About the paper
The State of PR 2026 is an original survey study of public relations professionals examining their roles, working conditions, strategic priorities, media relations practices, AI adoption, GEO and social media use.
Muck Rack surveyed 1,115 professionals by email between 14 May and 12 June 2026 and retained 971 usable responses after data cleaning.
The sample is heavily US-based (91%) and agency-weighted (56%), so the findings primarily reflect the American PR market rather than the global profession.
Length: 34 pages
More information / download: https://media.muckrack.com/documents/Muck_Rack_-_State_of_PR_2026.pdf
Core Insights
1. What does the report show about the changing scope of PR work?
Media relations remains the profession’s central activity. Eighty-four per cent of respondents say it accounts for at least a quarter of their work, unchanged from the previous year. This suggests that, despite major technological and organisational changes, traditional earned media work still defines the PR role.
At the same time, the role is broadening. Thought leadership accounts for at least a quarter of the job for 51% of respondents, six percentage points more than in the previous year. Media measurement and reporting is cited by 45%, content creation by 41%, and both executive and corporate communications by 25%.
The report therefore presents PR not as a profession abandoning media relations, but as one layering additional responsibilities on top of it. Practitioners are increasingly expected to combine journalist outreach with content production, executive visibility, analytics, strategic advice and authority-building.
This expansion may also help explain the pressure reported elsewhere in the study. Fifty-five per cent worked more than 40 hours in the preceding week, 77% worked outside normal hours at least once, and 66% rated their recent work stress above the midpoint of the scale. PR’s remit appears to be growing without traditional responsibilities becoming less important.
2. How are AI and GEO changing PR strategy and practice?
Generative AI has moved firmly into mainstream PR practice. Eighty per cent of respondents already use it in their workflow, compared with 77% in the previous year. A further 8% plan to explore it, while only 10% say they do not intend to use it.
AI and automation are also the leading long-term priority: 61% expect them to grow in importance over the next five years. However, the report does not suggest that AI is replacing conventional PR skills. Media relations ranks second at 48%, up from 35% the previous year, followed by strategic planning at 32% and reputation management at 30%.
Generative Engine Optimisation is emerging as a distinct strategic concern. Seventy-three per cent consider GEO at least somewhat important to their communications strategy, including 43% who describe it as very or extremely important. Yet responsibility remains unclear:
- 29% say no one owns GEO.
- 24% place responsibility with PR or communications.
- 15% assign it to SEO or content teams.
- 13% do not know who owns it.
- 11% place it with marketing leadership.
- 9% assign it to an AI or innovation team.
This indicates that organisational practice is lagging behind strategic interest. GEO has become relevant before most organisations have established governance, responsibilities or consistent measurement.
The tactics being adopted also reinforce PR’s traditional authority-building role. Fifty-five per cent are seeking coverage in high-authority publications to increase visibility in AI-generated responses. Half are producing more authoritative or data-driven content, and half are optimising content for search. Forty-four per cent are restructuring content so that AI systems can parse it more easily, for example through clear answers and FAQs.
The underlying implication is that AI visibility is not simply a technical SEO issue. The report frames credibility, earned media coverage, authoritative content and machine-readable structure as mutually reinforcing elements of an emerging PR discipline.
3. Why is earned media becoming harder to secure, and how are practitioners responding?
The report portrays difficulty securing earned media as almost universal. Only 2% say it has not become more difficult during the year.
The largest obstacles are structural:
- 71% cite low journalist response rates.
- 61% cite smaller or shrinking media lists in relevant beats.
- 43% point to increased competition for coverage.
- 36% cite a lack of timely or newsworthy stories.
- 36% cite shorter media cycles and faster newsroom turnaround.
- 35% identify overloaded or understaffed PR teams.
These findings suggest that practitioners face pressure from both sides. Newsrooms have fewer relevant journalists and less available attention, while PR teams are competing more intensely for that attention.
