Soni got his start as a venture capitalist working largely with international startups. He sat down with me to talk about “being on the other side” and the challenges of developing and marketing an original product.

Where did the idea for Sprayable Energy come from?

I met Ben Yu, the creator of Sprayable Energy on a trip to Antarctica. We shared a cabin on the expedition vessel and discovered we had a lot in common, including our dissatisfaction with coffee and other energy products out there.  Ben was sick of the digestive problems caffeine gave him so he created an alternative that would help him cram for school assignments.

After our trip to Antarctica we both went to South America to be part of a startup accelerator called Startup Chile. We decided to work together to create and market Ben’s sprayable caffeine idea. We spent a year in the lab developing and testing Sprayable Energy until it was ready to share with the world.

Why would consumers choose Sprayable Energy over a cup of coffee?

While we were at Startup Chile we worked with 100 other companies and had the opportunity to meet lots of people who were excited about our product. We found out that many people are caffeine sensitive. The amount of caffeine required for the cognitive benefits like alertness is less than 15 milligrams. A cup of Starbucks coffee averages 150 milligrams. We knew we needed to present Sprayable Energy to consumers as a safe and healthy alternative to coffee.

The type of person we are targeting is someone who has physiological or biological issues, like high blood pressure, and is told to cut down on their caffeine. Many people have an emotional relationship with coffee; they don’t want to give up their morning ritual or occasional cup ‘a joe. We couldn’t say we want to rid the world of caffeine and caffeinated energy drinks. But for people who don’t want to consume so much caffeine anymore we’re offering an alternative that gives you exactly the amount you need.

What is the greatest challenge of growing and sustaining demand for a sprayable product?

Our biggest challenge is changing behavior. People are used to being tired and consuming coffee to get more energy. But the biggest barrier to adoption is the delivery mechanism: the efficacy and health benefits of using something topically. People wonder, “Does this work? Is it safe?” We have to convince them that putting caffeine on your skin is healthier than ingesting it.

In the long term, we’re looking at finding ways to partner with companies and products that use the same delivery mechanism; partnering with cosmetic companies that sell skin products, for example. They’re intrigued. There’s not a lot of innovation among cosmetic companies but our product can potentially provide more value to their customers.

How did you make the leap from venture capitalist to entrepreneur?

It was a slow, gradual transition for me. I started in investment banking working with big companies. But I preferred working with smaller companies. I went to work for an early stage VC and I looked at where I wanted to be in 5 to 10 years. I wanted to be with the people who were building interesting things. I wanted to be less of an observer; more on the court than the bleachers.

There were major challenges to the transition. It was humbling. Working for a VC firm you get used to the credibility you earn because of your title. With a startup I had to prove myself. Plus there’s a lack of structure. There are so many things you should be doing, but you’re not sure how to prioritize. My role as an entrepreneur is less defined.

What advice would you give to others who are forming startups?

Many people start their own companies to get away from the boss, but you need to be prepared to create the management and structure your boss used to provide. Set up your structures early on and define roles, deadlines and goals as soon as possible.

The upside is there is a new challenge every day and the work never gets dull. I may not sleep as much as I used to but I feel more fulfilled.

 

Imagine you’re experiencing troubling symptoms at 2 in the morning. You search the Internet for answers, but you can’t sleep without a second opinion. So you pull out your smartphone, find a specialist, and instantly call them up for a live video/audio consultation.

The closest thing to round-the-clock, quick access to a physician is a 911 dispatch call to a paramedic and a trip to the ER, but Hrishikesh Amravatkar has come up with the latest medical mobile app to change the paradigm. He is the CEO and cofounder of DoctorQuickly, an mHealth app promising 24-hour secure connection to a board-certified physician. Patients pay by the minute for this concierge service, setting the app apart from similar subscription-based or flat fee services.

“Innovation is the tool to give back to the society,” Amravatkar said. His growing frustration with the current health care system motivated him to take action. Drawing on his background in video streaming technology, he saw an opportunity to cut through doctor-patient communication barriers. The company is quickly attracting specialists in internal medicine, psychiatry, pediatrics, OBGYN, and cardiology giving physicians the opportunity to earn extra income from home while helping people in a direct and meaningful way.

