Well, this is disheartening.

According to the PRCA's 2025 census, more than one in three PR professionals (37%) still rely on Advertising Value Equivalent (AVE) as a performance metric.

For those outside the industry: AVE multiplies earned coverage (column centimetres or broadcast seconds) by advertising rate card prices, usually with a 3x multiplier to reflect editorial credibility.

Traditional media pitching is still important, but back when coverage outcomes dominated communications goals, the AVE method always held appeal when showing a dollar figure mattered most – and perhaps this resurgence reflects our bottom-line-obsessed times.

But I find it short-sighted.

When attention today is earned through respected influencer perspectives, and brand visibility demands influence within generative AI search results that drives actual business value, shouldn't we have the courage to adopt measurement approaches based on reputation and business outcomes – real impact that transcends impressions and likes?

When I was at Edelman, we championed the 3 A's of measurement (A³): Awareness, Advocacy, and Action. Clients loved the thinking, though budget rarely matched ambition. I've long envied marketing's deeper pockets and appreciation for brand science that definitively proves campaign ROI.

As we approach 2026 – with earned storytelling leading the charge in training machine learning models – we should be reaching beyond outdated vanity metrics to demonstrate communications' true value.

Am I wrong?