Tag Archives: media exposure

4 Media Relations Lessons…Learned the Hard Way

Tripped up again…by the “When did you stop beating your wife?”​ question.

Media relations (or press relations) involves risks and consequences that can quickly derail any career, either as a corporate executive or PR agency rep. A misquote can sink a company’s stock price. An innocent “puff piece” can turn out to be an exposé that embarrasses your CEO. An insensitive comment on camera can spark a customer boycott.

Over the course of my career – as an in-house staff member, and as a PR flack for hire – I’ve received several permanent scars, while attempting to generate positive coverage, and while defending against negative reporting. Some of those media scars have been self-inflicted; others were caused by journalists who often play by their own set of rules.

Here are four lessons I’ve learned from working with the press:

1. A Reporter Can Never Be a Trusted Friend.

As spokesperson for the Options Division of the American Stock Exchange, I frequently spoke with a Chicago Sun-Times reporter who covered news related to the Chicago Board Options Exchange. At that time, the CBOE had a significantly greater number of options listings compared with the Amex, but a small number of listings were traded on both exchanges. He considered the competition for market share involving those few listings to be newsworthy.

Our weekly conversations were always friendly. Discussion topics ranged from baseball to poetry, and always ended with him asking me for a comment about market share, with me declining. After several months of weekly conversations, and having exchanged college exploits and family details, I considered this reporter a friend. Tired of declining to comment on his market share issue so many times, I finally said to him one day, “Why do you keep asking me that same dumb question? The CBOE is so much larger than the Amex, and the CBOE only trades options, so why is that a story?” He laughed and we hung up.

The next day, I was summoned to the Amex President’s office. He threw a copy of the Chicago Sun-Times in my lap. The headline of the business section read: AMEX OFFICIAL ADMITS CBOE SUPERIORITY. I expected to be fired on the spot, but instead (and to my great relief) he told me, “Don’t ever let that happen again.” I’ve never forgotten the lesson to always expect to see whatever you say (and sometimes things you didn’t say) in print. Nor have I forgotten my boss’s benevolence.

2. Some Reporters Have Personal Agendas

While representing a major chain of food stores as outside PR counsel, I brought in a Forbes reporter in hopes of having her write a company profile. The food chain had been doing very well, had an interesting story, and there was no negative news associated with the company. The reporter’s 2-hour interview with the CEO went very well. He answered all of her questions in a direct manner, and she did not present any questions that suggested an intention to write anything other than a positive story. The CEO winked at me on the way out the door, as if to say, “Nice job.”

Two weeks later, I picked up the phone, and the CEO screamed, “Have you seen the article in Forbes?” I said no, and he yelled, “When you read it, you’ll know why you’re fired!” He slammed down the phone.

I scrambled to get a copy of Forbes, and read what was a total hatchet job. The reporter had nothing positive to say about my client’s company. My fingers trembled with anger as I dialed the reporter. She picked up, and I asked her, “How could you possible write that story?” There was a long pause, then she said, “I didn’t like the way your client treated his secretary.” Then she hung up. That experience taught me that you can never count on positive coverage. Press relations is always a crap shoot.

3. Admit When You Don’t Know the Answer

As head of public relations at a very large financial services company, I spoke on a regular basis with seasoned journalists who always knew far more than I did about complex, arcane topics. I received a call one day from a Wall Street Journal reporter regarding a press release we had just issued involving a stock split. He asked me a question that I didn’t really understand, but my ego did not allow me to admit to him that I didn’t know the correct answer. His question was simple, requiring me to select one of two possible responses. Playing the odds, I picked one, hoping it was correct.

The next morning, in a flashback from my Amex days, the firm’s CEO walked into my office with a copy of the Wall Street Journal, asking who had spoken with the reporter who covered the stock split. I had picked the wrong response to the reporter’s question, and the error had been published. For a second time, I was lucky to keep my job, but groveled in the follow-up call to the reporter, asking for a clarification in the next issue. I’ve never made that same mistake, and now consider admission of ignorance a badge of courage.

4. A Reporter’s Ego Can Derail Fair Coverage

While representing a new advertising agency, I arranged an interview for the agency co-founders with a well-known New York Times columnist who covered their industry. My clients were elated at the prospect of being featured in such a respected, widely read column. But when the story appeared, some of the key facts regarding the agency were reported incorrectly.

I assured my clients that the columnist would print a clarification in his next column. I called him, and introduced myself, to which he responded, “I know why you’re calling me. And if you push for a clarification, I will never cover your client in my column again.” Offsetting this unpleasant incident, I’ve also had experiences with well-known journalists, including Dan Rather, who’ve kept their positions and egos from affecting their professionalism. 

In media relations you learn to expect surprises, and to roll with the punches. Career risk notwithstanding, you have the potential to educate target audiences, to shape opinion, and to create positive outcomes for your company or client. When those good things happen, the hard lessons you’ve learned and the scars you accumulated all seem worthwhile. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Investment-Related Publicity: How Clueless is Your Fund?

According to BNY Mellon’s most recent survey of Investor Relations (IR) practices worldwide, fewer than half of the nearly 700 respondents are using media relations to support their IR goals. More significantly, only 6% of that group included media exposure as a top IR goal.

Whether its reluctance to proactively pursue publicity (also called “earned media”) is based on cost, control, or misunderstanding of the function, the investment industry is failing to take advantage of one of the most powerful means to build investor awareness, third-party endorsement, and assets under management.

