Archive for June, 2012
Thursday, June 28th, 2012
In the film American Pie, the character Jim gets excited too soon during his romantic rendezvous with Nadia. The scene is accidentally broadcast to his entire school, ending as an embarrassing live shot. If only he more properly evaluated the situation and wasn’t in such a rush. Comparison complete.
A news director once told me it’s sometimes better to be first than right. Yes, you read that correctly. Maybe he had more influence than I imagined. And maybe some TV executives should create apology templates the night before a big day of breaking news.
After the U.S. Supreme Court released its ruling on healthcare, certain members of the media offered us yet another sequel to a bad script. Call this showing “American Eats Humble Pie.” Let’s go to some Tweets from others I read in my timeline to see how some of the confusion unfolded on Twitter.
7:08am: “BREAKING — Individual mandate struck down. More to come”
7:08am: “Breaking: @CNN reporting #SCOTUS has ruled that the individual mandate for health care is unconstitutional.”
7:09am: “Wait: AP and CNN just reported opposite outcomes.”
7:10am: “Not Twitter’s finest moment here. #scotus”
7:10am: “So does the mandate survive or is it struck down? Oh Twitter, your confusion is so much fun…”
7:11am: “Lots of tweets about #SCOTUS striking down mandate… yet @Scotusblog reporting that it is upheld.”
7:13am: “Conflicting reports from media on Supreme Ct. mandate. Tune in to KTAR for LIVE breaking news, analysis.”
7:13am: “Wait, you mean TV news reporters dont take the time to get something right, preferring first? wow! #scotus”
7:16am: “Chaos outside of #SCOTUS. Hearing several things waiting for my copy of the written opinion.”
7:21am: “***Correction*** The Supreme Court upholds Affordable Health Care Act”
7:31am: “CNN makes a disastrous Supreme Court screw-up”
7:38am: “Reaction to CNN’s erroneous Supreme Court healthcare ruling”
7:48am: “Drama at CNN. I would love to be a fly on Wolf Blizter’s beard. #SCOTUS”
8:03am: “Twitter reacts to #SCOTUS health-care ruling with confusion over conflicting early headlines, jokes.”
8:32am: “Who is having a worse day Republicans, Ann Curry or CNN?”
11:03am: “Update #2: CNN colleagues defend Kate Bolduan; say veteran producer misinformed her.”
Tags: affordable health care, breaking news, CNN, health care act, health-care, healthcare, media, news director, PR, reporter, reporters, scotus, supreme ct, tv executives, tv news, tv news reporters, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Thursday, June 28th, 2012
Don’t Argue: You successfully persuaded a journalist to cover your client’s story. Your client is excited. The interview goes well, but the reporter wants more to work with before moving forward. You’re naturally disappointed. You thought you placed your client, but now you risk losing the story if you don’t come up with more. This scenario might naturally upset you. You might have a valid argument why the journalist could have handled the situation better. The reporter might make a comment you feel is unfair. Don’t get upset. Don’t get snarky. Confidently tell the reporter you will try your best to get your client to provide in a timely manner the additional elements needed.
Make A Call: If a journalist’s email indicates a story might be slipping away, call the reporter. Email doesn’t work as well when you sense a reporter might be disappointed. Show you care enough to make the story work by picking up the phone. Talk it out. What does the reporter want?
Keep It Real: Say a journalist conducts an interview and then is disappointed to learn other media covered versions of the story before. Explain you believe this story offers a fresh angle (which it genuinely should). And if the reporter disagrees with your assessment, ask her what she needs to help make the story different than past ones.
Confirm Interest: Ensure as best you can the reporter will air or publish the story if you successfully come up with additional interviews, pictures or whatever he wants. If you sense the journalist has given up on the idea, let it go. Don’t get desperate. Don’t push a reporter into doing a story he doesn’t want to. You can’t win them all.
