Posts Tagged ‘news story’
Tuesday, February 19th, 2013
When I was reporting, a communications firm emailed me a news release about an education expert available for comment. A combination of the following reasons led me to ignore the news release:
- The news release placed contact information at the very top. Place contact information at the bottom. Your lead, the first few sentences you hope grab the reporter’s attention, takes priority. Contact information at the top reinforces the feel of a news release, which is what you don’t want. Your email signature should offer sufficient contact information.
- The news release included a headline. You don’t need a headline. A news release is not a news story. Your email subject serves as a sufficient headline.
- The news release included the dateline, “New York — August 30, 2010 —.” You don’t need a dateline. Again, this is not a news story.
- The news release explained, “… is available for comment on the following topics.” If you’re sending an email about an expert, reporters already understand someone is available for comment.
- The news release listed five topics the expert could speak about to reporters. Pick one topic you’re most passionate about or one that is most timely. Don’t throw darts hoping one of many topics sticks.
- The news release included a section, “Who, what, when.” This section simply repeated previously mentioned information in the release. This section is unnecessary.
- The news release ended with “###.” You don’t need to include this to indicate the news release is over.
- The news release sent from New York did not give reporters a reason why they should interview an out of town expert. Reporters interested in the topics could likely find local education experts. Either persuade reporters to interview someone out of town or offer a local representative.
- The news release did not offer a local parent to interview about the education topics. Personalize news releases. Share stories of real people.
- The news release raises this question: Wouldn’t building relationships with reporters work better than sending out news releases somewhat randomly?
Tags: communications firm, education expert, education experts, interview, media, Media Relations, news release, news releases, news story, PR, reporter, reporters
Posted in Media Relations, Public Relations | No Comments »
Monday, February 4th, 2013
- 11:41am: A TV producer calls me and tells me about an office shooting. She wants our client, venue safety expert Steven Adelman, live on the phone as soon as possible.
- 11:45am: I leave voicemails for Steve and his wife. I also text both of them.
- 11:48am: Steve calls me. I explain to him the sitiuation. We both Google the shooting to update ourselves on the breaking news. I read him a news story. I turn the TV to the news station requesting him and describe to Steve the live video of the scene. Steve is busy, but we both know you don’t turn down a TV interview especially for breaking news. You build yourself a reputation as being available anytime, anywhere.
- 12:03pm: Steve goes live on the phone with the TV station, discussing the situation and potential security issues.
If you position yourself as an expert in your industry, the media over time will call you for interviews instead of vice versa. Those 22 minutes did not tick off as smoothly as they did by accident. Steve and I have discussed several times the importance of my ability to reach him in a hurry. And we’ve discussed no matter how much work is stacking up on his desk, he’s ready to go when asked.
A congresswoman once asked me if I knew why the media often ask her, instead of others in her political party, to appear on TV. She said the reason is because she responds “yes.” She is willing to wake up in the early morning hours and make herself available. Many other people do not. For the media, accessibility is half the battle. No excuses.
Tags: adelman, breaking news, congresswoman, interview, interviews, live tv, media, Media Relations, news station, news story, PR, producer, safety, safety expert, security issues, steven adelman, TV interview, tv producer, TV station, video
Posted in Media Relations | 1 Comment »
Monday, January 14th, 2013
In the movie “Wanderlust,” a TV reporter is covering a groundbreaking. Alan Alda’s character, speaking through a bullhorn, asks her to stay to report the real story of a land dispute. She declines, citing time constraints.
Jennifer Aniston’s character asks the reporter, “You want a news story?” and then takes off her top. The reporter returns to cover the story. Other men and women also start taking off their shirts. Aniston’s character and her friends later watch the news, smiling in pride at the coverage they generated.
Would going topless really grab an otherwise uninterested media? Absolutely. TV newsrooms like few things better than to blur out something. I even recall an example of a newsroom obscuring out something that, in my opinion, did not need blurring, making the content more interesting and mysterious.
But going topless brings risks and questions:
- How would taking off shirts affect your brand? Would going topless to obtain news coverage be worth breaking with a brand which otherwise promotes people wearing clothing?
- Would your spokespeople be able to speak smoothly to the media and keep on key messages without wearing a top?
- Would your representatives speak passionately or allow the adrenaline rush to drastically change their tones?
- How would a business ensure the stunt did not backfire? It’s one thing for glamous Hollywood actors to pretend to protest in the nude. Would you be ready to see real life co-workers take on this task?
- Would the company itelf take its own photos to post on social media?
- How about citizen journalists covering the event who decide to post video without blurring it?
- And how would a business handle employee communications, ensuring everyone understands the strategy and can come forward with concerns?
The movies can inspire us and reflect reality more than we wish to acknowledge. But before trying topless, consider how the concept fits into the overall communications plan. Most likely, the end will bring more than simply rolling credits.
