One of the most reasonable questions a hotel owner can ask me is this: if the first six months have already produced media coverage and visibility, why not stop there and continue benefiting from those results? It is a fair question. The short answer is that the articles you have earned remain valuable, but they represent what you have built up to today, not what you will build tomorrow. Editorial reputation is not a campaign that can simply be switched on and off. It is a function that needs to remain active over time, and stopping because it has worked means confusing the result with the system that produced it.
That does not mean every hotel should retain a PR consultant forever, or work with the same provider indefinitely. The point is more precise than that, and it has some important exceptions.
The articles you have earned are the stock; PR is the flow
The media coverage you have built is a genuine asset, but it is a stock: it captures what your hotel has been up to that point. Ongoing PR is the flow that continues to feed it.
Existing articles do not disappear, and they can continue to work for you through reputation, social proof, search visibility, backlinks where relevant, commercial materials and independent third-party sources that describe the brand. All of that has value. But it reflects what has already been built, and it has one characteristic that is often overlooked: it ages. A feature published two years ago may still be valuable, but it cannot document what the hotel has become since then. The stock does not vanish; it simply does not update itself. The flow – new stories, new relationships and new editorial coverage – is what keeps the public narrative aligned with the hotel that exists today.
Stopping because PR has worked means confusing the result with the system
If PR is working after six months, that can be one of the least logical moments to switch it off. There is a small paradox worth considering.
In my own work, I regard six months as a sensible first window in which to assess an ongoing media relations programme, while recognising that there is no universal threshold. But that raises an obvious question: if six months is the period needed for a strategy to begin producing meaningful signals, why stop precisely at month six? There are two possibilities. If nothing has happened after six months, the first step is to understand what is not working before deciding whether to continue or stop: the story, the product, the targeting, the method or simply the expectations set at the beginning. If things are going well, however, by month six you may only just have identified the strongest narratives, introduced the project to the right journalists, generated the first editorial proof points and built a much deeper understanding of the product, the people behind it and the media most likely to care. That is often the stage at which PR can move beyond simply introducing the hotel and begin building a more mature position.
With Moyseion in Matera, a significant part of the value came after the first six months. The Nékyia performance was covered by publications including la Repubblica and Cosmopolitan months after the work had begun, not in the opening weeks. Overall, more than forty additional pieces of coverage followed after January. Had the engagement ended at the six-month mark, those results simply would not have existed.
What changes after the first six months?
Two of the most valuable assets in media relations begin to change over time: journalists’ trust and the knowledge accumulated by the person handling the PR. Neither can be bought overnight.
After six or twelve months of working closely with a hotel, conversations with journalists become easier because I have developed a genuine understanding of the product, its history, the sensitivities of the ownership and the discussions that have already taken place with individual editors. Relationships mature too. Journalists may become more comfortable with the project after speaking to colleagues who have visited it, and conversations begin to arise that were not triggered by a new pitch. Inbound requests start to appear. For example, a Sky Arte journalist once contacted me directly to experience Moyseion, without any active launch taking place at the time. Some publications also return to the same project more than once, as has happened with both Moyseion and B-Side in Alta Badia. This network of familiarity and trust builds slowly, and it can cool when there is no longer anyone actively maintaining it.
“We have nothing to communicate this month”
“We do not have a press release to send this month” and “there is no PR work to do” are two completely different things. And even when there is something worth communicating, the answer is not to manufacture a story for the sake of activity.
A hotel is a living business. There are many angles from which the same project can be understood, and elements that already exist can often become relevant when viewed from a different perspective. In my experience, the issue is rarely that there are hidden stories waiting to be discovered; more often, there are perspectives that have not yet been explored. A founder who initially preferred to remain behind the scenes, for example, can open an entirely new editorial territory once they decide to tell their own story. A seasonal offer, a programme being developed, a topic the hotel is beginning to explore more seriously: all of these can become material. Unless a property is one of those that is not yet ready for PR, it will usually be thinking ahead to the following season in order to remain relevant and competitive. That does not mean forcing communication. Part of the job is knowing when not to communicate, and refusing to send a weak release simply to prove that something has been done.
Continuity does not mean frequency
Continuity and frequency are not the same thing. This is perhaps one of the most misunderstood aspects of ongoing PR. An ongoing PR relationship does not mean “one press release every month”.
In more than a year of working with Moyseion, I sent only three or four press releases in total. Much of my work is based on tailored pitches, and that is precisely one of the reasons why PR benefits from remaining active. Every morning I read the news and the publications relevant to my clients. If I see that a journalist has written about a subject into which one of my clients could genuinely fit, I call or email them and start a conversation. No press release is required. What matters is being alert to the editorial opportunity. Sometimes an angle is relevant for only a few days, and taking advantage of it requires someone who is already paying attention, rather than someone restarting the process from zero every six months. This is the difference between distributing press releases and genuinely maintaining media relations.
The role of ownership and management in building new stories
The strongest stories are rarely created in isolation. They come from an ongoing dialogue with the people who live and manage the hotel every day. For me, regular communication with ownership and management is a condition of doing the work properly.
That is where you identify what is changing inside the hotel and what could become editorially relevant: a new chef, a cultural programme, a collaboration or an existing element that can be approached from a different angle. Sometimes my role is not to receive a finished initiative and communicate it, but to help refine an idea so that it becomes stronger from an editorial perspective as well. There is also a category of story that hotel owners often take for granted: data and trends. Bringing an owner or General Manager into a conversation about how tourism is evolving, what is changing, what the numbers suggest or what new trend is emerging is not inventing news. It is giving the media an informed, current point of view and, when the contribution is genuinely substantial, positioning ownership or management as credible voices within the sector.
What does a hotel risk by stopping PR altogether?
