Tue, 2 Apr 2002 -- Media Matters No. 4:
How to alienate a reporter

In our last "Media Matters" we talked about giving reporters the information "any way they want it." Today we look at things guaranteed to alienate reporters. Our tips come from PR counselor Andrew Edson as cited by Fraser P. Seitel in a column written for O'Dwyer's PR Daily (http://www.odwyerpr.com/), one of the most respected publications in the PR industry.

We have already talked about calling on deadline. It is No. 1 on the list.

Calling on deadline. Reporting is hectic, frenetic work. And no period of the day is more hectic or frenetic than deadline time. A reporter with a 6 p.m. deadline doesn't have time to talk to you after 4 p.m. Remember, whenever you call a reporter, begin with, "Is this a good time to talk?"

Being long-winded. Reporters also don't have much time to talk. They receive hundreds of emails, releases, pitches and phone calls every day. Their time is limited. When you call them, "get to the point." And be brief.

Pitching a non-story. The only stories that deserve to be pitched are those that are relevant. What determines "relevance?" Such things as consequence, conflict, timeliness, proximity and human interest. The only potential stories that interest reporters are those that contain bona fide "news" (see Media Matters #2: "Understanding the reporter's mindset"). If a journalist says "no," that's it. Don't belabor the issue by refusing to accept the journalist's verdict. This is closely followed by...

Overselling a story. Reporters may be suckered once to pursue a story that turns out to be a non-event. But good reporters won't fall for the same setup twice. Best practice therefore is to assess intelligently whether yours is a truly newsworthy event, before trying to enlist a reporter's interest. NOTE: Call The Center for an Accessible Society first and talk it over with us if you have any doubts, qualms or just want help in thinking about a better news hook.

Not reading the publication. There is nothing more annoying to a reporter than being approached by someone pitching a story idea who obviously has no clue about what the reporter or the publication reports on. Become familiar with the publication -- and what the particular reporter covers -- before you call that reporter to pitch a story.

Verbally sparring after the fact. Once a reporter has reported your story, you're ordinarily stuck with it. Oh sure, you can demand a "correction" or a "clarification," but these offer little solace after the damage is done. You of course should inform a reporter if what they have written is unfair or inaccurate. But browbeating a journalist because she hasn't written it the way you'd like, wins little but hostility. It's not worth it.

There is someone who actually cares about "unfairness" at many newspapers and that is the Ombudsman, or Readers' Representative. It is his or her job to be the ethics police, to watch for bias or correct inaccuracies and generally monitor their paper for fairness. If you genuinely feel you have been treated badly call the Ombudsman. They'll look into it.

Requesting prior editorial approval. Forget it. Don't even bother requesting -- much less insisting -- to see the story before it appears in print. They don't have the time to send it to you and then wait for your "approval". If you insist on seeing it, it won't make the paper, so basically talking to you has been a waste of the reporter's time. Think for a moment -- what would you say if all your "human subjects" wanted prior approval before you could publish study results? You'd probably look for another subject.

Not knowing the answer and inventing a reply. This is known as "lying." It is never, never done. Simply say, "I don't know, let me try to find the answer for you. When do you need it?" Or simply, "I don't know."

More Media Matters