The Commercial Comment: If a journalist decides this story is turning into a commercial, explain you don’t want that either. Respect a journalist’s desire to tell a real news story. You understand there’s a sales department for commercials. Find out what the reporter needs to make the story newsworthy.
Be Firm: Don’t B.S. the client. The reporter is not thrilled and wants something more. Tell your client you need this or that or no one may ever see the story. If your client is upset with the reporter, explain those concerns may hold validity but this is the situation. The two of you need to either take it or leave it.
Deliver Quality: Your client, desperate to find a second interview the journalist seeks, may ask a relative or best friend to play that role. People often tried to deliver me those interviews. And I sensed something was wrong. I asked enough questions and realized the interview wasn’t genuinely what I requested. This approach often back fires and makes everyone look bad. If you can’t deliver what a journalist wants, then explain that. Don’t try to salvage a story with a lame interview.
Provide Updates: Your client may need extra time to find other interviews, pictures or information a journalist wants. Contact the reporter on a regular basis. Don’t wait a week, making the reporter wonder if you and your client simply gave up. Explain you’re working hard and promise regular updates.
Tags: interview, journalist, media, news, news story, PR, reporter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Tuesday, June 26th, 2012
After the U.S. Supreme Court released its ruling on Arizona’s SB1070, some members of the media complained presidential candidate Mitt Romney wasn’t staking a clear position about the decision. Watch this interaction between CNN and a Romney representative. Romney’s supporters may chalk up this criticism to what they consider to be a never-satisfied liberal media. His detractors may argue he is trying to walk a tightrope: He doesn’t want to lose the support of Tea Party members or Latino voters especially in battleground states.
However you feel about how Romney’s campaign handled the issue, my advice is this to politicians and public figures: Be decisive. Clearly reveal your opinion. Don’t muddy the waters. Let the media question your position. But don’t let the media portray you as someone not taking a position. Don’t let journalists question your resolve.
We knew the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling was coming. In cases such as this, those responsible for crafting statements have time to prepare and strategize for various scenarios. Don’t be caught off guard. You can try to offer statements offering you loopholes and escape hatches if the political environment changes. But most members of the media, especially those who pride themselves on getting straight answers, are well-trained to spot non-answers. Critics blasted John Kerry, during his presidential campaign, for what they considered confusing and unclear statements about the Iraq war. You can fool some media, who will simply air or print statements without much analysis. But particularly in today’s environment of partisan journalists and talk show hosts, you’re gamblin’ if you start ramblin’ with weak words.
Don’t be the bait. Take a stand. Let your critics take issue with your opinion. Don’t let them argue you didn’t offer one.
Tags: Arizona, battleground states, CNN, john kerry, journalist, journalists, latino voters, media, mitt romney, politics, PR, presidential campaign, presidential candidate, press, tea party
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Monday, June 25th, 2012
A few months after arriving as a TV reporter in Phoenix, I was working the nightshift when the U.S. Supreme Court announced in the evening its decision on Bush v. Gore. Someone assigned me to do a newsroom live shot explaining one of the country’s biggest judicial decisions ever. I’m proud of my education, but I am not a legal scholar. I spent the first few months at the station covering crime and weather. My prior assignments there involved stories such as chasing dust storms or pointing live on TV to trees swaying in the weather. Those reports did not help prepare me for this story.
Before my live shot, I watched national correspondents discuss the ruling and read the AP wire. I needed to hear their insight to ensure I said something logical when I hit the air with my own assessment. I learned this: The experts on the national level were even struggling to properly discern the court’s ruling on such short notice.
I once remember watching a reporter on national television fumbling through a court’s decision in her hands, trying to report its meaning before anyone gave her a chance to significantly look through it. The problem is this: When the U.S. Supreme Court releases a landmark decision, few media outlets are going to report “The Court has released its decision. We will report that decision once we have a moment to make heads or tails of it.” Media are eager to report the Court either upheld or struck down the law. And as the Supreme Court’s decision on Arizona’s SB 1070 again reminded us, rulings are not sports games. Decisions don’t always offer a clear winner or loser.