Stopping PR does not freeze your results in time. It simply leaves them to age while everyone else continues communicating.
The first risk is no longer being top of mind, and therefore missing opportunities and visibility. The second is losing the person who can help turn a new project into an editorial opportunity capable of reaching the audiences that matter, or simply explain to the outside world what the hotel is doing and the thinking behind it. There is also a restart cost that is easy to underestimate. Pausing and beginning again means reactivating relationships and rebuilding part of the context, particularly if the project, the publications or the relevant journalists have changed in the meantime. And something less measurable can be lost as well: the ability to remain recognisably human, rather than becoming simply another business selling rooms.
Earned media, Search and AI: why new and up-to-date sources matter
This also provides a more useful answer to the objection: “I already have eighty articles on Google. Why should I pay for more?” Those eighty articles are an excellent asset, but they document the past.
Existing coverage can continue to be useful online, but it does not replace new sources. Search systems and generative experiences can draw information from multiple sources and, when a query depends on current information, recency can become relevant. That does not mean that more articles automatically produce greater visibility in AI systems. It simply means that new, authoritative third-party sources help keep the public information ecosystem around a hotel up to date. I explore this in more depth in why AI recommends a hotel and what PR has to do with it.
When does a fixed-term PR engagement make sense?
Not every PR engagement needs to be ongoing, and it would be dishonest to suggest otherwise. Some assignments are quite rightly designed to end.
A one-off launch, an event, a festival or a project with clearly defined phases can all have a natural conclusion. In 2026, for example, I handled PR for the Premio Umberto Fracchia literary prize through an assignment linked specifically to that year’s edition. The work had an obvious end point, and a new collaboration may or may not make sense for a future edition. Equally, a hotel with limited editorial material may benefit from a concentrated period of communication followed by a lighter phase. There is another principle I always keep in mind: the decision to continue or stop belongs to the client, not to me. A hotel can achieve excellent results in the first six months and still decide to end the relationship, and that is entirely legitimate. My role is to explain clearly what may be gained and what may be lost, not to keep anyone tied to a retainer.
Ongoing does not mean the same intensity forever
An ongoing PR function does not necessarily require the same intensity or the same scope of work for twelve months. In many cases, it should be adjusted over time.
There may be more intensive phases around an opening or launch, followed by lighter periods of monitoring, relationship management and preparation. Strategy can change, scope can change and, when appropriate, the provider can change too. What makes sense not to treat as temporary is the function itself, not the individual contract. I discuss the commercial structure in more detail in how much hotel PR costs, and the difference between working with a senior independent consultant and a larger agency in PR agency vs PR consultant for hotels.
How can you tell whether a PR retainer is still delivering value?
An ongoing relationship should still be evaluated. There is no reason to keep a PR retainer simply because it has always existed.
The clearest warning sign is the combined absence of both editorial material and meaningful media relationships. If a hotel has done nothing new for a long time, genuinely has nothing left to say and there is no active relationship with journalists, continuing to pay for PR makes little sense. I say that against my own commercial interest: if I found myself working with a client that had been completely static for a year and there was no credible material to develop, I would feel uncomfortable continuing to charge for the same activity and would be the first to suggest reconsidering the arrangement. It has not happened so far because I work with projects that continue to evolve, but that is the standard I apply. As for when a PR strategy should be evaluated, I do not believe in universal deadlines. Hospitality PR can begin at different moments, provided there is a strong enough story, and it should be judged through real signals rather than a fixed date. I explain those signals in more detail in how to measure hotel PR results.
In summary
The articles you have already earned are an asset, and they can continue to work for you. But they are the stock, not the flow. A hotel that wants to remain editorially relevant needs to maintain a PR function over time, with an intensity and structure that make sense for each phase, while recognising that the decision to continue always remains with the client and that, in some cases, a fixed-term engagement is exactly the right choice. The mistake worth avoiding is stopping simply because PR has worked. That means confusing the result with the system that produced it.
If you run a hotel and are trying to understand whether an ongoing PR programme genuinely makes sense, or whether a more limited engagement would be more appropriate, we can assess it together: how much editorial material the hotel really has, what level of activity would be justified and which stories remain unexplored. I will also tell you frankly if I do not think an ongoing model is warranted. You can explore my PR and media relations services or get in touch directly.
Frequently asked questions
How long should hotel PR last?
There is no universal duration. Editorial reputation is an ongoing process rather than a campaign with a fixed expiry date. Building relevance, relationships with journalists and an up-to-date media presence generally requires an active PR function over time, with the intensity adjusted according to the hotel’s stage and objectives. Fixed-term engagements can still make perfect sense for launches, events or clearly defined projects.
Does it make sense to stop PR once a hotel has already earned media coverage?
It depends. If the hotel is still evolving and wants to remain editorially relevant, stopping precisely when PR is beginning to work is rarely the most logical choice, because that is often when accumulated knowledge and media relationships start becoming more valuable. Stopping can make sense when the project was designed to be temporary or when there is genuinely no editorial material left to develop. The decision ultimately belongs to the client.
Does ongoing hotel PR mean sending a press release every month?
No. Continuity is not the same as frequency. Much of ongoing PR consists of monitoring the media, identifying short-lived editorial opportunities, maintaining relationships and developing future stories, often through tailored pitches and with very few press releases. Sending weak releases simply to demonstrate activity is usually counterproductive.
When is a fixed-term PR engagement better than ongoing PR?
When the objective itself has a clear end point: a launch, an event, a festival or a project delivered in phases. In those cases, the PR engagement can have a natural conclusion. A hotel with limited editorial material may also benefit from a more intensive period of communication followed by a lighter approach rather than maintaining a full programme without enough substance to support it.
