Posts Tagged ‘media’

Media Relations: Should You Pitch Unrelated Ideas During Days Of Big Breaking News?

Tuesday, May 21st, 2013
water-main-break

Closely monitoring breaking news on a regular basis is an important way to find opportunities for you or your clients to serve as an expert for the media during timely events. But days of breaking news might also be times to delay your pitches.

For example, we are not pitching stories to the mainstream media while outlets cover the events in Oklahoma. From an emotional perspective, we personally feel uncomfortable trying to sell the virtues of our story ideas at a time when the events of much higher importance are occurring in our country. From a practical perspective, we understand the media are focusing much of their attention on Oklahoma and slots for evergreen stories that could air at later dates are few and far between. Many of the journalists I worked with were not particularly excellent during days of breaking news of filing away unrelated stories for another day.

These scenarios are not typically black-and-white. Other media including those online with a specific focus likely welcome new ideas at any time. If your story idea is tied to a scheduled event you cannot postpone, you may have no choice but to pitch the story now despite the less than ideal circumstances. And some in the media may point out that even during big days of breaking news, they seek some unrelated ideas to ensure their coverage isn’t solely focused on one topic. But in reality, my experience indicates the spots and time slots you’re fighting for are reduced dramatically. And the space and airtime your idea receives may be reduced substantially.

The bottom line is breaking news is both a barometer for when to pitch ideas and when to wait for a better day.

Obama Takes Key Public Relations Steps In Tug Of War

Friday, May 17th, 2013
tug-of-war

The political tug of war between the Obama administration and Republicans has returned to its insane level of rhetoric that we remember prior to the November elections.

Some Republicans argue the administration misled the public about Benghazi to help ensure a victory in November. Some Democrats argue Republicans are making something out of nothing to tarnish Obama and Hillary Clinton’s potential presidential run in 2016.

Republicans want to know who knew what about the IRS. The administration also criticizes the IRS but points out the president does not run the agency.

And both sides of the aisle express unhappiness with subpoenas related to the Associated Press.

Some of the media seem to be complicit in a reality game show atmosphere, working side-by-side with politicians on whom can deliver the most sensational sound bites. These “scandals” raise some important discussions, but good grief. If only some politicians would work to solve our everyday problems with the same zeal that they try to call hearings and speak craziness into microphones.

For a moment, take off your political team’s bloodied uniform and acknowledge some of what’s really happening: In general, the administration wants to downplay any links to these issues as much as possible. On the other hand, some Republicans want to make these issues seem as dreadful as possible and portray the government as a stalker peaking through your bedroom window at night. Call it high stakes marketing far beyond the traditional press release. If some of these microphone huggers really wanted the truth, they would wait for their hearings to finish fleshing out the facts before demanding justice with their scary words.

The media are already analyzing how these current issues might impact Obama’s legacy without acknowledging our tug of war may likely have moved on to something new in six months. But Obama is taking some important steps for crisis communications:

  • He showed concern about the IRS issue by saying, “Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I’m angry about it.”
  • He took action by accepting the resignation of the top person of the IRS.
  • The White House released e-mails related to Benghazi.
  • He brought back legislation to help legally protect journalists.
  • He answered questions at a news conference.
  • He for the most part keeps his composure.
  • He asked Congress to help improve security at American embassies.

I’m not saying he’s right. I’m saying those are some of the moves you make when opponents say you’re wrong.

Of course, others might share examples pointing out the administration put itself in this PR mess in the first place. Fair enough. But these latest steps help the president reach his larger goal of refocusing attention to his agenda. He is building a dam against gushing water. But some water will always leak through. His critics also have public relations firms armed with strategies. Even if Obama registered tomorrow as a Republican and shouted “pretty please with a cherry on top,” critics know to share phrases such as:

  • “We demand more information.”
  • “We reject the apologies as insufficient.”
  • “This is politics at its worst.”
  • “He is not going far enough.”
  • “We are determined to get answers.”

So the tug of war continues with almost everyone landing in the mud. Some politicians hope to score points. The media hopes to improve ratings. Too much of the public is desperate for details that prove that the opposing party is truly the scum of the Earth.

And I, of course, write a blog, tired of grown-ups who can’t solve problems or controversies without acting like the sky is falling and it’s the other guy’s entire fault.

5 PR Lessons From Alaska Airlines On Landing Smoothly

Wednesday, May 15th, 2013
victoria-british-columbia-2

I took this picture prior to landing in Victoria, British Columbia, where I spoke at a conference to businesses about handling the media. A problem forced us to deplane our initial flight from Seattle to Victoria. Alaska Airlines/Horizon Air took several steps to propel this negative into a positive.

