For anyone that chooses, or is obligated to speak to media reporters, there's a common misconception when telling certain reporters that what you are saying is "off the record"and that it will actually be kept off the record.
Even when there's an exchange of email correspondences in which the reporter agrees to keep it off the record, and/or to not mention you as the source. Dancing with reporters is about as tricky as dancing with Edward Scissorshands. Instead of a two-step, it can become a double-cross.
Sure, you want to help get a 'story' out there, and you want your 'slant' to be incorporated--but you'd rather not have your name mentioned.
When you do that, don't forget that reporters are more determined to have their slant dominate the article. So, the odds are high that anything you say will be taken out of context. Sometimes the reporter does that intentionally; that's called muckracking. Sometimes the reporter does it because you have too much to say, and they decide which comments are most relevant or most poignant.
Most reporters honor the protocol of "off the record". Some get confused.
For example, NYT's Joe Nocera is finding himself in a bit of conundrum in his coverage of Steve Jobs, as evidenced in recent columns that he's written, including his mention of "off the record" comments that Jobs made with regard to his health. Dicey stuff. Both for Jobs, one of the most prominent CEO's in the world, and for Nocera.
Some reporters blatantly violate the code of honor regarding "off the record".
Case in point, a publication called Wall Street Letter. One of their reporters was 'tipped' via email about a story, and through great perseverance, the reporter actually identified the source, including phone #, and followed up to solicit a comment from the tipster.
In the telephone call with the source, and subsequent email exchanges, the reporter (Alexandra "Allie" Zendrian) acknowledged and agreed to keep the 'source' name out of the story. The next day, the publication ran a story that was not only completely out of context, but in addition to identifying the source's name and company, the reporter actually wrote, " when asked, [source] had no comment..."
What the source had actually said to the reporter was, "I won't comment on the record, and I won't engage in a conversation and share with you the tidbits if you publish my name.." The reporter agreed to the terms of engagement, and documented that agreement in a follow up email.
The most telling part of the story was when the tipster discovered the article online and sent an email to the reporter, as well as the senior editor and the publisher in an effort to extract a explanation for the 'outting'. Executives at Wall Street Letter had no comment..
In this case, it wasn't a "disaster" for the tipster, and some would say 'any news is good news' when you're trying to get a mention in the media. The particular publication is not widely read, and given the state of Wall Street, its fair to guess that their paid subscriber base and readership (securities industry traders and brokers) is down to a few hundred people. And few of their readers know, or actually care about the source being "outted".
PR/IR and Marcomm Rules to Remember:
Rule 1. Unless you have an existing relationship with a specific reporter, or have otherwise been given to understand they are generally honorable, be circumspect about what you say to them.
Rule 2. If executing a "guerrila"PR or IR tactic via emails to reporters as a means of stimulating interest in a story, but don't want to be identified as the 'tipster', don't use an email address that can be easily traced back to you.
For example, if you've previously published a document on the internet that incorporates your email address (a resume for example), your email address can be easily Googled, and in turn, your identity is easily unmasked. Even if you think you've removed the document from the internet. Once its up there, it stays up there.
That said, we know that even the very best Marcomm Gurus forget some of the basic rules of engagement. This 'case study' should help remind you not to forget.
1 comment:
Brilliant observations!
Post a Comment