I followed news of the decision on Twitter:
At 7:22am, A Tweet from The Associated Press stated the court “strikes down most of the crackdown on illegal immigrants.”
At 7:26am, the Los Angeles Times referred to it as a “split decision.”
At 7:27am, the BBC Tweeted the Court “upholds some” of the law.
At 7:30am, a local reporter wrote the Court “upholds key portion …”
At 8:30am, a Tweet from The New York Times’ stated “High Court Rejects Part of Arizona Immigration Law.”
You always can quibble with wording. Tweets using words such as “strikes down” and “rejects” probably led some of the law’s critics to believe the Court agreed with them. Tweets using the words “uphold” likely led some of the law’s supporters to assume the Court agreed with them. But overall, credit these media outlets, or in some cases these individual reporters, with realizing under strict deadlines that this decision is not a slam-dunk victory for either side. I’m sure someone can find examples of poor reporting I’m unaware of. But the rush to cover other big stories in the past has left behind bad examples of making factual or misleading mistakes in a quest to make the news first.
In this case, much of the media, in how they initially portrayed the ruling, appear to have made the right decision about the decision.
What do you think of that story’s reporting? Did you see errors I didn’t?
Tags: ap wire, Arizona, Associated Press, correspondents, landmark decision, los angeles times, media, media outlets, national correspondents, national television, news, newsroom, Phoenix, PR, press, reporters, television, The New York Times, tv reporter, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Wednesday, June 20th, 2012
It’s no secret that health benefits are complex. Health benefits are also personal. In today’s highly charged health care landscape, communicating any changes related to health care benefits needs to account for this more than ever.
A recently robotic, convoluted benefits letter I read reminded me about this. The letter was supposed to inform people about a bunch of changes and things they have to do by certain dates. I had to keep rereading the letter to figure out what the company was trying to say and what action readers had to take. The basic point of the letter was to let everyone know that a new company was going to administer the benefit by July 1. At the end of the letter, it indicated the next monthly premium payment. I noticed right away that the premium went up by $20. Did someone miss this rate increase explanation somewhere amidst the robotic mumbo jumbo? Nope. There was no mention of the rate increase. Anywhere. Was the rate increase simply a mistake? Another confusing point was that while the change was effective July 1, the company enclosed a payment coupon for June.
This letter got us thinking about some key things to think about when crafting benefits messages – especially about changes:
- Provide straightforward context about why the changes are happening. Why did you choose a new benefits administrator? How will employees benefit? Will they notice any changes in service?
- Lose the robotic language. Don’t start the letter with “Effective immediately” or “Effective [date].”
- Don’t bury important changes. Um, like premium rate increases. Premium increases are touchy and should be acknowledged thoughtfully. (Hopefully, the increase is a mistake.)
- Be compassionate. You’re writing about a sensitive topic. Enough said.
- Clearly list steps to take. The information is complex enough. Spell out clearly what employees need to do and when.
- Test pilot your communications. Share your drafts with a few people whom the change will impact. Ask them for honest feedback about what is clear and what isn’t.
Tags: Benefits, benefits communications, communication, Communications, employee benefits, health, health benefits, health care benefits, media, PR
Posted in HR Communications, Internal Communications | No Comments »
Tuesday, June 19th, 2012
I’m not sure but someone is.
I can tell you this. Some TV news managers claim they know who watches the local news. But when I asked how they knew, their answers didn’t satisfy me. In my opinion, their evidence was flimsy at best. But some TV news managers feel obligated to appear they know who is watching. Someone needs to take a leadership role during editorial meetings and provide logic when deciding which stories to cover. What stories do people care about? I heard that question countless times during meetings. Imagine if TV news managers said “I really don’t know who’s watching. So your guess is as good as mine.”
