A PR style guide is a shared reference for recurring editorial choices. It helps several writers describe the same organization consistently across releases, spokespeople’s notes, web pages, and corrections. It should settle mechanics and terminology, not become a tool for making an unsupported claim sound official.
Choose a base and define exceptions
Select a maintained editorial reference for general style. The AP Stylebook is widely used in newsrooms and PR, and PRSA’s own contributor guidelines say its publication follows AP style. Then document organization-specific choices: official product names, capitalization, short descriptions, acronyms, accessibility language, and any required legal naming.
Keep each exception brief and explain when it applies. A company may prefer a trademarked form in its own materials, while an independent outlet may use its house style. The guide cannot require a reporter to adopt the company’s spelling or framing.
Write rules people can use
Include a preferred term, an avoid term, and an example sentence where confusion is likely. Define how to refer to people, titles, dates, locations, measurements, and links. State how to mark a planned launch differently from a completed launch. Provide examples of plain language that explain technical features without removing important limitations.
Separate voice guidance from facts. ‘Clear and direct’ is a useful tone rule; ‘always say category leader’ is not a style rule unless a current, defensible comparison supports it. A style guide should also point to the owner of product, legal, and financial facts rather than pretending the editor can approve every claim alone.
Make review and correction part of the guide
Record who checks quotes, statistics, image rights, accessibility, and links. Specify the approval path for routine news and for sensitive or regulated topics. When an error is found, say who updates the source page, how partners are notified, and how a correction is logged.
PRSA’s ethics guidance calls for accuracy and prompt correction. A clear process is more valuable than an elaborate list of comma rules if a misleading statement can slip through because no one owns the final fact check.
Keep it current
Store the guide where writers can find it, give it a version date, and review it after product renames, changes in services, or major editorial style updates. A short searchable document is often easier to use than a long PDF no one opens. Archive old versions so a team can explain why a published term differed from today’s rule.
Test the guide on a real draft. If reviewers repeatedly disagree about the same phrase, add one example rather than a broad rule that creates new ambiguity. Consistency should make public information easier to understand, not flatten every story into identical corporate language.