Reporting on the ICT sector is becoming difficult as corporates increasingly release information solely through media liaisons and demand to "pre-approve" articles before publication.
Another dead-end the journalist encounters is the "no comment" response, especially when stumbling upon a piece of information the company doesn`t want circulating in the marketplace.
Stephen Whitford, Journalist, ITWeb
In such a competitive industry, the unauthorised release of any information is seen as a hatch that must be locked down. A company`s image and the success of its brand are so important that every step is taken to prevent the release of news that could damage a company`s reputation.
From a business point of view, this may well make sense. Block off all exits except one and then you can control what goes in and what comes out.
One could liken this to a residents` association blocking off Johannesburg`s suburbs. All exits are fenced off and traffic is forced to enter through a specific route. It may have lowered crime levels, but it makes navigating through the city a nightmare for the motorist. In the same manner, journalists are battling to get information through corporate communications departments.
The boom-gate method
More and more, journalists are forced to first contact a company`s PR agency. If the PR is efficient, the journalist is immediately put in contact with the media liaison officer of the company concerned.
Unfortunately, media liaison people are almost never able to provide the required information - assuming you can track them down in the first place. For example, certain key officials within a certain government department who don`t have voicemail on their cellphones. And with them hardly ever answering their phones, they may as well send out a press release saying, "gone fishing".
Once the journalist has conveyed what he is looking for, the media liaison officer then seeks out the person best equipped to comment, tracks him down, asks the questions, gets a response and then gets back to the journalist. Of course, if the journalist has follow-up questions, the process begins again.
Occasionally, the journalist is actually allowed to speak to the relevant person as long as he is quoted in context.
Depending on what information is being sought, the boom-gate frequently turns into a dead-end when the journalist is told "comment can only be obtained from the MD/CEO" (who is probably in meetings until one no longer needs to speak to him).
Another dead-end the journalist encounters is the "no comment" response, especially when stumbling upon a piece of information the company doesn`t want circulating in the marketplace.
News cannot be controlled
If companies release information, they often do so with the condition they get to "pre-approve" the article in an attempt to check what information has been used or to control what has been said. This slows the process even further as the journalist patiently explains that there is no such thing as "pre-approval" on a news story, but that if the company insists, a draft of the story will be sent to allow factual checking only.
What many companies don`t seem to understand is the fact that, unlike the disgruntled motorist who had no influence over the residents` association, it is impossible to stop the movement of news, but the amount of time it takes to release information often affects what information is published. While companies may be quite happy to take one or two days to respond, journalists are held to deadlines.
In my case, it`s a daily one and like many journalists I have a story quota. By insisting on this lengthy process, the company makes it difficult or impossible for a journalist to meet a deadline. Companies therefore often lose out on the opportunity to provide official comment and the journalist is forced to find information from an alternative, trustworthy source.
The story is then published with a phase like "company X could not be reached for comment" or "would not comment". And the phrase "no comment" invariably leads to the reader asking: "What does the company have to hide?" So much for clamming up to protect one`s image.
Share