Media Training Can You Afford NOT to Be Prepared When Reporters Come Calling?

Dec 10, 2019

7 min

Peter Evans


Want to see someone in a respected position of power throw away a career in all of about two minutes? Stephen Duckett was an expert in his field. Respected globally. Until this…


Watch this exchange



Duckett wasn’t prepared to deal with media. He paid a serious professional price and left a lesson for us all to learn from. In fact, his exchange is used by a lot of media trainers on exactly what not to do in a  crisis situation.


As a former news producer, I remember scrambling to find an expert opinion or perspective when news was breaking. If a story required explanation and when it was beyond the grasp of even the brightest of reporters we needed the help of supporting sources.  They were critical in helping explain, validate, and ideally, break down just what was going on to our audiences at home.


When an outbreak struck, we needed an epidemiologist. When a rare earthquake shook the region, the search for a seismologist was on.


Finding the expert wasn’t usually the problem. We had local universities, colleges, and health care facilities within arm’s reach.


However, finding an expert who could effectively speak on camera often was. Our goal was to keep people from turning the channel – so boring, highly technical speaking experts simply wouldn’t do it for us.


When I worked in TV, we needed someone who could explain a complex subject, in layman’s terms, and in sound bites of about 15 seconds. It may not seem like much, but it is a lot to ask. Explaining high level content is not easy, but the reality is that your audience needs complex subjects explained in the simplest of ways. To do this right, it requires understanding the roles and goals of media and media training.


Anyone who will be representing an organization, institution, or corporation needs some form of coaching. It’s a must-have requirement for most CEOs and politicians. Turn on your news at just about any hour of the day, and you can easily tell who has been properly prepared and trained and who hasn’t. It doesn’t happen organically. It takes work. It takes expert coaching.


Media-friendly speakers bolster credibility and get noticed. In times of a crisis, a trained speaker may be the missing piece that can make or break a situation a reputation.


Those who are not trained stick out—in a very bad way. They stammer, evade questions, ramble and are usually incoherent. If the task is mainly to describe a current situation, an untrained expert may ramble or speak hundreds of feet over the head of the average person. If there’s a crisis at hand—a tragedy, a scandal, a lawsuit or worse—an untrained speaker risks making a bad situation worse.


Take a look back to July of 2013—an out-of-control train carrying crude oil exploded, destroying the downtown section of Lac Megantic, in Quebec, Canada. Thirty buildings were leveled, killing 47 people. In this small town, everybody knew somebody who was killed.


Edward Burkhardt, president of Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway Inc. arrived shortly after the explosion. He was the near-perfect storm—an untrained, and likely uncoachable leader. He was clearly in distress, rattled, arrogant, and unprepared. He fixed blame at the worst possible time, blaming the train’s engineer and the local fire department.


A journalist asked how much he was worth. A town is destroyed, the world is watching, close to four dozen people are dead, and his reply was, “I’m worth a lot less now than I was last week.”


Proper media training and coaching would not have prevented the horrible tragedy, but knowing how to speak during such a high-stress situation and knowing what questions to expect might have mitigated the visceral reaction of residents, industry and government officials.


As it stands, Edward Burkhardt and the company, no matter how successful either had been in the past, are now forever associated with that interview.


Conway Fraser worked for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for almost 20 years. He’s a Gemini award-winning journalist who worked as a national reporter and investigative journalist. These days, he specializes in strategic and crisis communications as well as media coaching. Conway’s worked with some of Canada’s top corporate executives, academic leaders, and politicians.



In both journalism and in PR, he has seen executives who have spent decades building a reputation only to have it destroyed in moments because they weren’t prepared to deal with the media. They’ve either never received media coaching or, Conway says, have taken mandatory training but were never further invested in. In other words, he says, they thought they didn’t need media training and were only taking it to appease the Board or ownership.