Nevertheless, many practitioners still use relatively broad outreach. Forty-nine per cent pitch more than 20 journalists per campaign or announcement, including 24% who pitch more than 50. This wide-net approach may partly reflect shrinking response rates: as the probability of an individual journalist responding falls, practitioners may compensate by increasing the number contacted.
The relationship base is mixed rather than predominantly strong. Thirty-six per cent have previously worked with only a few of the reporters they pitch, while 35% have worked with about half. Only 27% have worked with most or all of them.
Personalisation is common but often limited. Sixty-six per cent usually or always personalise their pitches, but among those who personalise, 73% change only a few sentences. Fifteen per cent tailor every part of the pitch, while 11% personalise only the greeting.
The report therefore reveals a tension between relevance and scale. Practitioners recognise the need for personalisation and relationships, but the difficulty of earning coverage encourages larger pitch lists and relatively light-touch customisation.
4. How do PR professionals believe the function can demonstrate greater value?
Most respondents feel positively regarded by organisational leadership. Sixty-seven per cent say PR and communications is valued or very valued, including 36% who say it is very valued. However, one-third regard the function as only moderately, slightly or not valued.
The strongest consensus in the entire value discussion concerns measurement. Sixty-nine per cent say producing measurable results is the best way to increase PR’s perceived value to leadership or clients. The alternative answers are far less prominent:
- 11% choose improving executive visibility.
- 10% choose delivering creative solutions.
- 8% choose managing reputation risk.
This does not necessarily mean that executive visibility, creativity or risk management are unimportant. Rather, respondents appear to believe that these activities become more persuasive internally when their consequences can be evidenced.
Measurement and reporting already constitute at least a quarter of the job for 45% of respondents. The study therefore positions measurement not as a specialist or administrative add-on, but as an important source of organisational legitimacy.
There is, however, a contrast between this strong belief in measurement and the immature measurement of GEO. Thirty-nine per cent are not currently measuring GEO success, while 21% are unsure how it is being measured. Only 25% track brand mentions in AI-generated responses, 21% monitor search visibility, and 17% track referral traffic from AI tools.
The implication is that PR’s strategic aspirations may be developing faster than its evaluation methods. Practitioners believe measurable results are essential, but one of the profession’s most rapidly emerging priorities does not yet have widely established indicators or standards.
5. What broader picture of the PR profession emerges from the report?
The report depicts a profession experiencing simultaneous continuity and transformation.
The continuity lies in media relations. It remains the dominant component of the job, and practitioners expect it to become more—not less—important. Online and digital media are pitched by 91%, but traditional formats remain significant: newspapers by 69%, magazines by 64% and television by 60%. Podcasts have also become a mainstream target, cited by 57%.
The transformation lies in how authority, visibility and influence are created. PR now operates across earned media, thought leadership, search, social platforms and AI-generated answers. High-authority media coverage is valuable not only because people see it directly, but because it may influence what AI systems retrieve, cite or reproduce.
LinkedIn occupies a particularly strong position. Sixty per cent regard it as the most valuable social platform for PR work, far ahead of Instagram at 18%. It is included in 87% of company social strategies and is the platform respondents most want to monitor, at 73%. This suggests that LinkedIn functions simultaneously as a corporate channel, a professional network, an executive visibility platform and an arena for thought leadership.
Yet the profession’s development carries a human cost. Long hours, after-hours work and elevated stress are widespread. The combination of traditional media work, expanded content responsibilities, measurement demands, social media monitoring and emerging AI tasks may be increasing expectations faster than resources and organisational structures can adapt.
Overall, Muck Rack’s perspective is that PR is becoming more technologically enabled and strategically expansive, while remaining rooted in media relationships and credibility. Its most important emerging role may be helping organisations build the authority required to be visible across both human and AI-mediated information environments. However, the sample’s strong US and agency bias means that this conclusion should not automatically be generalised to every national market or in-house communications setting.