Memo to decision makers:
Dear Sir/Madam:
If you want to control your message, announce it as soon as possible. If you want to cede control of your message, make the decision and then put off the announcement. It'll leak. Doesn't matter that you have good intentions or that you're not ready for an announcement. Information, like water, will find its own way out.
So, when a reporter calls you and asks about your project, the gig is up. If you stonewall, you put yourself at the mercy of those who WILL talk to the reporter. On the other hand, you could reclaim a modicum of control by answering the reporter's questions. It's really PR 101, although it's surprising the number of policy makers who go the stonewall route.
The most recent example of this at work is the story about the merger of Action Greensboro, the chamber, the Greensboro Economic Development Partnership and the Greensboro Development Corp. The agencies wanted to announce it Tuesday, but it was leaked early. We were chasing it, and the Business Journal was chasing it. Both of us got it the crux of it Monday and posted it online. But no one involved would talk about it on the record. Want to know who would? A city council member who was perturbed that he and other council members were left out of the loop. Hardly the message the business folks wanted out on the first day.
Could the major players have talked about it Monday? Sure. Don't get me wrong; I'm sympathetic to their desire to wait. But while they wanted to wait for the official action of the boards of those groups, which came Tuesday, the reality is that the fix was already in. None of the boards was going to block the merger.
Here's how the news media works. We get wind of a story that we think our readers should know, we chase it until we get it. Now, with the addition of civic-minded bloggers to the mix, the number of people who report "news" is growing every day. The old model of getting your ducks in a row and making an announcement will still work, but not well. My unsolicited, self-serving advice? You can't put water back into the faucet. Go ahead and talk to the reporter when he or she calls. At least you'll get to say it the way you want it said.
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
This "leaving the Council out of the loop" reminds me of a conversation I had with one of the principals of Action Greensboro some time ago.
AG foundation heads had formulated their business plan and called a meeting with some of the City Council to present their roadmap to the body in an informal meeting to get their reaction.
After seeing all of the ideas and sources of funding, one of the Council members piped in with something like this, "These plans are great, but who's going to lead the charge?" (It was NOT Tom Philips who said it)
The AG head knew at the time that he and others were going to have to do it if it was going to get done. So they did, and they continue to do so.
It is strange but true that most of the actual leadership in this city is not of the elected variety.
The fact that AG et al left Council out of the loop on the merger of the booster organizations is an ongoing practice borne of frustration.
Posted on October 27, 2004 7:55 AM
And to think: these Politricksters want us to think they're smart.
Posted on October 27, 2004 8:15 PM
Oh! I'm sorry. I did not know you thought so little of BJ Barnes. Aren't his endorsements aren't news worthy.
Posted on October 30, 2004 2:57 PM