Where to Check Public Relations Salary Data?
Public relations salary data is available through government databases like the Bureau of Labor Statistics, salary aggregators such as Glassdoor and PayScale, and job platforms including ZipRecruiter and LinkedIn Salary. Each source uses different methodologies, with the BLS providing the most authoritative benchmark data updated annually.
Government and Official Sources
The Bureau of Labor Statistics remains the gold standard for PR salary research. As of May 2023, the BLS reports a median annual wage of $66,750 for public relations specialists, with the middle 50% earning between $50,280 and $92,290. The data comes from 275,550 employed specialists across all U.S. industries and updates annually each spring.
What makes BLS data particularly valuable is its methodology. The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics program surveys over 1.1 million establishments semi-annually, capturing actual payroll records rather than self-reported figures. This eliminates the inflation bias common in platforms where users voluntarily report their compensation.
The BLS breaks down salaries by detailed criteria that most aggregators can’t match. You’ll find wages segmented by industry (software publishers average $123,430 versus $68,550 at universities), geography (D.C. leads at $114,250 while Vermont averages $69,820), and percentile distributions from the 10th to 90th percentiles. This granularity helps you determine not just average pay, but realistic ranges based on your specific situation.
State labor departments complement federal data with local market intelligence. California’s Employment Development Department and Texas Workforce Commission publish regional wage surveys that drill deeper than national averages. These state sources often release data quarterly, providing fresher insights than the BLS’s annual cycle.
Salary Aggregator Platforms
Glassdoor, PayScale, and Salary.com serve different needs despite appearing similar. Glassdoor’s strength lies in company-specific data—its $117,025 average for public relations professionals in 2025 reflects contributions from 2,312 employees who anonymously shared complete compensation packages including bonuses and equity. You can filter by exact employers, seeing that PR roles at Genentech average notably higher than positions at traditional agencies.
PayScale takes a skills-based approach. Its 2025 average of $57,127 for PR specialists may seem lower, but the platform excels at showing how specific competencies affect pay. The data reveals that professionals with social media marketing skills earn approximately 8% more than the baseline, while those managing corporate communications command 12% premiums. This makes PayScale particularly useful when deciding which skills to develop.
Salary.com positions itself between real-time user reports and actuarial salary modeling. Its PR Specialist I average of $60,980 comes from employer-reported data submitted by HR departments for compensation benchmarking. The advantage here is reliability—these are actual offered salaries, not aspirational self-reports. The trade-off is less frequent updates, typically quarterly rather than continuous.
Built In focuses on tech-adjacent PR roles, reporting a $65,767 average total compensation. Its value comes from breaking down the increasingly important distinction between base salary ($61,353) and additional cash compensation ($4,414), which includes bonuses and profit-sharing that aggregate averages often obscure.
Job Search and Posting Platforms
ZipRecruiter analyzes millions of active job postings to generate real-time salary estimates. Its October 2025 average of $83,626 for public relations roles represents what employers are currently offering, not historical data. The platform scans 10-20 million job listings daily, extracting salary information from approximately 40% of postings that include compensation details.
This makes ZipRecruiter valuable for understanding current market dynamics. When companies suddenly start offering $10,000 more for PR managers in your city, ZipRecruiter reflects this within days. Traditional surveys take months to capture such shifts. The platform also identifies geographic salary premiums—Bumpass, VA currently shows PR salaries 33.9% above the national average, likely driven by specific employer demand.
Zippia aggregates data from multiple sources including Glassdoor, ZipRecruiter, and BLS, arriving at a lower $48,383 average that likely reflects entry-level roles more heavily. Its utility comes from trend analysis, showing that PR salaries have risen $7,411 over the past decade—useful context when evaluating long-term career potential.
LinkedIn Salary, while less frequently mentioned, provides unique insights from its 900+ million professional members. The platform’s algorithm weights data by profile completeness and verification status, reducing the impact of outlier reports. You’ll find salary ranges endorsed by current employees at specific companies, with the additional context of how long they’ve held their positions.