Ratings help break down the age groups watching. But are single moms truly watching a specific newscast? If American Idol airs before your newscast, are music lovers actually watching the news that night? On that night, should the newsroom assign more stories about iTunes or concerts?
Maybe TV managers, similar to Colonel Sanders, have a secret formula tucked away in a safe with all the answers. But when I asked, people in the newsroom never convinced me they really knew who was sitting in the living room enjoying the latest edition of breaking news and brush fires along the highway. I inferred I should simply stop asking the question.
So I don’t know the answer. And I’m still asked the question. When people asked me what I did for a living, they often apologized for not recognizing me, saying they don’t watch the local news. Most of my friends insist they don’t watch the local news. But someone still is. Enough people recognized me or my name over the years that I assumed they watched my station with consistency. Some people were even familiar with my style of reporting. If you need further proof, check out a local TV anchor’s Facebook page. Anchors briefly mention they smoked a cigar or they post a picture of the weather and a gazillion people reply. I mean it! A gazillion!
Businesses hand out company flyers pointing out they appeared on a station. I know one business which mentions its appearance on its outgoing voice mail. Media relations clients tell me about the leads they receive after appearing on the news. Some companies simply believe appearing on the news gives them some extra credibility. And with webpages, phone apps and Twitter updates, you don’t need to turn on the TV for your local news.
I don’t know for sure who watches the local news. I don’t know their wealth or education level. I can guess but not with much certainty. I’ve asked. I’ve debated the topic numerous times, even to the point where a TV manager whispered he honestly didn’t know either. But someone is watching. And at any given time, the news still offers you an opportunity to share your business with a whole bunch of people.
Tags: AZ, breaking news, editorial meetings, Facebook, local news, local tv, media, Media Relations, news managers, newscast, newsroom, PR, tv anchor, tv news, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Monday, June 18th, 2012
When interviewing people, red flags popped up on my reporter’s notepad when someone went overboard trying to impress me. To me, “speak softly, and carry a big stick” means your work speaks for itself, so you don’t have to. But instead of teasing great content by allowing the content to speak for itself, some of those posting Tweets are falling back on gimmicks to convince us to click their links. I assume the man who jacks up his truck and then slaps on some Godzilla wheels is overcompensating. And I assume when a Tweet includes one of the following words or phrases, the content might just suck.
Wow! - This also appears as “WOW!” because the lowercase version is something not sufficient. If I’m about to shout “wow!” at your content, you don’t need to say it for me. A Tweet that instead more artfully previews what I’m about to see should suffice.
Amazing! - A substitute for “wow!” when someone exhausts their “wow!” quota for the week.
You won’t believe - Shamefully stolen from the local news. When I watched a local news story an anchor told me “I wouldn’t believe,” I usually ended up believing it. We don’t often hear this phrase, see the content and then stumble back into a corner dazed and mumbling “I don’t believe it! That can’t be true!”
? - Stolen from cable news, which too often instead of confirming a story, simply asks a question so two talking heads help fill up 24-hour coverage. “Could this rock be a source of nutrition?” “Were some of us born on Mars?” You could Tweet any ridiculousness and simply add a question mark to spark a discussion.
Must read - You have no idea what I must read. Cut it out. I don’t click these links simply as my way of offering up a social media middle finger.
Must have - See above.
INCREDIBLE - See our first two entries. Don’t turn Twitter into a late-night, lame product commercial with some guy yelling at me.
a WHAT? - He said WHAT? She gave him a WHAT? Nice try, but I know WHAT you’re up to.
You’re missing out - Just shut up. You sound like my mother.
Shocking - An old local TV news stand-by. Oh, I’m shocked! Your content is so shocking, I dropped my phone. Wow! I never believed this amazing content would be an incredible must-read after seeing exactly what he said. Will this information change the world as we know it? The answer might shock you … or not.
