Answers To Four Of Your Media Training Questions
During my recent webinar with Cision, “How to Prepare Executives For The Big Interview,” we received far more questions than we had time to answer.
For this post, we selected four additional questions submitted by the PR pros on the call. I hope these answers help them—and everyone else who ever conducts or prepares others for media interviews.
Four Media Training Questions
QUESTION ONE (submitted by Marilyn) “How do you keep a nervous spokesperson from making irrelevant, lame jokes?”
Marilyn, I’ve found tasers to be highly effective. Sorry, was that one of those irrelevant, lame jokes you were referring to?
One exercise that helps is to give the spokesperson a lot of leash during the practice interview. Let them make as many silly jokes as they please—for your purposes as the trainer, the more the better. When you’ve concluded the interview, call for a 10-minute break. Use that time to write a quick news story about the interview topic that quotes only their joke—and makes them look ridiculous in the process. Seeing the “real-life” application of their ill-timed humor is often enough to make them reconsider using it.
QUESTION TWO (submitted by Virginia) “Can you give any specific advice for working with scientists?”
For whatever reason, scientists and physicians are among our most-frequent clients. I love working with them, but as you know, they can too often get bogged down by details that fail to make the big picture clear.
Here are a couple of tips. First, I always remind scientists of an Einstein line: “Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler than that.” In other words, no one is suggesting they “dumb down” their content. To the contrary, I believe that simplifying complexity takes more creativity and intelligence, not less. One specific technique to help them do that is to teach them the “12-Year-Old Nephew Rule.”
Second, I find that scientists waffle more than they need to, unnecessarily reducing the impact of their communication. Their hedging may even cost them their chance to be included in news stories at all, since journalists are inclined to drop sources who won’t express a clear viewpoint. To eliminate unnecessary tentative language, focus on the parts of your story that are 100 percent true. Two examples of absolute language follow; I’ve bolded the declarative words:
- You might not be able to say that a new drug will work, but you could say it’s the most promising new drug you’ve seen in your career.
- You might not be able to say that your company has never had a safety violation, but you could say you’ve never had a major incident at your plant.
Allison, there are several times it makes sense to turn down media requests (here are seven times to turn down an interview).
In addition, you might turn down interviews if the topic isn’t relevant to your work or if the topic isn’t company specific (for example, if a journalist is writing a trend piece about how the recession is hurting local businesses, you might not want your brand to be associated with the idea of a bad economy).
But if the story is about your company and will be written with or without your participation, you should probably agree to the interview. Here’s why: There are three voices in many news stories—yours, your opponent’s, and the reporter’s. If you refuse the interview, “The Rule of Thirds” states that you’ll likely go 0-for-3 in the story.
That’s because your opponent will almost surely be critical of you in their one-third of the story, and reporters may hold your refusal to comment against you by slanting the tone of their one-third in favor of your opponent. Speaking to the reporter doesn’t guarantee you a positive story. But it’s still usually worth agreeing to the interview since going 1-for-3 is a whole lot better than not scoring at all.
QUESTION FOUR (submitted by an anonymous listener): “In healthcare, most information is protected; how might I prepare execs to respond to bad press and rumors of adverse patient treatment when they are limited by confidentiality issues (e.g., HIPAA).”
Too often, I see hospitals and other healthcare providers lose every shred of their humanity when discussing people who have been injured or died at their facility—regardless of whether or not they are at fault.
Every case is different, but in many situations, I’d push your attorneys to allow a statement that doesn’t accept responsibility—but that has real sympathy toward its injured or deceased accusers and their families. Remember: other important constituencies (such as potential and current patients) are watching to see how well (or poorly) you’re treating their fellow patients. Second, I’ve had success by reminding reporters that HIPAA laws mean only one side of the story is getting out—but that your silence doesn’t mean the “facts” put into the public square by others are accurate. The challenge? Conveying empathy and pushing back against incorrect impressions simultaneously.
If you missed the webinar, you can watch it below!
Like the webinar? Read the book! The Media Training Bible: 101 Things You Absolutely, Positively Need to Know Before Your Next Interview is available in paperback, for Kindle, and iPad.