Now Amravatkar and cofounder & CTO Steven Chau are on a mission to become the market leader in mobile tele-medicine and make healthcare accessible and affordable. Amravatkar talked to me about the motivations and challenges of his journey to create a simple new mHealth app.

What gave you the idea for DoctorQuickly?

My wife and I were expecting a baby and one night my wife started having stomach cramps. We got worried and tried calling a nurse, but the wait time was really long and the nurse was not able to advise us. We decided to drive to the nearest emergency room where we were made to wait for four hours before a doctor could see her. Those four long hours were agonizing.

Once the doctor arrived she said that my wife needed to take some pain killers and rest. That was it!  For that simple information we had to go through all this incredible pain. This is when I realized there’s got to be a better mechanism to reach doctors directly when you truly need them.

How does DoctorQuickly work with a traditional model where the primary care doctor refers the patient to a specialist?

Our ideal patient is someone who first goes to WebMD or Google and makes an unreliable diagnosis over the Internet. Patients need a second opinion and a quick consultation over the air with live video stream and a real Doctor is the solution. For example, a pregnant woman might call DoctorQuickly with an OBGYN question if she doesn’t know what’s happening in her body: “My baby isn’t kicking; I’m having abdominal pain.” Or patients with psychiatric needs who do not need to go to a health care facility could use DoctorQuickly.  It’s a case-by-case scenario. We are less inclined to work with patients with chronic disease or emergency calls. If someone has a severe heart condition, for example, they would be not be counseled through DoctorQuickly and would be referred to call 911 or their own primary care provider. These are the first initial steps in bringing Tele-medicine to the mainstream with more complex cases in future.

There has been a rising trend in the direct primary care (DPC) model of Health care. With our platform a patient can pay out of pocket for off-hour consultations over the phone. Even better, if the patient-doctor relationship is already established, the doctor can bill the insurance company as part of caring for his or her patient. Doctors can choose their own pricing and see more patients by doing this.

What challenges have you faced developing an mHealth service?

The biggest challenge for DoctorQuickly was not only building and architecting an easy to use product, but also understanding the numerous health care regulations. Consequently we have consulted with some of the leading medical experts regarding best practices. There are multiple layers to the existing healthcare model, which we had to understand before building the product.

Tele-medicine, including mHealth, is still not fully covered by health insurance. There is no copay; it’s part of a concierge service. Also, tele-medicine has limitations based on state lines, which means that doctors outside the patient’s calling area cannot provide informational consultations. This creates barriers to adoption.

How have doctors and patients responded to your service?

We have had overwhelming interest in our product both from patients and health care professionals. We do have plans on expanding and applying the product in different markets. Within one month of the product launch, and no marketing budget, we have exceeded our goal in patient sign-ups, as well as doctors who are willing to partner and work day and night.

DoctorQuickly is on the cutting edge in the mobile health market. We will see major disruptions from our platform soon. We are already one of the first mobile apps for mobile tele-medicine. We will also be the first platform to be launched with Apple Health Kit. Not only that but we are already the first platform that allows doctors to answer video calls directly from their cell phones no matter where they are.

Dr. Quickly image and CEO images: byDoctorQuickly

Medical mobile app iamge: Healthinformatics

 

 

Interview with Jeffrey Young, health reporter for Huffington Post

I look at my inbox every 4 minutes because I might have to deal with something right away.  I communicate with my editors throughout the day from NY; I’m in DC.

I don’t have strong enough words to express how much I hate the following: did I get their email!  One time in 1,000 I may say thanks for the message but I will call you if/when I’m interested in further follow up.  It’s an interruption.  A 2^nd email to remind me that you sent the first one? – ok sure.  But don’t call me to ask me!  It’s old fashioned.

For PR people, for most reporters, I never lose sight of the fact that people I’m talking to have an agenda of their own – their job is to do what makes the people they work for look good.  That doesn’t mean we have to be combative with each other.  On the other hand it would be professional malfeasance if I took everything at face value and didn’t do my own reporting.

I’m talking to people and what I write sometimes makes someone feel that I’ve made them look bad.  There’s a game being played and it’s more that way.  This is more prevalent in politics.  They want their story told the way they want it told.  We both have a job to do and let’s see how we can each get by.

My whole job is not to believe what people tell me.  But I don’t have to be a jerk about it.