Industry-Specific Salary Resources
Professional associations maintain compensation surveys for members that often exceed public data in precision. The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) conducts biennial salary surveys of practitioners, though detailed results require membership. These surveys capture industry-specific nuances like agency versus in-house pay differentials, which can reach 15-20%.
PR-focused recruitment firms like The Creative Group and Solomon Page publish quarterly salary guides based on actual placement data. Their Q4 2024 guides show starting salaries for PR specialists ranging from $55,000 to $70,000 in major markets, with account executives commanding $65,000 to $85,000. Because these reflect successful placements, they indicate what employers actually pay to fill open positions.
Trade publications like PRWeek and PR News occasionally survey readers about compensation, offering peer perspectives rather than statistical rigor. A 2024 PRWeek survey of 800 practitioners found that 47% received raises in the past year, with a median increase of 4.2%—contextual data that helps interpret whether posted salaries reflect market movement.
Emerging Data Sources
Compensation-focused platforms like Levels.fyi and Comparably have begun tracking PR roles, particularly at tech companies. Levels.fyi’s strength is transparency around total compensation packages—it shows that a senior PR manager at a public tech company might receive a $140,000 base plus $30,000 in equity vesting annually, a distinction most aggregators miss.
Blind, an anonymous professional network, hosts salary discussions where verified employees share exact figures. While anecdotal, these conversations reveal market intelligence like signing bonuses (increasingly common at competitive firms) or how remote work affects compensation (typically 5-15% below metro rates for the same role).
AngelList provides startup-specific PR salary data, important given that early-stage companies often structure compensation differently. A PR director at a Series B startup might accept a $120,000 base that’s 20% below market in exchange for equity potentially worth multiples of salary if the company succeeds.
How to Use Multiple Sources Effectively
Start with BLS data to establish a baseline. Its median of $66,750 represents the most statistically sound starting point for PR specialist roles. This figure comes from actual employer payroll records across all U.S. sectors and adjusts for sampling errors. Think of this as your anchor—when other sources show wildly different numbers, BLS helps you understand whether you’re looking at a genuinely different market segment or just noise in the data.
Cross-reference this baseline against real-time job postings on ZipRecruiter and LinkedIn. If current postings show averages 15-20% higher than BLS data, market conditions have likely improved since the last BLS survey. If postings trend lower, the market may be softening. Pay particular attention to posting dates—a surge of high-salary listings from just one or two employers can skew platform averages temporarily. Look at the 25th to 75th percentile range rather than simple averages to avoid this distortion.
Use company-specific data from Glassdoor and PayScale to refine expectations. Someone targeting tech PR roles should weight Built In and Glassdoor’s tech-company filters more heavily than generic averages. Agency-bound professionals benefit from checking PRWeek surveys and recruitment firm salary guides. The difference matters more than you might expect—a PR specialist at a SaaS company typically earns 20-30% more than an equivalent role at a traditional PR agency, even controlling for experience and location.
Consider geographic and experience adjustments simultaneously. A PR specialist with 3-5 years experience in San Francisco should expect $80,000-$95,000 based on combining BLS geographic differentials (San Francisco pays 51% above median) with PayScale’s experience curves (3-5 years earns 15-20% above entry level). But don’t simply multiply adjustments together. A 50% geographic premium and 20% experience premium doesn’t equal 70% total—the effects interact. Most salary calculators on platforms like Salary.com and PayScale handle these interactions automatically if you input both variables.
Create a personal salary range rather than fixating on a single number. Take your baseline (usually BLS median), adjust up or down 15% based on real-time market data, then apply your specific factors (location, experience, industry, company size). This gives you a working range of perhaps $58,000 to $76,000 for a mid-career specialist role, which you can then refine further. Having a range makes negotiations more flexible and realistic.
Verify outliers. If one source shows dramatically different numbers, investigate its methodology. Glassdoor’s higher averages partly reflect volunteer response bias—satisfied, well-paid professionals disproportionately share their compensation. Zippia’s lower figures include more entry-level and part-time roles. Neither is “wrong,” but context matters for accuracy. When you see an outlier, ask: What population does this source capture? What’s their sampling method? How recent is the data?
Track changes over time rather than relying on point-in-time snapshots. Bookmark 3-4 key sources and check them quarterly if you’re actively job searching, annually if you’re settled in a role. This habit reveals whether your current compensation is keeping pace with market growth. Someone earning $65,000 in 2023 who’s still at $67,000 in 2025 has actually lost ground if market rates for their role climbed to $72,000—a pattern only visible by tracking multiple sources over time.
Data Limitations to Understand
Self-reported salary data carries inherent inflation. PayScale research shows that voluntary respondents report compensation averaging 10-15% higher than verified payroll records. People proud of their pay share it more readily than those earning less, skewing averages upward. This creates what researchers call “participation bias”—the sample doesn’t represent the full population because participation isn’t random.
You’ll see this play out in predictable patterns. Platforms where users create profiles voluntarily (Glassdoor, Blind) show consistently higher averages than platforms where employers report data (Salary.com, BLS). A $20,000 gap between these source types for the same role isn’t unusual. Neither number is necessarily “correct”—they’re measuring different populations with different motivations for participating.
Job title inconsistency creates comparison challenges. One company’s “PR Specialist” might equal another’s “Communications Associate” or “Media Relations Coordinator.” Salary.com attempts standardization through job descriptions, but perfect alignment remains impossible. When comparing across sources, focus on described responsibilities rather than titles alone. Does the role manage others? Handle crisis communications? Report to a director or VP? These functional details matter more than the exact title on the business card.
This problem intensifies at smaller organizations where titles often inflate to compensate for other limitations. A “PR Manager” at a 50-person startup might have responsibilities equivalent to a “PR Specialist” at a Fortune 500 company, making direct title-to-title comparisons meaningless. Reading job descriptions rather than scanning titles reveals these mismatches before you make flawed salary comparisons.
Geographic data granularity varies significantly. BLS provides metro-area specificity (you can see Dallas-Fort Worth versus Houston), while some aggregators only break down to state level. For location-dependent comparisons, prioritize sources offering city-level data. The difference matters enormously—Austin and El Paso are both in Texas, but PR salaries differ by 30-40% between these metros. State-level averages obscure this variation entirely.
Timing mismatches can confuse cross-source comparisons. BLS data is always 6-12 months old by publication, while ZipRecruiter updates daily. During periods of rapid change (like 2024’s tech sector adjustments), this lag matters considerably. Always note each source’s data collection period. A platform showing February 2024 data during October 2025 searches gives you information that’s 18+ months stale—useful for historical trends, misleading for current negotiations.
Sample size affects reliability differently across sources. BLS surveys 1.1 million establishments but might have only 200-300 specific employers in a niche category like “PR specialists in nonprofit organizations in Vermont.” Glassdoor might show averages based on just 15 user reports for that same category. Small samples produce unstable estimates—one unusually high or low report can swing the average significantly. When examining specialized roles or smaller markets, look for the sample size disclosure (usually in fine print) before trusting the numbers.
Benefits and total compensation often go unmeasured. Most salary data captures base pay, missing bonuses (common at agencies), equity (significant at startups), and benefits packages that might add 20-30% to effective compensation. Someone accepting a $70,000 base salary with $12,000 annual bonuses plus equity effectively earns more than someone at $75,000 with no additional compensation. Only platforms like Built In and Levels.fyi consistently break these components out, and even they rely on user-reported accuracy.
