The Case Against Morally Superior Journalists
I love journalism, and I respect and admire the work of journalists. I also know, in this era of angry bloggers, that so-called MSM (mainstream media) journalists take more unfair crap than just about any profession — with the possible exception of contingency attorneys.
That said, there is one thing I don’t like, and have never liked, about some journalists. I don’t like the way they treat public relations practitioners.
I’ve been on both sides of the journalist/PR pro relationship, so let’s start with a confession. When I was a reporter, I was often rude to PR people. I treated them alternately as annoying telemarketers (when they pitched me a story) or slavish assistants (when I deigned to write about their companies.)
One incident in particular still elicits pangs of guilt. A PR person representing a large Dallas church invited me to interview one of his denomination’s national leaders. He called me several times, and was nice enough, and so I finally relented and agreed to do the interview.
But then something came up that day and I forgot all about the appointment. At the end of the day, when I checked my voicemail, I had an angry message from the PR guy. He kept calling until he was able to reach me on my phone to tell me how unprofessional I’d been, and how embarrassed he’d been sitting there, with this national religious figure staring at him, waiting for me to show up.
What I feel most guilty about today is my reaction to his call. I was apologetic on the phone with him, but when I got off my first thought was, “Well, I’m never dealing with that guy again. What a jerk!”
Of course, I was being the jerk. But I was so accustomed to PR people who quietly endured my arrogance that I mistook his aggrievement for hubris.
I believe in karma now, because the same thing happened to me a year after I started in PR. I had just taken a mid-level corporate job and had arranged several interviews with the CEO at a trade show. The CEO and I sat in a 10-by-10 room with empty white walls and a small white table, waiting for the first reporter to show. He never did. As I fumbled with my cell phone and developed flop-sweat, the CEO stared at me. (I believe the reporter acknowledged a “scheduling conflict” in an e-mail to me a week or so later.)
OK, I deserved that one. But what I didn’t deserve was the “calling out” I got from an erstwhile journalistic colleague a few years ago. I was working in corporate communications, she was still a journalist, and she was writing a story about a controversy involving my company.
The conversation went like this: She asked me a question, and I told her my company’s point of view on the issue. She didn’t agree with this viewpoint; furthermore, she didn’t believe that I agreed with it, and blurted out the following:
“Scott, you’ve sold your soul!”
Notwithstanding the utter lack of comprehension of what PR people do — i.e., we represent our employers or clients, not ourselves — this former colleague’s comment goes to the heart of what bothers me about some journalists. Put simply, they think they are better — that their jobs have a higher moral and ethical purpose than that of the lowly PR practitioner.
I have always found this ironic (and on a handful of occasions like the one above, infuriating) because I left journalism for three reasons. One, I was burnt out. Two, I wanted to earn a decent living. And three, I did not like some of the moral and ethical situations I was put in as a journalist.
I didn’t intend for this post to turn into Moby Dick, so I’ll close with three examples of these moral and ethical situations:
1. Reporters routinely kiss up to interview subjects in order to get their story. This is particularly questionable when the reporter already knows that he’s going to write something negative about his interview subject. A great example of how this dance works is “Anatomy of a New York Times Article,” a blog post by Mark Cuban. Reading the e-mail trail reminded me of some of my own past sins; it made me a little queasy.
2. One of my last assignments as a journalist was to write a story about the Dallas school system. The publication’s editor had gotten a lead on a “conspiracy” of sorts within DISD, and asked me to talk with his sources and write the story. I talked to his sources; there was no conspiracy, or at least not one that could be in any way proven. But the editor insisted that I wasn’t “digging hard enough.” I relented and gave him the slanted, sensational story that he wanted. I felt sick afterwards.
3. Reporters are often required to knock on the doors of people whose loved ones have just died — often violently and unexpectedly. Although there is usually no legitimate purpose for this other than to sell newspapers or earn ratings points, journalists wrap themselves in pretzels to find the “higher purpose” in this practice. Let me explain why you’re wrapping yourselves in pretzels: there is no higher purpose.
These elements of the reporter’s life never felt right to me; they weren’t right, by my moral and ethical standards.
That said, I would never attempt to take the moral high ground with a journalist, because I know that ultimately we’re all just people, doing the best we can. We make the compromises we can live with.
Brilliantly put. Thanks for your “confessions.”
journalists seek and tell the truth, or should. flacks hide, disguise or shade the truth. the two groups are fundamentally opposed. they are natural enemies who can sometimes work together.
Here’s one difference.
Journalism, when done correctly, is aimed at discovering, understanding, and telling the truth.
Public relations, when done correctly, is aimed at advancing the agenda of the person/company/organization who is signing your paycheck.
Are there bad journalists who don’t meet the high aims of the profession? Sure. Are there bad p.r. people who don’t their job well? Sure.
But the difference is the purpose of journalism is truth, and the purpose of p.r. is advancing an agenda, generally a financial one.
Nothing wrong with that, of course — I’ve no beef with capitalism — but it may explain why I may be occasionally snippy with the 40 p.r. people who call me every day trying to sell me on writing about their products.
I’ve been on both sides of the fence too. I agree thatthere are good and bad apples in both professions and both involve a whole lot of gray area too
Read the “Anatomy of a New York Times Article,” and tell me the “purpose of journalism truth”. Maybe in some fairy land you live in…
Interesting viewpoint and it’s unfortunate you had such bad experiences — especially if you were working with journalists who were acting unprofessionally.
A little insight about the frustration reporters/editors have with PR reps comes from the sheer volume of PR pitches. When I worked on a business desk, I literally was getting two pitches via e-mail per minute. Add that to several calls per day and multiple mailings and, well, you can see why I might not be willing to give a lot of time to each individual PR rep.
As for the ethical failings of journalists, I’d just like to comment on the item about talking to families after deaths. While there are certainly journalists who hound and annoy beyond a reasonable point, please keep in mind how meaningful it is to some families to have the relative’s story told in a public forum. If that story inspires or protects someone else, all the better.
And keep in mind the main reason journalists believe in this higher moral ground: It’s the only way we can justify to ourselves the long hours, little pay, lack of time with our families, occasionally hurting people and the slight pangs of guilt we feel after being rude to PR reps who didn’t deserve it.
Holy crap, anonymous is a schizophrenic!!!!
I appreciate the anonymous who posted at 2:16 p.m. As a PR person, I make my phone calls and send my emails knowing how many other unsolicited calls and pitches journalists are getting. So I don’t hold it against journalists for getting snippy with me, as unpleasant as those exchanges can be, and I do my very best to serve the journalist’s needs.
But failing to attend a meeting/phone conference that a journalist has committed to…well I’ve been burned too. Not only do you have to eat sh*t from your client, then you have to make multiple calls and emails just to get the journalist back on the line to hear their lame excuse.
To the anonymi who think journalism is about ‘truth’ and PR is about an agenda. HA. Journalism has an agenda, and good PR has truth.
Great blog, I’ll bookmark this!
This anonymous stuff is for the birds. People, people…if you’re going to say something, say it in front of the whole class!
Saying that “journalists seek and tell the truth” and that PR practitioners “hide, disguise or shade the truth” is such a nuanced, reasoned viewpoint, I suggest you apply to host your own program on a 24-hour cable news channel!
More accurately, journalists attempt to get to the truth based on input from a potentially infinite number of information sources. Public relations practitioners try to make sure that their company/client is one of the information sources that gets noticed.
The most troubling line in your post was how you were “accustomed to PR people who quietly endured (your) arrogance..”
As a PR person, I am embarrassed by the subservient position often assumed by my colleagues. If a reporter doesn’t respect you, you’ll be treated accordingly.
While there are several ways for PR people to retaliate against reporters who act unprofessionally, most don’t because they don’t want to risk being “liked.”
But the sooner both the media and PR industries realize it’s a mutually beneficial relationship, the better off we’ll all be.
Yes! To the most recent blog entry. It can be a mutually beneficial relationship. That’s the key. Be respectful of each other! I’ve been on both sides of the fence as well. I believe it is almost crucial to know both sides, so you can be sensitive and understanding of both sides’ needs.
Walk a mile in our PR shoes or journalist shoes and you will begin to understand we can all work together peacefully in a mutually beneficial relationship.
As a many-year PR veteran, I’ve endured most of the hackneyed insults you’d expect from journalists–on the phone or even on conference panels. Most of these center around an earlier post’s notion that we’re all literally eager to lie, an action that wil presumably benefit our company.
Tell me this, though: After we’ve fooled the journalist, what do we do then, get another job? Change our name? The benefit I bring my company is the relationships I have with the media. These aren’t based on lies or bribes. They ARE sometimes based on my wading through the propaganda I am often fed by product management and finding the beautiful needle in a haystack–a product that is not only real but also of interest to a writer’s audience. If the PR person doesn’t get that from the company it’s his job to keep pushing until he does. If nobody in the outside world is going to care about a new product, it’s your job as a 2-way conduit of market information to tell the company. “Nobody’s going to care about this.” If the company can’t stand that kind of truth, they won’t be succeeding, so you may as well find work elsewhere.
Good PR people tell the truth and sometimes succeed even in the face of that. When my close press contacts get a call from me, they know I have something legit. That’s ’cause I never lied to them.
Toxic Sludge is Good for You.
Oh, and Mark Cuban showed up the Times reporter. Yep.
Also: Pat Robertson didn’t say anyone should be assassinated.
As a former journo (NY Times) and PR person (Lloyd’s of London), I have to say that this was really an outstanding post. Pretty much said it all, and succinctly.
Nick Ravo
nickravo@gmail.com
what a load. you were a lazy reporter and you are trying to justify yourself after the fact.
One of the first things they taught us in j-school is play nice with the flacks. I can’t tell you how many times the wisdom of that message has been proven to me in the years since. Good journalists realize that good flacks can be a tremendous help. When I deal with a flack forced into full damage control mode I usually feel sorry for them - so I remind myself how much more money they make than I do.
The fact that S.B. was an S.O.B. to flacks as a journalist suggests to me that perhaps he didn’t have much of a soul to sell in the first place.
Reason #3 doesn’t wash. I hate knocking on the family’s door, but half the time they *want* to talk to you. If done with some compassion and sympathy, your presence and the willingess to tell the story of their loved one means the tragedy is important to others, not just them. It gives them some solace. Of course, the other half of the time (no matter how nice you are) you’re the intrusive asshole who just wants to sell papers and they’ll slam the door in your face. Unfortunately, you never know which applies until you knock.
Hey, anonymous at 12.25 pm. How was he being a lazy reporter? He made a confession over one missed meeting and knew he made a mistake. He wasn’t trying to justify anything. He admitted to making a mistake and learned from it. How do you get lazy out of that? You don’t make any sense.
Maybe he was calling me lazy? lol. I’m also surprised to see a journo posting anonymously. Perhaps he or she is just a lurker or a wannabe …
This is a dead-on, excellent, excellent read. Others have said this. Others are right.
Both sides know exactly what the other must do in his or her job.
Both sides need not lump the other into li’l holes, i.e. “All reporters are _______” and “all PR practitioners are _______.”
Both sides need not fake it. Just acknowledge what your job is and what you’re trying to accomplish, establish a relationship with each other, and move on.
The Ol’ Man cringes every time he sees a PR person, and his/her li’l glossy suit, completely oblivious to what the reporter is looking for and too programmed into saying, “Yes, but what we all need to remember is…”
On the flipside, he cringes, too, whenever former colleagues or hot-headed reporters call out the PR person and say, “But you’re just a
flak.”
It really does come down to day-to-day relationships. In the year 2005, both sides need each other. It comes down to respect and honesty.
These relationships, when done right, certainly work to both sides’ advantage.
Or they’re just awful and the cycle of cynicism will continue.
Great post, either way.
I am just now getting around to reading the “Best of the Orchard”, so I would apologize for tearing the scabs off this debate.
Only I am not sorry.
I have too been on both sides of the fence. I now feel like I can describe it.
It’s a long fence, stretching to the horizon. It’s a tall one, too — much too high to consider climbing or vaulting.
What makes this wall special is the commerce that develops. Those on one side have important information and access to important newsmakers. Those on the other side have the keys to the kingdom, and can control who gets to come through the gate.
It’s a symbiotic relationship. The PR guys know where to drill for the water, and the media guys have a monopoly on the buckets and the road to town. Sure, the media guys can search for water on their own, but they risk getting beat by a competitor who is willing to work with the “PR dowser.”
That’s why I don’t get the emnity between the sides. They do need each other — and they work best without the attitude of superiority.
Newsies need some self-examination, and need to admit that much of their story selection and editorial decision is nothing more than self-promotion.
PR guys need to quit asking for permission at the gate, and using technology to take the water straight to the people.
(Scott — once again, I have developed the germ of a post from the content of a comment. Thanks…)
Moral superiority like beauty is likely in the eye of the beholder, very difficult to quantify, no unbiased jury to convict or acquit.
As to the great and superior papers: New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Post, well they are justifiably the most important reads of U.S.
Why? Most reprinted in other newspapers, most read by power centers in Washington, N.Y. and other parts of the country.
Besides their accumulated Pulitzer and other journalism honors, I believe them all to be successful business enterprises which have been very good to their stockholders.
That’s what I call superior.
Thank you for writing this. It is very much appreciated.
I would point out something that occurs to me when I read your examples. As hard as it is we are human beings with options. We don’t have to suck up. We don’t have to succumb. We don’t have to sell our souls. All, unfortunately, that is required is personal strength of character. I’m not perfect by any means. But I have always the willingness to draw the line. Again, I’m not perfect about it. But enough times I draw the line to know very well how good at it I am. We all make that choice for ourselves.
Were I to be a reporter I would be one exactly in the same fashion as I am a programmer analyst in terms of attitude. I own my job, and the fact is that I do a good job, work hard, and fly right. I work on behalf of my employer with all due diligence. However - I came aboard with the calm explanation that I have boundaries. When they hired me they thought they would break them down. They thought so, but they were wrong because I stuck to my guns, and always have from day 1. Not a bad practice. They tried and failed to whittle me down. Which is what I would do as a Reporter as well, were I to become one.
The point is that we make our own decisions for ourselves and we are ultimately responsible for them. Not Society. Not our boss. Not anyone else. Just us. I try to keep it in mind on a daily basis and it’s helped me to fight the good fight. We all can do this, if we so choose. Or we can excuse ourselves on the usual grounds. The choice is ours to make.
Here’s one other very big difference I didn’t see anyone else point out. Many pr execs at the large firms bill their time to the clients for contacting us. Sometimes it seems like they take the shotgun approach to story pitching. They’ll peddle prescription eyeglasses to a newspaper for the blind if they could. Now, I must add I have a couple of contacts I consider friends, or at least am friendly with, but they’re also the straight-shooting ones, helpful, and responsive. As someone said, yes it can be a mutually beneficial relationship. But as someone else said, pr people get paid for advancing the bottom line, granted some make even less than we do.