Tags: alan alda, citizen journalists, communications plan, employee communication, employee communications, Hollywood, hollywood actors, jennifer aniston, journalist, journalists, media, Media Relations, news story, newsroom, newsrooms, PR, reporter, Social Media, tv news, tv newsroom, tv newsrooms, tv reporter, video
Posted in Media Relations, Public Relations | No Comments »
Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012
Last month, we wrote a series of blogs about crisis communications after a network newscast led people to make angry phone calls to one of our clients. The news report does not mention our client. However, the story discusses another business with a contract with our client. And some of the visuals in the news story reveal that business relationship to viewers.
The crisis appeared to have passed until the network re-aired the story on a different news program. This time, more angry people called than before. Some swore during their voice mails. Others included profanity in their emails. Our client was concerned.
We agreed on a balanced approach. Our client will not overreact and bring unnecessary attention to himself, but he will not bury his head in the sand. While he and his legal representation re-evaluated the contractual relationship with the business in the news story, we recommended he immediately attempt to respond to the callers who were so concerned, they called cursing. We provided him with a series of key points he should consistently make.
Caller ID and email addresses allowed our client to try to respond. Initially, some of our client’s return calls rang and rang and no one answered. But overall, the effort appeared to pay off. Our client spoke with the callers that left messages. They were impressed he called back. One of the callers is in the same industry and actually is interested in helping our client with his business. His opinion turned around.
Even the angriest callers are willing to forgive a perceived wrong if a business communicates with them directly and genuinely tries to explain itself. People usually respect those strong enough to stand up during a storm instead of hiding in a hole. And when these callers share their story with friends, perhaps the plot will change to a positive one.
Tags: Communications, crisis communications, media, network news, news program, news report, news stories, news story, newscast, PR, press
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 17th, 2012
When I worked on investigative special reports for TV, the station often decided not to name or identify the people or companies the story was questioning. This often was the case when the story included undercover video. But we still asked those people and companies for on-camera interviews or some form of comment.
Eventually, something struck me about the companies which submitted a statement compared to those who simply ignored my emails and phone calls. When we included those statements on-air or on our website, we often began, “Company XYZ released the following statement …” The company’s own statement led us to ultimately identify the business.
Plenty of news stations identify the subjects of their investigative reports whether the company agrees to comment or not. But a recent network news investigation again reminded me of this scenario. A company, which hired us for crisis communications, brought the story to my attention. (To learn more about our experience, read Part 1 of our blog series.) The story put several companies in a bad light. If you looked carefully or paused the video and closely inspected it, you might catch information identifying the companies. But the reporter did not identify the companies in his voice over. If fact, he didn’t even identify on-air the company that gave a statement. But when the news network posted the company’s entire statement on its website, I learned the name of business.
When I aired investigative reports and asked companies for comment, a business never asked me, “Does the news story in any way identify my company?” If I answered no, a business owner might wonder what motive he or she might have to self-identify himself by releasing a statement.
“Doing the right thing” might be a motive to release a statement in this case. But when companies are in damage-control mode, owners might legitimately ask themselves why they should self-identify themselves when the TV station is not.
A news story may identity a company many ways. The story could:
- Name the company
- Show employees that will identify the company
- Show video that will identify the company
- Release other, unknown information that will identify the company.
Companies should ask journalists if their story will identify their businesses in any of the above ways or in another fashion we might not be thinking of. The answers to these questions alone may not provide an answer about whether to grant an interview or release a statement. But the answers would give a company a much clearer picture of what type of PR crisis they might or might not be facing.
Tags: business owner, crisis communications, interview, investigative report, investigative reports, journalist, journalists, media, network news, news, news network, news stations, news story, PR, reporter, TV station, video
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Monday, July 16th, 2012
I received a call late in the afternoon. A network newscast broadcasted an investigative report, which placed several companies in a bad light. The business owner who called us for help has a contract with one of those companies, and he worried the investigative report would also negatively impact him.
The news story did not name company names. One of the companies supplied the reporter with a statement. The reporter included portions of the statement in the story and the full statement online. The statement online included the company’s name.
My client received two angry phone calls. The callers made a connection between his business and a company seen in the story. He tried returning the angry phone calls but no one answered.
I’ve aired many investigative stories similar to the one in question. I’m a big proponent of responding to a reporter’s request for comment. In fact, I’m a huge proponent of granting the reporter an interview, not simply giving a statement. In most cases, a company or its spokesperson should be able to handle a tough interview rather than only issue a statement. Plus, providing an interview is a strategic way to get a reporter to tell more of your side of the story.
But this case was different. The news network was not asking my client for comment. The story never named on-air the companies in question. The reporter did not question my client’s actions. My client simply had a contract with the company in question and this national newscast only led two people to make the behind-the-scenes business connection. The angry callers blamed my client for behavior he had nothing to do with. And the angry callers were not key business relationships. When I worked as an investigative reporter at the Fox station in Phoenix, members of the public often scolded me for reasons related to Fox News Channel. I didn’t work for Fox News Channel. But some people focused on the fact the Fox station in Phoenix and Fox News Channel belonged to the same family of businesses and I was an easy target.
My client’s initial emotional reaction was to release a statement and explain himself. But releasing a statement would draw unnecessary attention to his business. No one accused him of anything. In fact, almost no one knew about his contract with the company in the news story. Ultimately, we provided him with tools to handle any future calls. We also helped him communicate to other companies under contract the nature of the news story and the importance of providing excellent service. Finally, we agreed to monitor the situation in case circumstances changed.
