When you talk to the press

I was left speechless recently when I found out that a certain financial firm had tried to bribe an InvestmentNews reporter. A senior-level executive with the firm, along with the company’s public-relations officer, had agreed to an “on-the-record” interview with our reporter. The executive was very open and honest in the interview and apparently told the reporter more than the firm’s compliance department cared to share.

After the story was posted on the web, the reporter received a call from the firm’s PR person, who asked if we could remove from the story some of the information that the executive had shared.

The reporter was told that if we made the changes to the story, the firm would be willing to spend some money with us by purchasing reprints of the “revised” story.

Needless to say, we didn’t take the bribe, and we didn’t remove the sensitive data from the story.

The incident revealed to me the surprising lack of media relations savvy among supposedly sophisticated and knowledgeable businesspeople, including those in the financial services industry. Frankly, it isn’t difficult to deal successfully with the press; one need only make an effort to learn the ground rules.

Due in part to the famous book and movie “All the President’s Men,” the phrases “off the record,” “not for attribution” and “background only” have become very familiar — even if not everyone is quite sure what they mean.

“On the record,” of course, means that all the information supplied by a source and everything said can be used, with no caveats. The reporter is also free to quote the source by name.

“Off the record” is used when a source provides information that they tell the reporter is not to be mentioned in a story. This means they don’t want their name or anything they say to be used in the story or be told to any other sources.

“Not for attribution” is when all information can be used, but the source must not be directly quoted or identified.

“On background only” is when the information helps make it clear that the journalist is correct in the line of reporting and that the facts are accurate. However, the facts that the source gives, as well as the source’s identity, aren’t mentioned in the story.

Ground rules must be discussed and agreed upon before anyone starts talking.

Many people make the mistake of talking to a reporter for an hour or so and then saying, “Of course, you know all this is off the record.” Actually, at that point, it absolutely isn’t.

Another point to keep in mind is that a reporter or editor won’t allow someone who was interviewed to see, edit, correct or otherwise preview a story before it is published.

Don’t embarrass yourself by asking, or demanding for that matter, to see a story before it is published. Any source, though, is within bounds to ask to have his or her quotes read back by the reporter for accuracy before the story is published.

Recently, an executive who was interviewed by InvestmentNews threatened not to cooperate or to withhold data unless he could see the story before publication. All he did was antagonize the reporter.

In some cases, a reporter will ask a source to check part of a story for accuracy or to go over company numbers. However, that is where the line is drawn.

Additionally, with increased frequency, some financial services firms have decided simply to shut off all contact with the press.

These firms apparently feel that they have been wronged by the media, so they choose to ignore a journalist’s call. Such companies are cutting off their corporate nose to spite their face, particularly if events surrounding a firm require that it has continued interaction with the media.

Instead, officials should find a way to set the tone for continued relationships with the press by being as open as possible.

Confronted with any sort of stonewalling, a good reporter will do whatever needs to be done to get the information. Sometimes that may mean getting it from a less-than-reliable source than the firm in question.

I admit that the process by which we work isn’t flawless, but as the editor, I can assure you that our entire staff strives diligently to deliver in print and on our website news that is fair, well-reported and accurate.

Jim Pavia is the editor of InvestmentNews.

Related Topics: Just Thinking