United States: Smile, You´re on Television

When the cameras are rolling, it's usually because TV reporters smell blood. Be careful out there.

Television, while offering some opportunities for positive coverage, is unfortunately more likely to call a lawyer, or the client, when the story is unflattering, embarrassing, or scandalous.

None of us is a stranger to the broad-cast media’s propensity for negative coverage ("If it bleeds, it leads"). For example, during 10 of the past 11 years, murder rates in the United States have declined, yet television coverage of murders has gone up. As a result, the general impression is that we live in a more violent society now than we did a decade ago.

If your client has some bad news they do not yet want made public, if the outcome of a conflict is still in doubt, if another party stands to gain a crucial advantage, there is a greater likelihood that reporters are interested in the story right now, long before you have tied up all the client’s loose ends. When you have finally gotten the job done to your client’s satisfaction, the story immediately loses any real interest for TV reporters. The conflict, the life-blood of television, is over.

But when the television reporters do call, the stakes at that moment are probably much higher than what is at risk in the courtroom.

Alas, if you want to play their game, you have to play by their rules. And those rules are guided by fundamental objectives that have less to do with journalistic integrity or fair play—regardless of the reporter’s intent—than with the simple dictates of the entertainment industry. Even programs with the word news in their title are largely about show biz.

Last month, for example, the Associated Press news wires ran a story for several days about allegations of Israeli atrocities against Palestinian civilians in Jenin. When the allegations proved to be untrue, the AP stopped reporting the story. A major television network, on the other hand, which got its story from the AP, ran the story for two more weeks before pulling it. Why? Because the TV industry is guided by the Napoleonic Code. Once a story has the appearance of authenticity, it may be necessary to prove that it is not true in order to win acquittal.

Saying "no comment" to a television reporter is a fine strategy if you wish to concede the entire broadcast to your opponent. Once television has decided something is newsworthy, simply ignoring the media will not make the story disappear. The key is to learn well the tactics to minimize damage to your client and maximize your communications strategy.

1. Less is more. The first difference between electronic and print media inter-views is the amount of information the reporter is willing to listen to and the amount of information that will get into the story. In most cases, print reporters have more time to put stories together, listen to interview subjects, and then incorporate what they learn and write suitably in-depth articles. Give these reporters all you’ve got.

By contrast, don’t fill in too much detail for electronic journalists unless asked to do so. If you are giving an inter-view during a "live" report situation, be aware that you may have an opportunity to get out only three or four sentences before you are cut off. So make your primary message point first and quickly move to Point Two if you can. In any event, always be ready to repeat Point One, especially if the reporter asks, "What is the most important thing the public should know?"

2. Quick, call in the experts. Most businesses do not have litigation public relations specialists in-house. Nonprofit organizations are even less prepared. Don’t wait until you are surrounded by camera crews to seek help.

Most in-house PR professionals are experts at positioning a product or idea, but they may be inexperienced in handling a crisis. Lawyers too often assume that their clients (especially large corporations) are ready and able to manage the media aspects of any situation they’re facing. More often than not, clients are caught flat-footed, at the most critical initial moments of a crisis. At that point, reporters have not yet formed their opinions and are still sorting out the good guys from the bad. The bad guys are usually perceived to be the ones who take longer to call the reporter back.

Before there’s even a whiff of a crisis, have the prophylaxis in place. Know who your crisis specialists are, build a trusted ongoing relationship with those specialists, and keep their cell-phone numbers on hand, to call at any hour. The future of your client may depend on it.

3. Say something. In those first few hectic moments, have a spokesperson return the call from the producer or reporter. Tell them, "We want to respond to your request for an interview, but we want to make sure we get you the right answers from the right people. Please be patient, let me know your questions, give me a number where I can reach you, and we will call you back as soon as possible. What is your deadline?"

If a TV crew has already arrived, politely ask them to leave the property unless you think you will very soon have something prepared to say. Request that, if they do stay on the property, they don’t talk to anyone until you come back out. Make it a win-win negotiation by promising more access to key people if they are cooperative.

4. You can negotiate. When negotiating with reporters for more time or to modify the story angle, understand that the vast majority of reporters want to report the facts accurately. Even cynical journalists chose their profession in part because they believe, and continue to believe, that the truth is sacred. However, their news judgment is sometimes influenced by deadlines or a competitive situation— or, in the case of broadcast media, the need to entertain.

Their instinct for the truth, even if it’s buried, is still a tool in your arsenal. So let reporters know that they need your input because it will make the story balanced, truthful, and fair. Reporters will run afoul of their bosses, and perhaps even the law, if it turns out that they intentionally rejected an opportunity to balance their story.

5. Speak in pictures. Al Gore lost the presidency the moment that television news showed pictures of hanging chads. If, in fact, African-American voters were prevented from voting, the Gore campaign needed a picture of this injustice. Instead, they lost in the first few days by letting television run with absurd images of allegedly defective ballots. If you are going to go on television, you must have a better picture than the other guy. What is your picture?

6. Use one spokesperson. Always try to centralize your message, using one credible voice. If there must be multiple spokespersons, make sure everyone has internalized the same story, so the media can’t pit one answer against another to compromise your position. The lawyer is the spokesperson of last resort, to be used only when fair treatment seems highly unlikely.

7. Play the "exclusive" card for leverage. The news business is one of the most competitive in the world. Reporters almost have to at least consider any opportunity to best the other networks.

If things aren’t going your way, you can always bargain with exclusive information. Here, you provide the reporter more access or information than any other reporter, provided she demonstrates receptivity to working with you to balance the story. Conversely, you can negotiate by gently threatening to hold a news conference or to give away information to other networks.

8. Knowledge is power. Be aware of what kind of reporter you are dealing with. Learn when the reporter’s deadlines are, what newscast he is trying to make, and what other news might upstage your angle. Find out whether you are dealing with a general assignment reporter, who may not know everything about your business, or a beat or investigative reporter, who may be tougher and more knowledgeable.

The advantage in dealing with the general assignment reporters is that they are usually easier to negotiate with. The disadvantage is that they might not care about alienating you, since they don’t cover your industry and don’t need you as an ongoing source. The advantages in dealing with a beat or investigative reporter are that they want more information that you may be able to provide, they need you as an ongoing source, and they want to establish themselves as the brand name journalist in your field. They need to be credible in your eyes, as you do in theirs.

9. Call the boss. If you feel you are not being treated fairly, or if you are being harassed, you can call an assignment editor or someone else further up the network’s food chain. But this is a last resort. Use all of these negotiating techniques before you go over the reporter’s head and possibly make that person an enemy for life. Be frank with the newsperson looming in front of you: Tell him that you are going to call the boss. But make sure the warning is off the record, or you’ll hear yourself making it on the evening news.

10. There can be a silver lining. Even the most threatening ambush or sudden crisis confrontation can be transformed into a positive experience for your firm or your client. If you are straightforward with news people, appreciate their job, and can establish a good relationship with them, you’ve maximized the possibility of balance or at least garnered yourself the benefit of the doubt.

In fact, it is not unreasonable to expect that, if you treat journalists fairly, the day may come—sooner rather than later— when they will be receptive to positive stories involving you or your clients. That will be an earned media opportunity worth its weight in gold.