Tags: AZ, interview, local news, local tv, media, news story, PR, press, reporter, Social Media, tv news, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Social Media | No Comments »
Thursday, June 14th, 2012
When someone pitched me a story idea, I often asked follow-up questions. The people pitching often didn’t know the answers. I could tell they sometimes guessed at answers. Other times, they needed to ask someone else and get back to me, which took time.
Consider pitching a story to media as simply the start of a conversation. A journalist won’t always read your pitch, shout “That’s it!” and follow up with “Let’s do this!” Reporters often hear ideas and want to mold them into something slightly different. PR pros can’t expect to know all the answers to every obscure follow-up question.
I recently pitched a story that inspired several follow-up questions from several members of the media. I didn’t guess at the answers. If I guessed wrongly, the client and I would look bad and break trust if the story didn’t ultimately deliver what we promised. Before providing answers, I called the client several times. Yes, I felt like a nag. But getting the facts straight is not only the job of journalists. That’s still my job. Ensure your clients understand your business relationship will include days of constant communications.
Also, you might as well be holding up two cans attached by a string if your client doesn’t pick up the phone when you call with a quick question. Often, people in public relations pitching me stories could not reach their clients in a timely fashion. Call it the bat phone. Call it the red phone. Call it whatever you want. But you need to exchange telephone numbers that won’t allow messages to swirl in the depths of someone’s voice mail. Journalists don’t often wait around. Too many other stories are waiting for them.
Tags: communication, Communications, journalist, journalists, media, Media Relations, PR, PR pro, PR pros, Public Relations, reporter, reporters, story idea
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Wednesday, June 13th, 2012
Someone in public relations pitched me a story idea and I shared it with an assignment editor. The assignment editor told me to tell the person we would file away the idea. To me, the concept of a media outlet filing away an idea is often equivalent to an employer’s letter stating it will keep your resume on file. I asked the assignment editor if she actually planned to cover the story one day. She said no. I responded that I would simply tell the PR pro the station is not interested. The assignment editor seemed uncomfortable with that option.
I told the PR pro the truth and she thanked me as if few in the media delivered her such honesty. If I told her otherwise, we would both knowingly be engaging in an unspoken contract of B.S. I’m tired of B.S. It stains too much of our world’s communications. I personally don’t want to contribute any more B.S. to our planet.
Why are much of the media afraid to tell you they don’t like your idea? Why do many journalists prefer to conveniently forget about your email and claim they will pitch it, knowing it will go “splat!” against an invisible brick wall in the editorial meeting?
The answer is no different than why many communicators in business prefer to engage in spin than straight up, keeping-it-real honesty. At some point growing up, most of us are taught being brutally honest in business is too risky. Instead, we B.S. each other and no one is fooled. We grumbled behind closed doors and each other’s backs.
I pitched the media several story ideas the week I wrote this blog. Some people never responded. Some asked follow-up questions but never responded to my answers. Did my email not get through? Did they love my idea and just forget? Should I remind them and save the day? In most cases, I advise don’t fool yourself. This is the game we humans play. Your idea didn’t make the cut. You can’t expect all of them to hit the air or show up in print. The reporters, producers and editors who didn’t get back to you, in most cases, are not jerks or bitches. They are human. Maybe they’re too busy to respond, but that’s an excuse. Not responding is much easier than writing “Thank you for your idea, but I’m not interested” or “With all due respect, your idea sucks.”
Another reason I told PR pros and businesses the truth was because it inspired new conversations. We talked about what the idea lacked. We talked about other ideas. But many in the media don’t invest in this approach. Don’t take it personally.
There’s nothing wrong with one follow-up email or phone call asking if there’s any interest in your magnificent idea that will thrill your client. But don’t dive deep into an arsenal of arguments and try to persuade producers to change their minds considering they left the conversation long ago. Don’t be a public relations stalker. At that point, the journalist is more interested in the free food someone just brought in.
Tags: assignment editor, communication, Communications, communicators, editors, journalist, journalists, media, PR, PR pro, PR pros, producer, producers, Public Relations, reporter, reporters, story idea, story ideas
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
