A panel in Valletta laid out a working playbook for startup PR, from the friends-and-family headline test to the case for hiring an agency.

Founders looking for media coverage at this year’s EU-Startups Summit in Valletta got a fairly direct briefing from the people who decide what gets published.

The session, titled “The Startup Media Landscape, PR Tips & Tricks”, brought together three editors and a moderator to walk early-stage operators through what works, what does not, and what has changed in the last twelve months.

The panel featured Thomas Ohr, founder and chief executive of EU-Startups; Akansha Dimri, founder and editor-in-chief of Tech Funding News; and Alexandru Stan, chief executive of TNW. 

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

It was moderated by Cathy White, founder of CEW Communications. The session was part of the summit’s main-stage programme at the Mediterranean Conference Centre, which expects roughly 2,500 attendees across this year’s two-day event.

The headline takeaway was practical rather than philosophical. Alexandru Stan argued that founders, especially those at seed and Series A, should consider working with a PR agency. His reasoning was straightforward: the major publications covering the European tech scene receive a high volume of pitches every day, and a professional with experience cutting through that volume is often worth the line item. 

A founder writing their own pitches in spare hours, he suggested, is competing against agencies that pitch the same outlet five days a week and know which journalist covers which beat.

That argument was paired, throughout the discussion, with a warning. Several speakers stressed that founders should avoid leaning too heavily on AI-generated press releases, which are now filling inboxes, and which read identically across companies. 

The advice instead was to focus on authentic storytelling: a clear sense of what the company does, who it serves, and why this particular news matters now. Generic announcements, even well-formatted ones, are increasingly easy to spot and easy to ignore.

A related point landed early in the session and stayed with the audience. Before pitching a journalist, take time to understand what the publication actually covers. Read recent pieces.

Note which writers cover which beats. Send the right story to the right person. The point was not subtle, but it remains, by every editor’s account, the single most common mistake startups make.

Perhaps the most quotable piece of advice was a test for headlines. If the headline of a press release is not strong enough to catch the attention of friends and family, the panel suggested, it is unlikely to be strong enough for the media either. 

The framing was deliberately low-tech, but it captures something the more elaborate PR playbooks sometimes obscure: editors are reading hundreds of subject lines a day, and the ones they open are the ones that read like a story rather than a corporate announcement.

The audience for the session reflected the summit’s wider mix. Founders made up the largest segment, alongside investors, marketers, agency operators, and ecosystem leaders from across Europe.

The conversation, by design, was less about how to game coverage and more about how to earn meaningful attention without treating media as a shortcut to credibility.

That framing matters because the underlying problem the panel was responding to has not gone away.

European founders consistently report that coverage of the continent’s companies skews towards the largest markets and the most-funded rounds, leaving earlier-stage companies and those based outside London, Berlin, Paris, and Stockholm fighting harder for visibility. 

The summit’s choice of Malta as a location and the panel’s choice of audience reflect that imbalance directly.

During the session, journalists on stage also asked Alexandru Stan about his acquisition of TNW from the Financial Times Group, which closed in late 2025. Stan acknowledged the topic but did not disclose further details about the transaction, which was completed through Tekpon, the SaaS marketplace he founded in 2020. 

For founders in the room, the broader message of the panel was harder to misread than most. Coverage is earned. The shortcut, the AI-generated release sent to a mailing list scraped from a database, is now also the most crowded route.

The slower path, knowing the publication, finding a story that reads like a story, and writing a headline a friend would click on, is also the one that still works.

Disclosure: Alexandru Stan is the chief executive of TNW. This article was written and edited independently.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Vibe coding has taken the development world by storm—and it truly is a modern marvel to behold. The problem is, the vibe coding rush is going to leave a lot of apps broken in its wake once people move on to the next craze. At the end of the day, many of us are going to be left with apps that are broken with no fixes in sight.

A lot of vibe “coders” are really just prompt typers

And they’ve never touched a line of code

An AI robot using a computer with a prompt field on the screen. Credit: Lucas Gouveia / How-To Geek

Vibe coding made development available to the masses like never before. You can simply take an AI tool, type a prompt into a text box, and out pops an app. It probably needs some refinement, but, typically, version one is still functional whenever you’re vibe coding.

The problem comes from “developers” who have never written a line of code. They’re just using vibe coding because it’s cool or they think they can make a quick buck, but they really have no knowledge of development—or any desire to learn proper development.

Think of those types of vibe coders as people who realize they can use a calculator and online tools to solve math problems for them, so they try to build a rocket. They might be able to make something work in some way, but they’ll never reach the moon, even though they think they can.

Anyone can vibe code a prototype

But you really need to know what you’re doing to build for the long haul

For those who don’t know what they’re doing, vibe coding is a fantastic way to build a prototype. I’ve vibe coded several projects so far, and out of everything I’ve done, I’ve realized one thing—vibe coding is only as good as the person behind the keyboard. I have spent more time debugging the fruits of my vibe coding than I have actually vibe coding.

Each project that I’ve built with vibe coding could have easily been “viable” within an hour or two, sometimes even less time than that. But, to make something of actual quality, it has always taken many, many hours.

Vibe coding is definitely faster than traditional coding if you’re a one-man team, but it’s not something that is fast by any means if you’re after a quality product. The same goes for continued updates.

I’ve spent the better part of three months building a weather app for iPhone. It’s a simple app, but it also has quite a lot of complex things going on in the background.

It recently got released in the App Store—no small feat at all. But, I still get a few crash reports a week, and I’m constantly squashing bugs and working on new features for the app. This is because I’m planning on supporting the app for a long time, not just the weekend I released it, and that takes a lot more work.

Vibe coders often jump from app to app without thinking of longevity

The app was a weekend project, after all

A relaxed man lounging on an orange beanbag watches as a friendly yellow robot works on a laptop for him, while multiple red exclamation-mark warning icons float around them. Credit: Lucas Gouveia/How-To Geek | ViDI Studio/Shutterstock

I’ve seen it far too often, a vibe coder touting that they built this “complex app” in 48 hours, as if that is something to be celebrated. Sure, it’s cool that a working version of an app was up and running in two days, but how well does it work? How many bugs are still in it? Are there race conditions that cause a random crash?

My weather app has a weird race condition right now I’m tracking down. It crashes, on occasion, when opened from Spotlight on an iPhone. Not every time does that cause a crash, just sometimes.

If a vibe coder’s only goal is to build apps in short amounts of time so they can brag about how fast they built the app, they likely aren’t going to take the time to fix little things like that.

I don’t vibe code my apps that way, and I know many other vibe coders that aren’t that way—but we all started with actual coding, not typing a prompt.


Anyone can be a vibe coder, but not all vibe coders are developers

“And when everyone’s super… no one will be.” – Syndrome, The Incredibles. It might be from a kids’ movie, but it rings true in the era of vibe coding. When everyone thinks they can build an app in a weekend, everyone thinks they’re a developer.

By contrast, not every vibe coder is actually a developer, and that’s the problem. It’s hard to know if the app you’re using was built by someone who has plans to support the app long-term or not—and that’s why there’s going to be a lot of broken apps in the future.

I can see it now, the apps that people built in a weekend as a challenge will simply go without updates. While the app might work for the first few weeks or months just fine, an API update comes along and breaks the app’s compatibility. It’s at that point we’ll see who was vibe coding to build an app versus who was vibe coding just for online clout—and the sad part is, consumers will lose out more often than not with broken apps.



Source link