contentious.com

(NOTE: This is part 2 of a 10-part series on online media outreach. Index to this series.)

Human contact remains the core of quality journalism, even though most journalists increasingly rely on the internet for their work. Every journalist knows that when you’re on deadline, the best way to get questions answered correctly and fast is to talk to a cooperative and knowledgeable source – that is, a real person, an individual. Therefore, journalists always want to know:

• Which person (an individual, not a department) to call for which kinds of questions
• How to reach that person directly

An organization can gain journalists’ goodwill (at least in terms of the working relationship) by demonstrating that it understands and respects journalists’ needs. Specifically, it’s crucial to clearly show that your organization understands that journalists need to talk to real people, and why, and the time pressures involved.

How can you accomplish this? Simple. In your online pressroom, prominently list the names, direct phone and e-mail, and areas of responsibility for each of your press officers. That’s it. No rocket science involved.

When reporters visit your online pressroom and immediately find complete and specific contact information for each of your media representatives, they generally gain some confidence that your organization probably will not waste their time. This is incredibly important to journalists.

Few things are more frustrating to journalists than hacking blindly through an organization, trying to figure out which person they need to speak to and how to contact that person directly, just to get some basic questions answered. Unfortunately, at too many organizations this kind of hassle is the norm.

GENERIC PRESS CONTACT INFO BREEDS INSTANT DISTRUST

Guess what message generic press contact info sends reporters? “We don’t really want to talk to you.”

Here’s how that works: When a journalist looks at an online pressroom and sees an e-mail address like media@xyz.com, or a generic press office phone number, with nothing that refers to how to contact individuals directly – inside, that reporter groans. She expects to place a call and then have to talk to at least three remarkably incompetent people (perhaps in multiple phone calls) just to find out who she should really be talking to. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking away toward her deadline, second by second.

Putting complete, direct, and specific press contact information in an easy-to-find place makes a clear statement. It tells journalists, “We understand your job. We know the kind of help you need from us. We want to work with you, and we will do so efficiently. We won’t waste your time if you call us.”

…Of course, that positive initial impression must be backed up by effective follow-through once the journalist establishes direct contact. That’s beyond the scope of this article. Still, merely presenting that kind of information makes a very favorable initial impression on journalists. If your organization values media attention (either by seeking more media attention, or by leveraging whatever comes your way), a good first impression online can form the basis for a positive working relationship with members of the press.

GOOD EXAMPLE: NRDC

The Natural Resources Defense Council does an excellent job of helping journalists figure out which of their many staff experts to talk to, and how to contact them. The most prominent item in their online media center is NRDC’s Expert Finder. This tool allows you to look up specific NRDC experts by name or by area of expertise. Each expert listing includes direct contact information (name, phone and e-mail) for the appropriate NRDC press officer, who can arrange interviews.

Granted, as a journalist I would prefer if NRDC listed direct contact information for the experts, without having to pass through a press contact. However, I understand and respect why such a high-profile organization might choose to make a press officer the point of first contact for media. In that situation, the source organization bears an even greater responsibility for proving that their press office is an aid to journalists, not an obstacle.

Having used NRDC as a source on many stories, I’ve gained personal confidence that their press officers will not waste my time. Often they transfer me to the expert I need right on the first call. Still, the fact that their site provides individual names and direct contact information for press officers makes a very good first impression on journalists. I’ve seen it happen. I wish more organizations of all kinds would follow NRDC’s lead. It’s simple, and it costs little or nothing to do. And it makes a huge difference to reporters.

HOW MONSANTO MISSES THE MARK

Biotech behemoth Monsanto doesn’t appear to understand the importance of listing direct press contacts. Although they do the right thing by making their news and media section easy to find, once there, who do you call? Not only does the main page of the press room not list individual press officers, it even lacks any generic contact info!

Worse than that – even their press releases lack contact information. (I’ll have a lot more to say about that gaffe in a later part in this series. Heck, even the notoriously bumbling press office at the US Environmental Protection Agency gets that part right!)

In fact, to find out how to contact Monsanto’s press office I had to hunt around the left vertical navigation menu. There, under press kits (hmmmmm…. whose perspective does that choice of words reflect?) I finally discovered an option called media contacts.

Briefly, I brightened with hope. “Contacts?” With an “s,” as in plural? I envisioned a group of people, all of whom are individuals with names and phone numbers and their own e-mail addresses. Eager for the individual, direct contact info I needed, I clicked that menu option. And next…

I found this :

Media Contacts

Monsanto Company
800 N. Lindbergh Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63167

(314) 694-1000
FAX: (314) 694-4903

Email: queries.media@monsanto.com

…Yep, that’s it. Groan. Big disappointment.

The sad part is, it wouldn’t matter if the Monsanto staffer who answers that generic phone number or e-mail address is the most capable, efficient, helpful press officer on the planet. As a reporter, seeing how they buried even that limited generic contact information put me in a bad mood. I was already expecting the worst. I would not make that call with a good attitude, which certainly wouldn’t help matters.

Even more importantly: If I was working on a story for which I didn’t absolutely have to get comment from Monsanto in particular, I would immediately start looking for a different source. I wouldn’t want to face the hassle of hacking their bureaucracy. Like anyone, I prefer the path of least resistance, given a range of comparably credible options. In that regard, Monsanto has ample competition for my attention as a journalist. If they prefer to create the impression that they don’t really want to hear from me, then I won’t bother with them unless absolutely necessary.

Life’s too short.

NEXT: Why Journalists Hate Web-Based Forms…
PREVIOUS: Your Online Pressroom
INDEX to this series