Well before blogs were even contemplated, I wrote this short essay in 2003 on the importance of working with the news media during risk and crisis events. I’m pretty sure that I sent it to some of my clients at the time, just to let them know that I was learning something during my doctoral studies at Syracuse University. Just as in the crisis leadership article I posted earlier, it is obvious that this article was written before the influence of social media. Let me know what you think. Are my five steps still valid?
The news media and risk issues: 5 Key Steps That You Need to Know (2003).
The news media are a powerful and important force within society. Some researchers have called the media the world’s main source of information and knowledge (Rogers, 1996), others see the media as agents of social control (Shoemaker, 1984) , while still others view them as the champion of social problems (Yanovitzky & Bennett, 1999). Overall, the media are in a pivotal place to prompt social change either through helping to set the political agenda or by keeping issues and groups out of the public discussion.
Because the media are the channels through which information from environmental organizations will pass to their key audiences, it is essential that your organization become a recognized and dependable force in promoting your views on risk issues. According to Shoemaker (1991), interested groups can do this by becoming a formidable fore in the gatekeeping process; providing information and messages as a regular part of the media routine and as a result becoming a credible source of ongoing information for the media.
The media can greatly influence the nature, development, and ultimate success of an environmental risk issue. According to Ball-Rokeach, Power, Guthrie, and Waring (1990), interested groups need the media more than the media need them. Even with the explosion of the Internet, a more direct method of communicating with environmental stakeholders and policy makers, the mass media remain ” the primary link between the public and the political system” (p. 254).
Given that “most Americans know what they know about the environment from watching television news and reading newspapers” (Salomone, Greenberg, Sandman & Sachsman, 1990, p. 117), and furthermore, that much of what most people discuss about risk issues comes from the media, it is important for us to learn how to work with the media to bring environmental information to the public (Shanahan, Morgan, & Stenbjerre, 1997; Archibald, 1999).
Step 1: This is your issue!
There is no one in the world that knows your issue better than you do. That’s the good news. The bad news is, there is no one in the world that knows your issue better than you do! Our primary challenge during risk controversies is to distill a complex, technical issue into a manageable and meaningful media message. Environmental risk issues that have been managed effectively in the public arena have often been the result of a detailed, strategic media relations approach. The first step for any successful campaign is to do your homework – to understand how your issue fits within the current political and public landscape. The easiest way to achieve this understanding is to perform an external issues analysis by conducting “top-line” research with a systematic sample of your key stakeholder groups and target media outlets. What do they know about your organization? What kind of information are they looking for? How would they like to receive information from you? What other issues are competing for their attention. The purpose of this step is to begin to frame your issue in the eyes and ears of your audience. This is your opportunity to begin to develop your message in a way that will be acceptable and ultimately received by those groups that could eventually
determine the success or failure of your campaign. Remember, this takes time and starting this program well in advance of the public release of your issue is critical – think months and weeks and not days and hours and you will establish a solid issue foundation.
Step 2: Media Relationships
The media have a constitutionally guaranteed role to play in all political and risk issues: we may not like the job they are doing or believe that they are well-equipped to communicate about risk issues, but in reality, they are here to stay. Once we come to grips with their place in the communication of risk issues, we can begin to think more clearly about how and when to work with the media to bring our issues to the public. It’s a basic tenant of human relation but it’s one that we sometimes fail to think about during risk controversies: the public and the media will believe you and see you as a credible source if they know you and have an ongoing relationship with you. Obviously, this is a difficult and somewhat challenging step but in today’s 24/7 media world, you have something that the media needs… information. Think of it as a quid pro quo type of system. You need them to carry your message to the public, and they need your information. But they need that information in a manner, style and at a time that bestsuits their needs. Your objective is to develop, as best as you can, working relationships with those journalists that may cover your issue: local, regional, national, broadcast, print and electronic. It takes time and research to find them and develop relations with them, but in the end, when your issue is hitting the public arena, it ‘ s better to systematically deliver your message to reporters who have a working knowledge of your issue and know where they can reach you for comment.