Here are some thoughts on how your fund can effectively leverage publicity:

More Publicity is Not Better: The term “media mentions” is broadly used by the investment industry to describe publicity, which implies that the sheer volume of exposure is beneficial. Even if your fund generates piles of press clippings, however, there are too many distractions within print, broadcast, and digital media channels to ensure that target audiences will ever notice, or be influenced by, any of those mentions. A media relations strategy driven by volume rather than substance is an expensive, zero-sum game.

Not All Publicity is Created Equal:  High-value media exposure puts an exclusive spotlight on your fund’s intellectual capital, underlying values or narrative, and typically allows you to control all or most of the content. On that basis, specific types of publicity — such as a firm profile written by a “friendly” journalist, or a one-on-one interview on relevant topics — are far more valuable than simply being mentioned or quoted (often with a competitor or two) in a news story, or providing a sound bite for CNBC.

Create Credibility Tools: The underlying value of media exposure lies in the inherent third-party endorsement that’s provided by a respected, objective media source. (This is why a Wall Street Journal article is more valuable than paid Wall Street Transcript coverage.)  Your goal is to generate media exposure that serves as ad hoc “credibility tools” for your firm, which can be used in your IR program to assure current investors, prospects and referral sources that you are a safe choice. If your publicity doesn’t make your fund’s marketing materials more believable, then the tactic will never have a connection to asset growth.

Plan Media Solicitations Last: Most media exposure is pursued in a haphazard, opportunistic manner. But to generate publicity that has inherent business value, you need to work backwards: first define what specific behavior or opinion you’re attempting to influence, and then determine what type(s) of media exposure will accomplish your goal. Only at that point are you prepared to solicit specific media opportunities that have the potential to drive measurable business outcomes.

Put Your Media Exposure to Work: Too often, media placements are passively hung on a website or a LinkedIn profile like a hunting trophy. But media exposure itself is never the goal; it’s only a means to an end, and must be put to work. Current and prospective investors, referral sources and other key audiences should be consistently reminded – through your positive media exposure – of who you are, what makes you different, and why they should invest with you. This is the tedious but critical step that most firms skip: maintaining a database of important contacts, and nurturing those relationships with those individuals by leveraging their media exposure to drive awareness and engagement.

Slice & Dice for Incremental ROI: In our digital age, there are online opportunities to gain additional mileage from the publicity you generate. For example, if you’ve scored a bylined article in a respected publication, initiate a discussion on the article’s topic within appropriate LinkedIn user groups, and attach a link to the published piece. Or use Twitter to promote your article’s link, by Tweeting (more than once) a provocative observation or quote from the piece to generate interest.

Funds that use media exposure effectively also understand the greatest limitation of the tactic: that no amount of publicity can compensate for an enterprise that lacks a strong value proposition, a clear sense of purpose, and underlying integrity. Without those cornerstones of brand reputation, publicity’s potential to expose a fund’s shortcomings will always represent a liability.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Research Integrity: The Achilles Heel of Content Marketing

The marketing profession has a reputation for sometimes using less than reliable market research to promote a point of view. And this marketer has been guilty of that sin.

Years ago, our insurance company client was introducing a new Directors & Officers liability insurance policy, and asked us to raise market awareness. With good intentions, but given no budget or time to perform proper market research, we interviewed a total of 6 corporate CEOs and board members to provide some validation to the underlying premise of our press release. The headline read: “Most Corporate Directors & Officers Believe They Are Not Protected Properly from Legal Risk.”

With very little expectation that a premise based on such shoddy research would qualify for exposure in the financial press, and dreading inquiries from journalists asking about our research methodology, the release went out. To our great surprise, we received no calls from reporters checking the facts, and the story was immediately picked up by two major wire services, and appeared as a news squib on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, followed by coverage in several business insurance trade publications.

Our client was overjoyed with the media exposure, but we felt less than honorable, and resolved that we would never use market research to promote a client’s product or service unless we believed the supporting methodology had sufficient rigor. And over the years we’ve lost work as a result.

Research integrity was an issue long before the internet became the platform for content marketing. Most often, your research-based news items would not be covered by respected media sources unless you ran the credibility gauntlet. Editors demanded your research methods and data, and had to be convinced that your study was objective and legitimate. Our very thin D&O liability research was a rare and risky exception…and perhaps a sign of things to come.

For well understood reasons, the “legitimate press” now has neither the manpower nor the time to dig deeply for validation of market research that supports content generated by organizations. The loss of this important filter, coupled with the explosion of online content, has created a marketing world in which sloppy, incomplete (and sometimes blatantly false) research generates news items that can go viral and become accepted wisdom. Pumping out content in volume has become far more important than creating high quality content that could withstand the scrutiny of a hard-nosed editor.

What this new world of content marketing means for individuals is simple: assume that all “research-based” information requires close scrutiny. Believe nothing at face value. If it’s important to your business strategy, or you intend to adopt the research to support your own point of view (or upcoming PowerPoint presentation), then you’ll need to become the hard-nosed editor who scrutinizes the original source; who looks at the sample size, respondents, questions asked, etc.; and who determines whether the research results legitimately support the conclusions.

What this new world of content integrity means to companies is more complex: assume that the “research-based” content that you produce is a reflection of your brand’s integrity. For the Marketing Department, this involves educating the corner office regarding the rigor, time and costs involved in market studies, surveys, research necessary to yield content worthy of customer-facing applications. For the corner office, this involves calculating whether the intended marketplace outcome is worth the necessary investment, and avoiding shortcuts.

Without the 4th Estate as the content gatekeeper, there is now far greater opportunity for companies to benefit from content marketing. And by not adopting the market research integrity standards that journalists long upheld, there are far more ways for companies to damage their brand through content marketing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized