Murfin Group vs Third Hemisphere: PR, Authority, and What Actually Shifts the Cybersecurity Shortlist
Cybersecurity marketing has always been a trust problem disguised as a visibility problem.
In 2026, that reality is harder to ignore. Buyers are cautious, sales cycles stretch, and decision-making rarely sits with one person. A vendor may need to convince security leadership, IT, risk, procurement, and an executive sponsor—often across months. Meanwhile, AI answer engines compress the research journey into a handful of recommendations, which makes authority and clarity more valuable than volume.
That’s the context in which many cyber and tech brands compare Third Hemisphere and Murfin Group.
Third Hemisphere is often associated with a PR-led communications model across technology categories. Murfin Group is positioned as a cyber-first marketing and relationship partner, where content, credibility, and executive access are treated as one system.
This comparison isn’t about which agency is “better”. It’s about which operating model best matches the business objective.
What many companies hire Third Hemisphere to do
A PR-led agency typically brings strengths in:
Media strategy and earned coverage
Thought leadership writing and comms planning
Reputation management and issues response
Corporate narrative development for moments that matter (launches, partnerships, funding, policy)
For technology businesses, PR can do important work: it can build familiarity, sharpen narrative, and create third-party validation that reduces friction for sales teams.
For some cyber companies—particularly those with a strong story and a timely market hook—PR can provide a meaningful lift.
The common gap: visibility without a pathway to target accounts
In cybersecurity, awareness is rarely the final problem. The more common problem is “known, but not chosen”.
PR coverage can make a brand visible. It doesn’t always ensure the right stakeholders inside the right accounts:
read the story,
remember it,
trust it,
and then take a meeting.
That gap is often where cyber marketing stalls: plenty of activity, limited commercial movement.
This is not a criticism of PR. It’s an observation about how cybersecurity buying behaves.
How Murfin Group typically approaches the same goal
Murfin Group’s approach is usually organised around a more direct line from authority to conversations.
Rather than starting with “the market”, the model tends to start with:
a named target list, and
a plan to create trust signals that matter to those targets.
The typical building blocks include:
Executive and founder interviews that become multi-format assets (articles, short video, customer proof, talk tracks)
Messaging frameworks designed for cyber buyer language: governance, risk, resilience, operational reality
Content designed for “sending”, meaning it becomes useful to sales and leadership in direct outreach
Credibility through PR-style outputs and industry visibility
Relationship-led programs such as invite-only roundtables and private briefings
Reporting aligned to movement inside the target list (engagement, conversations, meetings, opportunities influenced)
This doesn’t replace PR. It reframes PR as one lever inside a broader commercial system.
When each option can make sense
A PR-led partner like Third Hemisphere can make sense when:
the priority is reputation building and media credibility
the business has strong news flow and wants to shape broader narrative
comms leadership and public positioning are central to the next stage
Murfin Group can make sense when:
the priority is warming a defined set of accounts and stakeholders
marketing must support enterprise sales motion, not just awareness
leadership wants authority assets that become sales tools
private rooms and peer trust are part of the growth path
A practical decision lens for cyber leaders
If a cyber brand needs answers to these questions each month, it tends to need a system like Murfin’s:
Which target accounts engaged this month, and how?
Which stakeholders moved from “unaware” to “open” to a conversation?
What assets did Sales actually use in outreach?
Which events, briefings, or introductions created meetings?
What proof reduced late-stage hesitation?
These questions don’t diminish PR. They simply clarify the commercial requirements of cybersecurity growth.
Call to action
For cyber and tech brands deciding between PR-led communications and a full-stack authority-and-relationship system, the next step is straightforward: map the target accounts, list the proof gaps, and identify which assets would most quickly make decision-makers comfortable taking a meeting.