  1. After deplaning, someone on an overhead speaker announced we should stay near our gate for updated information on a new flight. Lesson for businesses:  When customers have problems, always keep them updated even if you have little to report. Otherwise customers may wonder if you forgot about them or aren’t working to solve the problem. As a TV reporter, I tried to keep sources regularly updated on the progress of an investigation.
  2. The airline found a second plane for us, if I recall correctly, within an hour. When the airline at first announced we needed to deplane, I saw passengers immediately pick up their cell phone to make calls. Some passengers may have posted status updates on social media. In fact for fun, the person I was traveling with asked me to return to my reporting days and provide a fake live shot for his iPhone on this “developing story.” But when we boarded the second plane, he mentioned he never experienced an airline finding a second plane so quickly. Other passengers may have shared similar, positive thoughts on cell phones or on social media. Lesson for businesses:  If you caused a problem for a customer, the best way to win back the customer’s trust is going above and beyond to find a fast solution.
  3. After boarding the second plane, a flight attendant showed some personality on the overhead speaker when apologizing for the delay or acknowledging how the experience was not ideal. Lesson for businesses:  When something goes wrong, don’t simply feed customers facts and information as if you’re a robot. Show some concern and compassion. Be human.
  4. After we boarded the plane, a flight attendant announced the crew would be serving us free beer or wine due to the delay. The announcement put people in a good mood. Lesson for businesses:  When your business has a problem, offer something extra:  a discount, a coupon, a gift card. Free stuff helps people forgive problems.
  5. After we landed in Victoria, another flight attendant repeated the apology for the delay. Lesson for businesses:  You probably can’t say you’re sorry enough. People can accept mistakes or unforeseen problems. But they often can’t accept those who don’t say I’m sorry. Saying you’re sorry pays off in a big way.

Media Training In British Columbia: 14 Questions For Businesses Before Bracing For Breaking News

Monday, May 13th, 2013
victoria-british-columbia

In Victoria, British Columbia, safety expert Steven Adelman and I visit the Parliament Buildings. I later spoke about the media at the International Association of Venue Managers regional conference. One of the first issues I discussed with the audience was bracing for breaking news. I explained how I once covered an accidental shooting at a gun show. That story raises the following questions for business owners to consider before news breaks:

  1. If news breaks at your business and you’re not there, how quickly can someone contact you even on weekends? The accidental gun show shooting happened on a Saturday.
  2. Where will the media park their vehicles? We parked our vehicles wherever we could find a space. Would you corral the media into a specific location?
  3. How will the general feelings of your staff or clientele toward the media impact how you handle reporters? Most people I met at the gun show were suspicious of the media. However, some were more accommodating toward me because I worked at a Fox TV station.
  4. Will you or someone on your behalf answer questions from the media about the breaking news?
  5. How would you handle questions about information you don’t have or are not ready to give out?
  6. Will you be able to answer questions in plain English without sounding like a stiff spokesman obviously choosing every word carefully?
  7. Will you use the phrase “no comment”?
  8. Will you present yourself and deliver your words calmly or get caught up in the adrenaline of the moment?
  9. Will what clothes you wear matter? Should you dress like an executive or roll up your sleeves like someone hard at work gathering information? Will you wear jeans if news breaks on the weekends?
  10. How will you handle social media?
  11. How will you handle reporters who want to walk onto private property and interview witnesses and bystanders? The accidental shooting happened at a convention center. Do you clearly understand which areas are public and which are private? What authority do you have in this situation?
  12. How will you handle photographers who want to walk onto private property to shoot video related to the breaking news?
  13. How will you handle media who request to enter your business to shoot video inside related to the breaking news?
  14. Do you need media training or to put together a plan for your staff to prepare for any of these possibilities?

 

Media Training In British Columbia: You Got Served

Tuesday, May 7th, 2013
media-training-speaking-in-victoria-british-columbia-you-got-served

Erandi had both perfect and imperfect timing.

Venue safety expert Steven Adelman and I had just ended our journey to Victoria, British Columbia to speak at a conference. After two flights and a long taxi ride, a hotel clerk directed us down Government Street for food. We passed a fudge place, promising to return, and entered Bard and Banker Public House on a corner.

At the risk of drawing attention to ourselves, I placed my camera on the bar and set the timer. Erandi, one of the resturant’s servers, did not see my set-up and walked in frame at the precise moment the camera clicked twice.

“Ohhh,” Steve and I shouted simultaneously like when a sports fan’s favorite team just misses a big play. Steve wanted to see the shot immediately. It ended up our favorite photo of the trip, which probably isn’t saying much. Steve started explaining to Erandi the virtues of the candid shot and I announced aloud she probably regretted even passing our table. But she appeared genuinely interested and stood patiently for a while by our table. A man wearing a military ballcap one booth over smiled in amusement.

I ate a turkey sandwhich and we forgot to return for the fudge. The whole trip happened very fast and Erandi was part of the blur.

 

Media Relations: For Your TV Eyes Only

Monday, May 6th, 2013

While speaking about the media to managers at a conference in Victoria, British Columbia, a woman asked me why TV news stations use the word “exclusive” or point out they are airing a story viewers will only see on their broadcasts.

