For too long, the Southeast Asian business owners have treated public relations as a secondary function: a polite megaphone used to announce results that, frankly, nobody actually cares about. But we are seeing a massive shift over the last couple of years. As Generative Engine Optimisation (GEO) replaces traditional search, the metrics for success have shifted from simple clicks to citation frequency. If your brand isn’t being cited as an authoritative source by an AI model, you essentially do not exist in the modern digital ecosystem.
The industry is currently grappling with a massive identity crisis. Research suggests that agencies relying on outdated billable-hour models are facing a structural margin collapse of up to 80 per cent as “agentic” execution becomes the norm. We are living in a period where high-volume content is no longer an advantage; it is a pollutant. With algorithms now prioritising “Information Gain,” the only way to break through the synthetic noise is to provide proprietary insights and a human pulse that a machine simply cannot simulate.
We discuss how the end of the swiping era is forcing a pivot toward intentional connection
In this landscape, the “human signal” has become the most expensive and valuable commodity in marketing. The following conversation explores how to navigate this messy transition from being a “word processor” to becoming an “architect of intent,” ensuring your communication strategy remains a growth engine rather than a historical footnote.
We speak to CEO and Founder, Terng Shing Chen from SYNC about the evolution of PR in the age of AI and what that means for modern-day communications.
Agencies are rebranding as ‘AI-native’, but are they passing those efficiency savings to clients, or just pocketing the margin?
Most agencies calling themselves “AI-native” are currently just rebranding their internal panic. While we’re not denying the greater use of AI across the board, most people lack the basic skillsets to use the tools at any capacity beyond basic.
So, if an agency is still charging you by the hour while using tools like Gemini or NotebookLM to cut their workload by 70 per cent, they aren’t being “native”: they are being, at best, misguided. We have always pushed for value-based pricing. Rather than focusing on discounts or upselling being an “AI-native”, we look at how we can produce the best outcome. Those efficiency savings shouldn’t be pocketed: they should be reinvested into higher-level consulting. If your agency isn’t transitioning from “content creators” to “business consultants,” they are simply stealing your margin.
Where is the line between using AI for scale and losing the ‘human signal’ that creates actual brand loyalty?
The “human signal” is what I call the human nuance, or in my time, being a human consultant. AI is incredible at synthesising data, but it doesn’t understand people to the extent that we can. AI tools like chatbots are not trying to help you succeed; they are trying to give you what you ask without understanding your real intent.
I use AI a lot, but it doesn’t know what it’s like to risk a mortgage on a startup or the sheer weight of a pivot. Brand loyalty isn’t built on a perfectly optimised 800-word blog post. It is built on the “f*ckup stories,” the shared frustrations, and the raw honesty of a founder. You should scale the distribution with AI, certainly, but the seed of the story must be human. If you can’t feel the pulse behind the prose, your audience won’t feel anything either.
In a world of polished AI prose, is there a growing market premium for human ‘imperfection’?
In a world of mid-tier (slop) AI content, authenticity is the new luxury that most brands are striving to achieve. From where we sit, we are seeing a massive shift where “polished” actually feels “fake.” I sometimes compare it to a vinyl record versus a digital file: the “hiss” and the “crackle” are exactly why people love it.
In the PR world, that imperfection translates to vulnerability and that’s what people want to see. So, we like to see founders who are willing to say, “We got this wrong,” or “This was harder than we thought,” are the ones winning the trust race.
If AI handles the first draft and the final polish, how do junior pros learn the foundational craft of communication?
This is a great question and something that concerns me every day. People worry that if AI handles the “blank page phase,” juniors won’t learn to write. I disagree. We need to stop teaching juniors how to be “word processors” and start teaching them to be “architects of intent.” This sounds like a fancy phrase, but it isn’t really; it is all about having control of the narrative and being the strategic leads in this process.
The craft isn’t putting words on a page anymore: it is the ability to prompt, iterate, and, most importantly, critically analyse. If a junior cannot tell the difference between an AI draft that is “accurate” and one that is “impactful,” they haven’t mastered the craft. We are moving from teaching “how to write” to “how to think”, with a focus on building a strong foundation for the team.
If new algorithms prioritise ‘Information Gain,’ isn’t the high-volume AI content strategy actually self-sabotage?
Algorithms are getting smarter and they are looking for Information Gain, which essentially asks if this content adds something new to the internet. If you are just using AI to churn out high-volume “me-too” content, you are self-sabotaging. This is being penalised by the algorithm and more importantly, it isn’t really very good.
I tell my clients all the time that one deep-dive interview with a unique perspective or a strong research-heavy article is worth a thousand AI-generated listicles. Today, the winner isn’t the one who churns out the most content: it is the one who says something no one else has said yet.
As the ‘output’ becomes automated, does PR return to its roots: pure, unautomatable relationship-building?
I’ve been saying for years that the press release is an archaic format or at least something we should revisit as a communications tool. So, maybe we are returning to a relationship-centric service, but I have my reservations about that. If PR is returning to strategic networking, does that mean creativity and storytelling are not important?
While you cannot automate a coffee with a journalist or the trust built over years, does that mean your reputation or friendship is actually scalable as a solution? AI cannot walk into a room and read a VC’s body language, but a skilled communications specialist’s value is being able to build a story that gets you into the room in the first place. Relationships have always been critical and will remain so, but I don’t think this is something you can build a PR career around.
What is the one skill you’d hire for today that you believe AI will never master?
Oddly enough, it is something that seems basic, but is hard to find nowadays: real empathy. AI can simulate empathy, but it cannot truly possess it. I want to hire people who can sit in a room, look a client in the eye, and understand their concerns and challenges and translate that into something that works.
I want someone who can pivot a conversation based on a subtle shift in a journalist’s tone or read the room to better understand what makes sense at that time. AI can give you the map, but empathy is the compass that tells you when the map is wrong. This goes beyond a gut feeling and really focuses on being able to combine strategy with human understanding.