My subjects always want to look good, like they’re helping me out.  If I put a thought inside a story I’ve written, and someone contacts me and says I know about this it is nice and helps build credibility with me.

I imagine queries are pouring in and you’re totally inundated.  What that’s like for you and how to you deal with it?  How do you keep up with all the content and still write a story.

On any given day I’m monitoring other reporters on Twitter.  When I worked at Bloomberg the goal was to break the story.  My editor would have to figure out a way to justify why Reuters beat us. At the Huffington Post we provide our readers with the most up-to-date coverage whether we wrote it or not – and we always give proper credit and try to send readers to the original source.  We post what we think is most important. It’s still common practice at other news outlets to pretend a story didn’t happen, to try to follow it with a similar story that comes out later (which I don’t think serves anybody’s interests), or even to debunk what can look an awful lot like spite.

News is news for a reason –you put it out first and it had not been previously known.  Politico was breaking news all the time.  There’s other ways to build trust and loyalty.  Part of the whole idea behind Huffington Post is we want you to find what you’re looking for.  With Huffington Post the theory is to send people to the breaking stories and we allow you to “link out” from us.  [Other news outlets] don’t want you to link out.  Huffington Post will let you leave the site.  Huffington Post readers like the fact that we’re not jerking them around.  So we’re not always first, but we don’t pretend that the news didn’t happen.  Our rule of thumb: everyone should cover it.

Whereas it’s still common practice at other news outlets to pretend a story didn’t happen, to try to follow it with a similar story that comes out later (which I don’t think serves anybody’s interests), or even to debunk it out of what can look an awful lot like spite.

How do you respond to PR people reaching out to you on Twitter?

The way I use Twitter has changed over the years, possibly because I’ve gained a lot more followers over the last year or so or because I’ve landed on the wrong people’s’ radar.  The level of nastiness in my @ column has significantly worsened.

Unfortunately this has led me to mostly ignore it, so anyone trying to get my attention on Twitter (in a good or bad way) probably won’t be successful. Twitter also allows users to filter what shows up in their @ column, and I’ve completely switched over to that setting, meaning a person I’m not following, who isn’t verified, who maybe doesn’t have many followers, etc., won’t show up there (although I can’t claim to understand how Twitter filters @ mentions, etc.).

It’s a shame, but predictable, that some people are making Twitter less fun and less useful as a way to interact with people. And it’s not just me. I’ve had many conversations with other journalists about this lately, and more people I know are doing the same thing. It’s even worse for women and basically anyone who isn’t a straight, white male, who have to suffer truly hateful comments from Twitter and Facebook users on a daily basis.

What about your coverage of healthcare?

For healthcare stuff we have a sharp focus on consumers but we add a different angle.  I’m interested in the topic of hospital acquired infections.  An ideal story for me would be if I could talk to a patient who had acquired a serious infection at a hospital.  And then I build backwards from there.  (But most hospitals are not going to allow me to talk to patient that had a preventable infection from their ICU.)  That is the big obstacle to writing well rounded stories on this.  Even hospitals that have done well reducing CLABSIs and other HAIs are reluctant to provide infected patients as spokespersons.

What’s your opinion on clinical study embargoes?

When I worked at Bloomberg we had a significant study with an embargo of 12:01 AM.  But Reuters posted it at midnight.  I had to document why Reuters beat us.  I was directed to go back to the study publisher and rat out Reuters.  There had to be a paper trail that had to include my email.  That is the “law” when you get beat on breaking news.

When a scientific journal embargoes a study, I ask for it in advance so I can read it, do my reporting/interviews and prepare my story to coincide with the study publication date.  There are many bad studies. With complicated stuff I want to talk to others.  If it’s under embargo I can’t write about it and run my story in advance of publication.  On the other hand, if I can’t look at the story and do my vetting in advance, then all I can do is write up the study as is.  Without seeing the study in advance I can’t go to another source to get their input on it.  Most reporters are respectful of embargoes and will not publish their stories before the study is published.  But the publishers of the study should handle the embargo the same way for all healthcare media.

At Bloomberg I wanted to write about more than the results of the study.  Who can I talk to about this? – an expert in public policy; is there a political angle; etc.?  I won’t write a big story about a study if I can’t do my reporting in advance.  Or else I write JUST about the study.

Photo: Jeffrey Young