“Proper media coaching isn’t just about knowing how to spew a main message, use effective body language or bridge away from challenging questions,” Conway says, “In my sessions I also teach my clients about the media, what their job is like, what a day is like for a reporter, what they need from you and how to respect their role. If anyone doubts the value of that, they’re playing with fire. Ask Stephen Duckett.”


Natalie Duddridge is a reporter for NY1. I worked with Natalie years ago in Canada at the start of her career. Natalie’s talent as a journalist has taken her to Ottawa (Canada’s capital), Toronto, and most recently, New York.


New York sits at the top (sorry L.A.) of media markets in the United States. It has a huge audience of about 10 million people and it is hands down the most competitive media game on the continent.



Reporters in these markets never get to rest. They’re either chasing stories, or when they are covering a story they had better have an angle, source, or expert that the others do not. And when you are in a race with at least six other news outlets, standing out isn’t easy.


Finding experts and having them ‘camera’ or ‘microphone’ ready is a must.


As Natalie explained to me, getting an expert for a story is absolutely crucial. In a market as diverse as New York City, those experts can range from police to politicians, to health and education officials, to scientists and artists.


Natalie also lent some great perspective on just how a reporter puts together a story and how your expert needs to know that news is also about storytelling and not just details.



“Last week I did a story about the heroin epidemic plaguing the Borough of Staten Island,” Natalie explained. “We like to begin our stories with a human element, in this case a recovering drug addict. In addition to his personal opinions and insight about how to prevent and slow the opioid crisis in the region, we also reached out to the local Drug Rehabilitation Center and interviewed a doctor as well as a therapist. We also interviewed the Staten Island District Attorney about the work he’s doing with New York State Governor to get more dollars for a drug task force to do everything from put more money into preventative education, build rehab centers, add police, fund additional assistant district attorneys to process criminal cases.”


If you were counting, you can see she spoke with three key experts on the subject of the story. Each was essential in the reporting process.


“For this story we featured several different experts on varying opinions on how this current drug crisis should be dealt with. All of the facts, stats and data for this story were based on the officials and experts we contacted.”


Being prepared and knowing what the reporter wants are also ideal elements in conveying the right message. For TV, short, smart, and to-the-point responses work best.


“We need a 10 to 15 second sound bite that is ideally informative and clear, and in some cases entertaining,” Duddridge told me. “When I am making calls to experts, I essentially do a pre-interview over the phone to hear how clearly they can explain a topic. If they are great at breaking down studies and terms into focused ideas that are concise and fit into a two-minute story, our job as reporters is so much easier.”


A win/win scenario. Your message is delivered, your institution and experts are promoted and the reporter files a great story.


It all seems simple.


But it’s not.


It takes training and preparation. If you are going to offer up your experts for an interview, they need to be ready.


Media training takes time, it costs money – but it’s an investment in your staff and your institution. As we learned from the example above, not knowing how to answer, interact, and respond to media can be devastating. Performing under pressure only succeeds with practice and training.


If your experts are media trained the reward will always outweigh the risk.



Here are a few tips:


Get media trained – Use a professional media coach. It costs money, but the professional development, readiness, comfort, and ability to deliver will pay off ten-fold.


Media-friendly experts get noticed – When your expert is on the news, people see them. They are representing your institution, so think about what this means for your credibility and recruiting potential.


You never get a second chance at a first impression – An old, clichéd saying, but it’s true. A weak speaker who comes across poorly imprints a negative impression on viewers, peers and your institution as a whole. It’s amateur hour, and it doesn’t need to be.


Friends for life – Once you prove yourself as a worthy and media-friendly source, the media will keep coming back. Experts who can provide journalists with the information, perspective, and sound bites they need are not only appreciated but noticed and remembered by all media. Once you have established yourself as a reliable source, expect the reporters to come calling time and time again.


Dividends – Every story where your expert looks good is positive earned media. Getting on NBC, CBS, FOX or any other nightly newscast is a huge win for your Communications Department. It’s exposure, promotion, and advertising—and it’s free.  


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