Featured Post from ExpertFile

How To Tick Off Reporters

Dec 10, 2019

3 min

Peter Evans

During media training sessions, I share examples of easy ways to completely tick off a reporter — not as a tutorial — but as a cheeky way to say DO NOT do these things ever if you want to maintain any kind of healthy relationship with media.


Below you will find the ones that bothered me when I worked as a journalist.


Do any of these things, and you’re in for a world of fun.


1. Tell a reporter how to do their job – They love that. Criticize the subjective tone or focus of a story while you’re at it. Bonus points if you can do this while never mentioning that the story was technically 100% accurate.


2. Ask them why they didn’t cover your story – Reporters love justifying how they do their job and the decisions they’ve made — to PR people. If you ask with a little bit of attitude, all the better. They dig that.


3. Only be helpful when you want something from them – Reporters can’t tell when they have an artificial one-way relationship with a PR person. No need to invest a little time in getting to know them and THEIR needs a bit better.


4. Send them a media advisory right before an event – They will never guess that you don’t really want them there so you made it logistically impossible to get there on time without being able to say they weren’t invited.


5. Only communicate with them by email or text – Reporters love nothing more than a controlled message via email with no chance to ask a question. Sometimes (legal implications) you have no choice — but we’re talking about the other 99% of the time. An email is great for communicating tone, too.


6. Send out a media release with a contact who’s not available – It’s a great tactic. Send out a media release and put the person’s name at the bottom for media to contact. But, that person is not available. This screams “credible”.


7. Promise a scoop then hold a news conference – Nothing says “I love you” like a broken promise. And, chances are they communicated the promised scoop to their editor, too, so you now have double the fans in that newsroom.


8. Ban them from anything – If there’s one thing reporters truly love, it’s being punished for doing their jobs. So, ban them from news conferences or events. Lord knows they’d never tell anyone, especially on social media.


9. Tell them how lucky they are to get what they got – It certainly works with spouses — so why wouldn’t it work with reporters, right?


10. Make them go through access to Information – They understand that there is some information that will require access to information — but the true joy comes in having to go through the red tape to get something simple and easy.


11. Ask them if they’d ever come work for you in PR – Nothing says manipulation like false flattery and dangling a carrot. You better be serious.


12. Make them watch other people eat – What is more enjoyable than attending a Chamber luncheon or keynote address and watching people eat while you stand in the corner waiting for the speaker. No need for a media table at all.


13. Hold a news conference with inadequate audio/visual facilities – Today’s reporter has to listen to the speaker, ask questions, video, tweet, etc. all at the same time. Would an audio board and camera riser help? Sure. But, what’s one more thing for them to do at this point?


14. Call their boss to complain about them – This was one of my favourites — when the PR person would go over my head. I can assure you I didn’t hold a grudge and didn’t dig into your organization with a little more rigour.


15. Return their call at 4 p.m. – You’re busy so reporters completely understand if it took you 6 hours to get back to them just to say you can’t help. I’m sure the next time YOU want something, they’ll be equally as gracious.


There are others. There are many others. Feel free to share the ones you know of and perhaps we’ll compile another list in a few months.




Connect with:
Peter Evans

Peter Evans

Co-Founder & CEO

Recognized speaker on expertise marketing, technology and innovation

Media TrendsThought LeadershipMarketingTechnologyInnovation
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ExpertFile

Who Owns the World Cup? featured image

2 min

Who Owns the World Cup?

A plan to sell minority stakes in the commercial business surrounding FIFA competitions has triggered a major confrontation with European soccer. UEFA and its 55 national associations have reportedly agreed to boycott FIFA competitions while the proposal remains active. The dispute touches on sports governance, private investment, legal authority, media rights and the growing commercialization of the World Cup. Writing a story around this unprecedented event?  Connect with leading experts below for insight and commentary. Matthew Robinson — University of Delaware Robinson specializes in international sports governance, sport diplomacy and global sport development. His work is particularly relevant to the power struggle between FIFA, UEFA and national associations—and what a coordinated European boycott could mean for FIFA’s authority. Thomas Smith — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Smith studies sports economics, finance and the business of entertainment. Canprovide insight into the financial thinking behind FIFA’s proposal, including the trade-off between receiving capital now and sharing future World Cup revenues. Tim Derdenger — Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business Derdenger studies sports markets, sponsorship and the commercialization of major sporting events. His research is relevant to the potential effects on broadcast value, sponsors, fan interest and the overall World Cup brand. Klaas Baks — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Baks specializes in private equity, alternative investments, mergers and acquisitions and business valuation. His expertise can help explain how investors might value FIFA’s commercial assets and what they would typically expect from a minority investment. Andrew Brandt — Villanova University Brandt’s expertise spans sports law and sports business. That experience is relevant to questions about FIFA’s authority over its members, the legal consequences of a boycott and the potential impact on players, sponsors, broadcasters and host countries. Tim DeSchriver — University of Delaware DeSchriver researches sport finance, economics and marketing. His work can help frame the broader financial question: Is FIFA unlocking the value of its competitions, or giving up a share of long-term revenue in exchange for immediate funding? Reach out to these experts now for your next story.  All inquiries are monitored to ensure time-sensitive request and deadlines are met. For more FIFA and WorldCup information visit our World Cup Expert Hubs.

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth featured image

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value.  Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns featured image

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts?  Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

View all posts
Powered by