At Costa DeVault, it’s no secret that we are big fans of Peter Shankman’s Help a Reporter Out (HARO). Dubbed the “largest source repository in the world,” HARO sends out approximately 210 media opportunities daily. For down-to-the-wire deadlines, it’s a journalist’s best friend … and a PR professional’s dream. But, with more than 120,800 active sources receiving the thrice-daily email, competition can be stiff for that coveted placement.

When you find a fitting query, having the perfect resource is just half the battle. The following are a few of our favorite HARO tips that we’ve learned from personal experience:

• Keep it short. When you mix a tight deadline with a high volume of replies, multiple paragraphs of text – while relevant and informative – might be overlooked in favor of short and to-the-point bullets. (In fact, People Magazine’s Steve Helling is a big advocate of the 250-word pitch.)

• Provide all the information. Some of the most coveted queries request particular information. Often times you’ll be asked to include common details, like the name of the source, company name and contact information. But sometimes, the reporter might want even more information – like a headshot, the source’s age or highly specific quotes and comments. When compared to another expert resource, if your email lacks any of the requested information, it might be the difference between being included and being ignored.

• Subject lines are valuable. Use them wisely. Our friends at HARO automatically add “New Pitch –” to your email’s subject line (at least when you reply to an auto-generated HARO email, like “queryxyz@”). Don’t waste valuable subject line real estate by including something similar – instead, get right to the point.

• Omit bold text to avoid “screaming.” In the past, I’ve used bold text to call out specific statistics and relevant information when responding to a HARO query. Sounds like a smart idea, right? When a reporter replied to me recently, they included my original pitch and I was surprised to see that my “courtesy” bolding had actually translated into SCARY CAPITALIZATION. Eek! Often times, people read capitalization as screaming … which is definitely not something I want to portray to a reporter.

For more best practices – from Peter, himself – visit Shankman.com. Please share your own favorite tips in the comment section below.

Roses are red, violets are blue … we hope these tweets help you, too.

Florida-based People magazine staff writer Steve Helling skipped the chocolate and roses for Valentine’s Day yesterday and instead gifted PR professionals everywhere a candid look at his pitching tips and pet peeves.

If you have more to add, please share your insight in the comments below.

Very rarely does an ad generate editorial media coverage. Generally, advertising is confined to its paid space – until the ad itself becomes the news. This is what’s happened for one controversial Super Bowl commercial: gay dating site ManCrunch.com. The ad depicts two men kissing and was denied by CBS.

Since the rejection, the company has received an enormous amount of publicity. Stories in news outlets, blogs, television and radio have created discussions in numerous public forums. This just adds value to the nearly $3 million price tag CBS is charging for a 30-second spot.

But why the uproar? Controversial subject matter always strikes a chord and advocates on both sides of an issue will make their voices heard. In fact, it was reported that CBS believed ManCrunch submitted an ad they knew would be rejected in an effort to generate free publicity. ManCruch denies the accusation.

And while ManCrunch is receiving a fair amount of free publicity, are they better off? As of today, the ManCrunch commercial on YouTube.com has been viewed more than 400,000 times. Last year, Wikipedia reported that the Super Bowl was watched by 93.2 million people. Would the aired ManCrunch television commercial create the same level of conversation? Would the controversy have as much value without social media?