I sometimes asked that question to colleagues while working as a TV reporter. I argued few people watch five newscasts and compare their content in detail. I don’t recall viewers ever telling me they preferred a station because it aired more exclusive stories. And when TV news stations point out an upcoming story is an exclusive, they are acknowledging that viewers can find most of the same stories on most days on other newscasts. (It’s not like we hear the word exclusive that often.)

I told the woman in the audience I don’t know why news stations declare stories as “exclusive.” When I raised these questions as a TV reporter, co-workers shook their heads in acknowledgement and moved on to other business.

My guess is that TV news stations, like businesses in other industries, do things simply because that’s how it’s always been done. Using an “exclusive” graphic for a story also is an opportunity to kick a little sand in the competition’s face. But no one has presented me with information that labeling a story “exclusive” as often as possible leads to some return on investment.

The woman in the audience didn’t like all this exclusive business. I inferred she considered it all a bit silly. News stations do many things I don’t understand. Just watch some of their promos which appear to be produced by the staff of Saturday Night Live.

You’ll only find this blog on this website.

Media Training: Man In Black

Wednesday, May 1st, 2013

At a Scottsdale resort, we conduct media training with a national organization.

media-training-man-in-black

Media Training: The Big Bag Theory

Friday, April 26th, 2013

I was picking up the cleaners when a TV on the business’ wall showed my former colleague and arch nemesis Fox10 weatherman Cory McCloskey wearing a hairnet. Cory often took any opportunity he had to poke fun of me during his weather segments on the air. He once enlarged a picture of my head and had people fire tomatoes at it on a farm. (It was all in good fun.) On this morning, Cory wore a hairnet while giving us a live tour of a factory that makes tortilla chips. If anyone can wear a hairnet and have it fit in with his shtick, Cory can.

After Cory’s live shot, my other old friend anchorman Ron Hoon delivered a report from the newsroom. But a big, white plastic bag on a desk behind him grabbed my attention. The bag reminded me of one of those you pick up after shopping at the grocery store. A lot of similar plastic bags are stuffed in our kitchen closet. We save them as a backup plan to pick up after our dog Molly. You can see now how one stupid item in the background of your shot can get someone daydreaming. It would disappoint me when I aired what I considered to be an interesting interview and colleagues in the newsroom focused more on the person’s hair, clothes or the fact he or she was not even wearing a shirt. People notice crazy stuff.

I mentioned that paper bag to someone in the newsroom and he texted me back saying, “Keith … those are the homespun touches that make the Hooner so endearing. You know that.”

Not everyone is so endearing. When appearing on camera, clear your background of distractions. Don’t give viewers a reason not to hear your words. I have no idea what Ron Hoon was saying. But I’m sure it was important.

Media Relations: A Political Pitch To Ditch

Thursday, April 25th, 2013
media-relations-a-political-pitch-to-ditch

The following points refer to an email someone sent me about covering an immigration event helping young people who are undocumented. At the time, I was a television reporter.

She sent the pitch the same day as the event. In fact, she sent it two hours and 15 minutes before the event began.

Both the email’s subject and a sub headline in the email stated “for immediate release.” Isn’t that obvious?

The email began with “Media Advisory” in big bold letters. When sending pitches to reporters, why is it necessary to include “media advisory”? Isn’t that obvious considering you are sending information to reporters?

The pitch’s first paragraph explains a school board member, a house representative and a councilman will attend the event. Sharing a compelling story in the pitch about a young person who is undocumented would have been a more persuasive way to attract my attention. Also, the email should have explained I would be able to interview that person on camera. School board members and politicians were often the last people I sought to interview at events.

The email buries in the second and third paragraphs how two controversial decisions sparked this event. The email refers to the event as a workshop that will include demonstrations. The media like controversy and TV reporters especially like visuals such as demonstrations. I would have included this information higher in the pitch.

The email includes a PDF attachment that repeats word for word the email itself. I’m not sure of the PDF’s purpose unless the sender believed some reporters prefer information within PDFs rather than emails. However, I’ve never heard of this preference.

I support including visuals in pitches, but this one includes a picture of a meeting. The meeting apparently depicts leaders who made a controversial decision leading to these demonstrations. However, a picture of people who look very bored in a meeting does not add much to the pitch. I would prefer to see a picture of a young passionate demonstrator who I might get to interview.

Media Training: How To Lose A Reporter In 10 Minutes

Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013

Ramble on and on and on without taking a breath.

Use lots of industry acronyms.

Top your acronyms with some lingo.

Give reporters, without them requesting it, a pile of paperwork because you can’t explain the issue yourself in a few sentences.

Insist how horrible something is when you haven’t even explained in simple terms what the heck you are talking about.

Mix together rumors and facts.

Overdramatize the impact of an issue to such an extent that you lose credibility.

Include statistics without a source to back them up.

Explain yourself in such complicated terms that reporters feel like they’re trying to unravel Watergate.

Do a lot of “blah, blah, blah” while actually saying very little.

Insisting the issue is hurting consumers without having a consumer for anyone to interview.