Industry classification creates hidden distortions. BLS categorizes PR specialists by their employer’s primary business, so a PR specialist at Microsoft appears under “Software Publishers” while one at Amazon falls under “Internet Retail.” This makes industry-specific comparisons tricky—what looks like an “industry effect” might actually be a company size or business model difference. Aggregator platforms that let users self-select industry categories face the opposite problem: inconsistent classification where users pick whichever industry sounds most relevant rather than following standard codes.
Choosing the Right Source for Your Needs
For career planning and long-term expectations, start with BLS data. Its statistical rigor and historical consistency make it ideal for understanding sustainable salary progressions. A PR professional planning a 10-year career arc benefits from BLS’s documented growth trends and industry comparisons.
When job hunting actively, prioritize real-time sources like ZipRecruiter and LinkedIn Salary. These platforms show what employers currently offer, which might deviate from historical averages during hiring surges or slowdowns. Combine this with Glassdoor’s company-specific data when targeting particular employers.
For salary negotiations, arm yourself with multiple data points. Reference BLS data for credibility (it’s government-sourced and unimpeachable), then layer in Glassdoor and PayScale figures for current market context. Showing a prospective employer three sources all supporting your range makes negotiation more objective.
If evaluating a career change into PR, use Built In and Comparably to understand total compensation structures. These platforms break out bonuses, equity, and benefits in ways that pure salary figures miss. A PR role offering $70,000 plus 15% bonus potential might outpace a $75,000 base-only position.
Frequently Asked Questions
What’s the most accurate source for public relations salaries?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the most statistically rigorous data, using employer payroll records from over 275,000 PR specialists. Its May 2023 median of $66,750 represents verified earnings rather than self-reported figures. However, because BLS data updates annually, supplement it with real-time sources like ZipRecruiter for current market conditions.
Why do salary numbers vary so much between sources?
Different platforms use distinct methodologies and capture different populations. Glassdoor’s $117,025 average reflects voluntary reports from satisfied employees, while Salary.com’s $60,980 comes from employer-submitted benchmarking data. Job title definitions also vary—some sources include managers and directors under “public relations” while others separate them. Geographic mix matters too, with platforms popular in high-cost cities showing inflated national averages.
How often should I check salary data?
Review baseline data from BLS annually when new figures release each April. Check real-time aggregators like ZipRecruiter quarterly to track market movement. Before major career decisions—job changes, relocations, or negotiations—conduct fresh research across multiple sources. The PR salary landscape can shift notably in 6-12 months, particularly in tech and agency sectors.
Can I trust self-reported salary data?
Self-reported data from Glassdoor and PayScale provides useful directional guidance but typically inflates 10-15% above verified payroll data. People earning above-market rates share compensation more readily than those below market. Use self-reported data to understand relative differences (tech PR pays more than nonprofit PR) rather than absolute figures. Always cross-reference with employer-reported sources like Salary.com or official data from BLS.
One thing worth mentioning: salary research works best when you treat it less like finding “the answer” and more like triangulating a range. I’ve watched people waste hours trying to reconcile why Glassdoor shows $117,000 while PayScale shows $57,000 for what seems like the same role. They’re both right for their specific populations—one captures satisfied tech workers, the other skews toward career-switchers checking entry-level prospects.
The smartest approach I’ve seen is keeping a simple spreadsheet. Add BLS data as your anchor point, then layer in 3-4 other sources with notes about their biases. Update it twice a year. This gives you context when a recruiter calls with an offer or when you’re deciding whether to pursue a particular opportunity. You’ll know immediately whether that $75,000 offer for a PR specialist role in Austin sits at the 40th percentile or the 70th.
Geography remains the most underappreciated variable in these comparisons. Someone earning $65,000 in Nashville often lives comparably to someone making $95,000 in San Francisco, once you account for housing costs and taxes. The raw salary number matters less than what it buys you. State labor department data becomes especially useful here because it captures these regional purchasing power differences in ways national aggregators gloss over.