You’ve also got a tiny handful of local residents—every ski town has ’em—who think that the projects are a bad idea (pollution, wetlands impacts, more kids in the local school system—the usual suspect reasons are trundled out). They contact the local paper two days before your permit hearing.
The headline? “Citizens vow to fight ski area expansion.” “They’re not interested in preserving the pristine environment or the values of our community,” says one of the malcontents. “All they want is money.” Another hints that selectboard support of the project shows that town officials are in your hip pocket. You’re given a few lines so the story can be “balanced,” but your quote amounts to blandishments about creating jobs during the construction cycle.
Welcome to the reality of modern media. The story is factually correct—some local residents are opposed. But the fact that they represent three percent of the local population isn’t mentioned in the story. Nor are the facts that your state of the art treatment plant is more than capable of managing the wastewater, that you’ve put clauses in the condo sales agreements prohibiting year-round residents, or that you have a wetlands mitigation plan approved by the state’s environmental protection agency. So why did you end up with this black eye?
To understand the answer—and improve your ability to deal with the press—you must first understand that Americans are busy people. Ads, emails, memos, phone calls—we’re barraged with messages. We just don’t have time for nuance and detail. So we’ve come to prefer our news in small, juicy bites.
Worse yet, Americans love controversy and titillation. Media outlets know this. The old saw “if it bleeds, it leads” was never more true than it is today.
Not long ago, people got news from a few select sources: local or regional newspapers, local television, Big Three network television and radio. But the revolution in broadcast and telecommunications opened the door to countless additional portals. Meanwhile, there are a finite number of stories that are important or shocking enough to be “news.”
That means competition for both stories and eyeballs, so journalistic style has evolved to take advantage of the American love of the lurid. The headline “Citizens vow to fight ski area expansion” is loaded with hot buttons and action words calculated to provoke a very specific reaction: Buy this newspaper! Not that other one. THIS one!
Different Outlets, Different Needs
Each type of media has its own set of challenges and it’s important to understand them.
Let’s start with print media. For ski areas, magazine and newspaper feature writers tend to be the easiest to deal with—and the ones most desired. These writers generally have rather loose deadlines and typically look for little more than a new twist on your resort’s story. Special interest publications are also heavily reliant on the advertising support of their subjects, so they rarely bite the hand that feeds them.
Generating favorable coverage from these writers is the primary focus of most resort PR managers. But business interruption incidents, environmental problems, expansion controversies, catastrophic accidents, human resources problems, crime, litigation—all of these things can and do occur at ski resorts. When they do, you’re suddenly dealing with a much less gentle media than the ski writers—and many resort PR managers and GMs lack the training and experience to get the best results.
Hard news reporters have stiff deadlines and often lack time to fully understand their subject matter before putting a story to bed. If the topic is particularly complex, all bets are off. Case in point: back when I managed communications for American Skiing Company, I spent a tremendous amount of time helping frantic small town newspaper and ski industry trade press reporters understand the contents of the company’s public filings. Most of them didn’t understand finance.
The Associated Press (AP) complicates matters. AP—the backbone of the American media—has hundreds of highly skilled, scrupulously objective staff reporters around the world. But AP also picks up stories from its affiliates under the assumption that these stories are as carefully researched as their own. That’s not always the case. As a result, error-filled stories originating at small dailies can end up verbatim on AP wires.
Television presents the greatest challenge. TV reporters and anchors face stunning deadline and ratings pressures. A TV reporter might be responsible for as many as three different stories a day—stories which must be assigned, researched, shot and edited (to say nothing of travel time). Dire promos start airing hours before the newscast, begging eyeballs to stay tuned.
If money is the lifeblood of TV news, fear is the central nervous system. A station in a ratings slide will quickly jettison air staff and bring in players who, theoretically, can generate better numbers. Given the American love of the tawdry, it’s no wonder TV news is so sensational.
Unlike print media, which at least attempts to explain a topic, TV strives for visceral reaction and empathy for “victims.” Turn on the “Today Show,” and see for yourself. Katie Couric often asks interview subjects how they feel, not what they know. That’s deliberate.
News radio tends to land somewhere between print and TV; it makes up for the lack of images with slightly better explanation. But except for National Public Radio, thirty seconds is a long story. So a typical news radio piece consists of a setup, two brief opposing quotes and a wrap. There’s not much time for detail.
On-line media outlets are generally run by newspapers or TV networks. Because the news is read, they’re typically closer in style to that of print journalism. Newspaper websites generally present their print stories verbatim, while those run by TV will tend to offer more detail than what gets aired.
Regardless of media type, the American press likes controversy and believes in the concept of “balanced reporting” (a device which, conveniently, ensures controversy). Reporters generally attempt to present two opposing views of a topic, regardless of whether there are actually more—or fewer—takes on it. How those views are weighted and play off each other is really what determines the “objectivity” of a story.