Step 3: What’s Your Message
Researchers today tell us that the average consumer is inundated by more than 3,000 different messages each day. From television commercials, to newspaper ads, to political messages, to our own personal “to do’s” we are bombarded by products, services and family members that want a share of our mind. In this competitive environment, your message needs to be able to break through this clutter in order to frame your position and set the agenda for the media and the public. Refining your message into an easily understandable headline is both difficult and complex. What is your objective: awareness… creating a cognitive linkage between your message and the public as a way of increasing knowledge of your issue; appreciation … while your audience maybe aware of your position, do they understand it and are they ready to form an opinion about your message; and finally, are you attempting to create an action or change a behavior through your message. Your message can only focus on one of these objectives and if you want your audience to do something with your message the n they first need to be aware of your position and second must have an appreciation for your message in relation to all the other messages that are bombarding them. These two steps are critical before they will eventually decide to act on your message.
Step 4: Anticipation, Practice and Performance
Lights, camera and… that’s right, today’s media-centered, consumer world looks at times like the Hollywood images that the entertainment industry continually projects to us. Think about the media vortex surrounding the Columbia disaster, the Beltway Sniper, the nightclub fires, and the kidnapping and disappearances of young women in recent years. The media’s ability to broadcast a disaster or an issue from any part of the world in a relatively short period of time magnifies our need to always be ready. The media’s satellite technology can beam images and comments to millions of television sets in just minutes and as such, you and your organization must be prepared to deal with the potential media hordes. I remember working with a small town on a water contamination issue, regularly briefing more than 150 journalists from throughout North America and Europe. More than 90 percent of these journalists had never visited this small town before and probably haven’t been back in the years since the crisis. You need to establish a media management system so that you are ready for the onslaught of journalist, whether you are in control of the announcement or reacting to a crisis event. Identify the most capable spokespeople and regularly train them on your key messages and their ability to respond to, what at times seems like, an unruly mob. Your spokesperson should be able to effectively communicate your message in a confident, credible and empathetic manner. Unfortunately, their credibility and the credibility of your organization will be judged by their performance under the spotlight.
Step 5: Become A Student of Media Relations
There are literally thousands of books, videotapes, websites and consultants that can keep you up to date on the do’s and don’ts of effective media relations. Better yet, there are hundreds of minutes of daily newscasts that can provide you with the ability to critique, review and assess the most effective media performances on television. Look, listen and think about the spokespeople that you see on the news. What’s their message? How well were they able to articulate the message? How did they respond to difficult questions? Were they prepared for the media interview? If you were in their shoes, what would you do differently?
Furthermore, visit any bookstore – in person or on the web, and search for books on media training skills. Read them and take their advice to heart. Unfortunately, it won’t be as easy as the books make it out to be. Effective media relations take time, practice and skill to implement. If you want a more hands-on approach to skills building, hire a media-training specialist, someone who has worked with risk issues, and have them train you and your team. I have found that using outside experts is a cost-effective approach to building the critical skills that enable organizations to effectively and efficiently manage risk issues in the media.
When all is said and done though, you and your organization must be comfortable participants in the media arena, therefore you need to develop the plan that best meets your goals and objectives while ensuring that you are prepared to successfully manage the outcome.
Archibald, E. (1999). Problems with environmental reporting: Perspectives of daily newspaper reporters. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30, 27-32.
Ball-Rokeach, S.J., Power, G.J., Guthrie, K.K., & Waring, H.R. (1990). Value-framing abortion in the United States: An application of media system dependency theory. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 249-273.
Rogers, E.M. (1996). The field of health communication today: An up-to-date report.Journal of Health Communication, I, 15-23.
Salome, K.L., Greenberg, M.R., Sandman, P.M., & Sachsman, D.B. (1990). A question of quality: How journalists and news sources evaluate coverage of environmental risk. Journal of Communication, 40, 117-129.
Shanahan, J. Morgan, M., & Stenbjene, M. (1997). Green or Brown? Television and the cultivation of environmental concern. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 4I, 305-323.
Shoemaker, P.J. (1984). Media treatment of deviant political groups. Journalism Quarterly, 61, 66-75, 82.
Shoemaker, P.J. (1991). Gatekeeping. Newbury, CA: Sage.
Yanovitzky, I., & Bennett, C. (I 999). Media attention, institutional response and health behavior change. Communication Research, 26, 429-453.