I have to be careful how I write this next entry. Don't want to make any PR flack upset with me. But let's face it: the media's relationship with public relations teams can be...challenging. And I'm sure the public relations teams thoughts of the media aren't exactly peachy either. Dare I say: love/hate.
Don't get me wrong, there are some fantastic PR people out there. I'd argue the majority are actually pretty good. But there are also some that we, as reporters, hate dealing with. It's not even that they're bad people. Sometimes, it's just a matter of "policy" that gets in the way.
Let me give you an example. I hear it all the time how, in the old days, you could call up anyone to get comment on something and there would be no repercussions for doing so. Those same people you used to call now say that the reporter must "call the media relations team" first and they will set up the interview. In some cases, that same team will ask for your questions before you're even allowed to ask. Which is kind of difficult as a lot of time, our questions will be based on what the answer is to the question before. You see, I've always viewed an "interview" as a "conversation". The "story" is what comes out of that conversation. Pretty simple stuff.
When dealing with some PR people, the response to my questions can sometimes be funny. My favorite line is "I don't see how that's a story". You might as well be saying "you have no idea how much of a story this will become if you dig deep enough". My approach is pretty simple: if people are talking about it, it's probably worth checking into. The general lack of understanding of radio is sometimes baffling too. The line is always "when's your deadline?" Ummmm...how about "now"? Radio is about as instant as you can get. When you have legitimate breaking news, radio is where people turn to for facts-based news (no disrespect to social media here, but rumours spread like wildfire there, whereas traditional media still has its checks and balances, but that's a different story for a different day). So by delaying your response, you're only making it more difficult for our listeners (aka people affected by the situation) to get the information they need.
An interesting example of this is rural RCMP detachments. I had one situation a few years ago where listeners told us about a plane crash. We called to confirm it but the spokesperson at the time (who is no longer employed by the RCMP) told us "I don't know what you're talking about." So we went to the area where we were told it happened. As we entered the scene, guess who happened to be there? The officer/flack. She was a little more forthcoming with information at that point. I will say the situation with the RCMP has been a lot better in Southern Alberta since then with Patrick Webb (who just recently retired). We also have situations where the team will say "a release is being emailed". That's all well and good but, for radio purposes, we'd like to get some audio. And you know, ask some questions. There is a fine line between getting the information out there and controlling the message.
Now here's where things get a little shaky. Can we call out an organization for having shotty media relations practices? To a certain extent perhaps. On election night, the Wildrose Party had a "lottery" to determine order of one-on-one interviews with leader Danielle Smith after the votes were tallied. We were under the impression this would happen win or lose. But when they lost, we were suddenly told that the one-on-ones would only happen if they won. They even said they wouldn't put her into a "scrum" (those situations where you see a bunch of microphones in front of someone's face and me in the background of the TV shots looking serious). A few of us went on-air/online to point this out and half an hour later, an impromptu scrum was held. But in the past, there's been similar situations, then when you call them a few weeks later to talk about another story, they say they're not granting the interview request because of what you've said.
It can be like walking on eggshells sometimes. Some call it "playing the game". But both sides of this argument need to understand one thing: we need each other. Public/media relations people need the media to get "the message" out there and in a timely fashion. And media needs public/media relations people in order to get the information and, eventually, the story. It's our listeners/viewers/readers (aka people affected by what's going on) that will win once everyone figures all of this out.
No comments:
Post a Comment