Dealing With Reporters
Given the way the American media is structured, odds are that you’re not going to like every aspect of a hard news story about your resort. But understanding today’s media is one of the keys to ensuring the best possible results.
Let’s take a quick look at some common mistakes. In the sample scenario, you might have been tempted to say something like “Look—there are roughly six people opposed to it, and more than 900 local residents who either support it or are neutral. This really isn’t a story.”
Score two points for the use of the statistics, assuming they’re valid (better be ready to back them up—a good reporter will ask). But telling reporters something isn’t a story is a bad tactic. It’s their job to determine the newsworthiness of a subject, not yours. Would a reporter tell you how to maintain your lifts?
Ski areas can get very defensive. “Why do they write this stuff?” I’ve heard resort managers say. “Don’t they know how many people we employ, or how important we are to the local economy?”
Answer: they probably do. But it doesn’t matter. In fact, the importance of the resort may actually be one of the reasons the story was written in the first place, and no media outlet is going to kill a story simply because the subject might be insulted or hurt financially by it. Your job is to make sure that what runs is as objective as possible.
“That’s it,” I’ve heard others say. “I’ll never advertise with them again!” Yawn. Sure you will, because if the outlet was a good buy for you then, it will be in the future. If a story isn’t accurate, that’s one thing. Call the editor and/or publisher and make sure they correct it. But if a story simply presents news you don’t like, or news you do like in a way you don’t, too bad. Do a better job managing the story next time. Newsrooms pride themselves on their independence from the ad people (that’s a good thing) and won’t care if you’re gone. Yanking ads may even confirm to the news department that they hit pay dirt, and will almost certainly eliminate any possibility that the sales department will speak on your behalf the next time around.
So given what’s going on in media these days, what are the keys to the best result? Here are some “dos and don’ts”:
DO get media training. Reporters are extensively trained to extract information, so you need to be trained to understand how to provide it. At least three people on your staff should be comprehensively media trained—your PR manager, the GM and one other in case the two of you aren’t around. I recommend either your marketing chief, the head of mountain ops, or your HR boss. Don’t assume that your PR person already has the skills simply because she places lots of articles; managing press in tough situations is a very different skill set than pitching and client relations. Even if these folks have been trained before, retraining every five years or so is a good idea. The press evolves over time, and skilled media trainers keep track of the changes and develop new tactics accordingly. Media trainers can help you learn how to be pro-active, rather than reactive, in interviews. Do this in the off-season, so you’ll be ready.
DO remember: there is no such thing as “off the record.” You’ll never get it from a reporter you don’t know, and you shouldn’t ask it of a reporter you do know if the story is big enough. Reporters have a job to do, and even if you consider them your friends, their obligation is to the media outlet, not you.
DO identify three key points you want to come out in the interview—simple ones that are easy to quote. Stick to them. Make sure the reporter understands that these are your point of view. Few modern news stories have more than three key elements in them; the public can’t absorb any more than that.
DO know when to seek outside help. When bad stuff happens, you’ll probably be too close to the story to see it as the media will. Besides, you’ll be busy dealing with the resolution of the situation, and your other obligations won’t have gone away. Outside communications counsel can provide numerous services, including objectivity. By seeking outside counsel, you can make your life a lot simpler in a tough situation.
DON’T go into an interview without a good understanding of what the reporter wants to know—and what he or she already knows. Find out before accepting the interview. Brainstorm likely questions, draft answers and rehearse.
DON’T refuse comment. There are times when refusing comment is the best approach, but in general a refusal to comment is perceived by reporters and the public as “Guilty as charged!” Up until recently, lawyers generally advised refusing comment because news accounts can be entered in trial. But progressive attorneys are discovering that in challenging situations, a careful approach in the media can actually be helpful. A good communications consultant can work with your legal counsel to help shape the messages you need to get out.
DON’T let your guard down just because a reporter seems friendly. And don’t assume that you have to add information simply because the reporter doesn’t ask or say anything after you answer. These are tactics reporters use to help them extract more information.
DO learn about editorial tone from a given media outlet before speaking with one of its reporters. Despite protestations to the contrary, bias does exist in the media. The Wall Street Journal, for example, almost invariably presents a very negative tone about the ski industry when it does features about it.
DO control information and set up a very clear protocol regarding who on your staff is permitted to speak with reporters. The press looks for inconsistencies and exploits them, so limiting the number of persons authorized to speak is the surest method of presenting a consistent message.
DO learn from each press encounter. Jot down your thoughts on each media interview immediately after it’s over, including what was asked and what you said. Weigh that against the finished story. Take note of the things that worked well and the things that didn’t, and modify your tactics in future interviews.
Skip King is the president of Reputation Strategies, a Portland, Maine-based strategic PR consultancy specializing in issues and crisis management.