Responding to negative reports is important both in traditional and social media. But don’t feel obligated to open the verbal floodgates just because your brother got in trouble and no one is pointing a finger at you. Responding quickly is important, but responding too quickly without thinking matters through can make the case unnecessarily complicated.
Tags: crisis communications, interview, investigative report, investigative reporter, media, national news, national newscast, news, news network, news story, newscast, Phoenix, PR, Social Media, spokesperson
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 »
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 »
Monday, June 11th, 2012
Someone once attributed to a Hollywood director a quote I often repeat in so many words. I don’t remember what was exactly said, but the message is don’t overshoot a scene simply because someone built one heck of a set. In other words, don’t try too hard to get your money’s worth. Show off your set too much and you might bore your audience to the exits.
I often applied this rule when putting together long form special reports for the news. The story often was my idea. I invested a lot of research. I interviewed several people. We shot several days of video. We suddenly were staring at a five-minute news story. Chances are viewers would not be as enthralled with the topic as I. They weren’t as close to the project. So I forced myself to cut down those stories, for example, to three minutes. That wasn’t easy. I eliminated video and sometimes entire interviews. But in the end, I assumed a good five-minute story would transform into an excellent three-minute one.
A recent conversation with a client reminded me once again about that Hollywood quote I can’t quite remember. We are working on several internal videos for employees and we had just finished a shoot with the last executive. As we worked together to capture the final necessary shots to go along with the script, the client wondered if we could simplify the message by cutting out a big chunk of our original idea. And he might be exactly right. Significantly shortening the video might provide just enough information to relay the key points to employees. Maybe the rest we could do without.
Consider videos more of a headline than a two-page, in-depth newspaper story. Most viewers will probably only take away a couple of key points and not remember the finer details. Why not focus more energy on those key points and make people want more instead of less? Include a website or call to action to direct interested viewers to more details. You can always shoot a series of videos instead of just one. A longer video might include more information, but it won’t mean much if people are sleeping or easily distracted.
Tags: interview, news, news story, PR, video, video marketing, video production, video production companies, video production company, videographer, videography
Posted in Video | No Comments »
Thursday, April 19th, 2012
- Pick up the phone: My phone rang. I didn’t recognize the number and considered ignoring it. Was another financial expert calling to persuade me to allow him to manage my money after talking to him for only three minutes? I picked up the phone. A reporter was calling. He wanted to talk to people who were inspired to start their own businesses by the economy.
- Make time: The journalist called as I was walking out the door. I could have explained I was busy. I didn’t. Cell phones have a cool feature: They allow you to continue calls without a wire staying connected to the wall. Cell phones have speakerphones. You can drive somewhere, with caution, while continuing a conversation. My phone’s battery was running low. I could have told the journalist to call back. I didn’t. I gave him a new number to call. His battery was low, too, and he needed to call back in about 20 minutes. When I called people for interviews when I reported on TV, individuals and big companies gave me countless excuses on why they couldn’t talk to me. (My favorite excuse was how bringing a camera in their store would disrupt customers.) Make yourself available. If people told me they didn’t have time to talk to me for a news story, I moved on to the next business to interview. I was on a deadline. I didn’t have time to wait and make myself convenient for someone’s schedule. If you want media attention, re-arrange your schedule. Do some quick thinking. Don’t miss an opportunity.
- Leave the shampoo in your hair: When the reporter called back later, I was in the shower, my hair full of shampoo. I turned off the water, left the shampoo in my hair and wiped the suds away from my forehead so they didn’t drip into my eyes or onto the cell phone while I tried to put together coherent sentences. I didn’t tell the reporter to call back. He was on a deadline.
- Be open: I didn’t fully enjoy my last two years as a TV reporter. The environment and the job were no longer for me. I didn’t sugarcoat this. Anyone can draw a pretty picture. PR pros and CEOs shoveled a lot of BS my way when I asked questions. Be transparent on why you made the decisions you made. Being honest makes you real. Being real makes you more interesting.
- Be personable: Some people are very guarded when talking to bloggers or journalists. They sound more like robots than humans. Be personable. I talked to this journalist about his family. We discussed issues important to us. We talked about journalism. I learned he once lived in the same city as Loren. I found out he once lived near where I grew up. Again, be real.
- Don’t ignore small media: The journalist may have interviewed me for a story so small, readers may need a magnifying glass. I don’t care. When I was a TV journalist, I sometimes covered great stories I found in smaller publications. You may see a story yourself the first time on the network news or written by the Associated Press, but sometimes those reports were first covered by journalists in smaller markets. And small blogs, publications or media outlets all have loyal readers, viewers and listeners. You’re not too big for small media … even if your hair is full of shampoo.
Tags: Associated Press, bloggers, blogs, ceo, interview, journalism, journalist, journalists, media, media training, news, news story, PR, PR pro, PR pros, press, reporter, tv reporter
Posted in Media Relations, Media Training, Public Relations | 1 Comment »
