Thank God it’s Friday. Dump Day, right? Time to dust off those bad news items and take out the trash. And as many Canadians stand transfixed by the political distractions both north and south of the border, who would notice our stinky little announcement? This sneaky news avoidance tactic known as Dump Day became part of the broader lexicon thanks in large part to the office of President Jed Bartlet (Martin Sheen) from the West Wing. Suddenly, staff (comms and non-communications alike) in offices across the land were uttering phrases like, “That’s not a good story for us. Let’s take out the trash on Friday.”

Here are five of the more common public relations misconceptions heard from colleagues around ‘strategic’ communications, and why they can miss the mark, starting with the garbage:

PR Myth #1: Friday Dump Day

Sure, some reporters may not be quite as diligent on a Friday afternoon as beer o’clock approaches. I once oversaw the Press Gallery bar at Queen’s Park. I won’t argue that it never works, but in many cases, sneaking out a negative story on a Friday afternoon will backfire.

Actions speak louder than words, even in communications. If you act like you are putting out bad news, that is how people will interpret it. 

First, actions speak louder than words, even in communications. If you act like you are putting out bad news, that is how people will interpret it. Anything that goes out on a Friday afternoon will be treated with suspicion (reporters watched West Wing too!). It says to reporters, “I really don’t want you to write about this story.” In other words, you just rang the magic bell to get reporters’ attention with an added dose of scrutiny.

Second, West Wing wrapped production in 2006. Twitter launched that same year. You were likely still getting faxes. In other words, the media landscape has kinda changed. There are fewer people at the Press Gallery bar these days, but there are lots of online reporters and social media commentators keeping their eye on things all day, every day. Platforms are no longer limited by the number of broadsheet pages on a weekend, early Saturday press deadlines, or a tight dinner-hour newscast. Your story could be on everyone’s phones by 7 PM Friday night and scrolling across the news channel tickers all weekend.

Most importantly, ask yourself whether sneaking stuff out under the cover of someone else’s bad day is consistent with your organization’s values. It probably isn’t, so why would you act that way while dealing with people who write about you to all your clients, customers, taxpayers…?

There are plenty of ways to deal with bad news. On a good day, you can turn a story on its head with the right positioning and make it a positive. Other times, you simply have to plan for a hit and do the work beforehand to prevent a one-day headache from becoming an organizational beheading. Your communications team can help you. We can help you.

PR Myth #2: Media Relations means not answering reporters’ questions

I have stood on both ends of the mic as a former reporter and communications vice-president. Like my colleagues from Curious Public, I have coached and prepped countless colleagues and executives before an interview or press conference. One of the most common questions/comments we get, even before training starts, is, “You’re going to teach me how to NOT answer the question, right?”

There is often a skeptical look when I say, “No.”

If you’re not answering your own questions, your critics will gladly fill the gap in a reporter’s story.

Not answering questions does three things: First, it frustrates a reporter–right before they talk or write about you to their audience. We know not to poke bears, so why agitate a reporter unnecessarily? Second, it smells like you’re hiding something. Evasive answers can also prompt more dogged reporters (a.k.a. bloodhounds) into sniffing around even more. And third, if you’re not answering your own questions, your critics will gladly fill the gap in a reporter’s story.

So, what is good media training? Good media training helps you share your key messages with the reporter’s audience. Reporters won’t help deliver that message if you aren’t providing answers with value. Sure, there are questions you don’t have to answer. For example, responding to ‘Have you ever kicked your dog?’ with a quote like, ‘I do not kick my dog’ isn’t helpful.

In most cases, even if a question is problematic, you can answer it in a way that supports your message. Ask for more context: “Help me understand why you’re asking that.” Or reframe the question: “I think you’re asking about animal welfare policies. I’m proud to say we have several policies in place…”

Sometimes you can’t directly answer a question, but you can explain why. “The issue is before the courts,” (qualifier: often overused), or “We are in the middle of negotiations and it would be irresponsible to discuss details before we reach a deal.”

If you can’t explain why you aren’t answering, then maybe it’s not that great of a reason. 

 PR Myth #3: Mainstream Media are irrelevant these days

Mainstream media has taken a beating for the past couple of decades. Just 20 years ago, Toronto had one of the most competitive newspaper markets in North America, with four paid dailies and two free subway papers. The reality of getting our news through social media was still in its infancy. Correction, it was still a glimmer in Mark Zuckerberg’s eye. But today’s numbers are sobering enough to drive one to drink. 

”The majority of Canadians got their news and information from the Internet (33%), television (28%) or social media (24%),” according to a 2023 StatsCan survey. And less than 10% of the population were getting their news through the radio or print media. This means there are fewer and fewer print, radio and television reporters out there digging up news that doesn’t come straight off a press release. 

How these journalists frame a story affects how that story cascades out to the world through other channels.

So why would an organization waste time on those bookish print journalists and harried radio reporters who seem busy covering a car crash and a city council meeting with microphones in both hands? These are the people on the scene. They witness news firsthand. Public opinion surveys continue to put them at the top of the ‘trusted’ list as sources of news. They influence TikTok and Instagram commentaries, Apple News digests and community Facebook news sites. How these journalists frame a story affects how that story cascades out to the world through other channels. Individual mainstream reporters also have tremendous social media followings. Bob Fife in the Globe and Mail’s Ottawa bureau has 100,000-plus followers on X alone. The Toronto Star’s Queen’s Park Bureau of reporters has roughly the same number of followers.

Rather than view traditional media reporters as the last of a dying breed, think of them as OG influencers. They can be essential in setting the tone of coverage that ripples through to the places where people actually get their news. Consider them when you are planning the rollout of an important initiative or preparing for a hairy issue to go public.

PR Myth #4: No good news on a Friday

This is kind of an extension of my views about Myth #1: Friday Dump Day. There are no absolutes. Sometimes Friday can be the right day to put out tough news. But sometimes it’s also a good day for good news. 

How so? 

Friday can be a slow news day. There’s often less institutional activity (e.g., Legislatures that don’t sit Fridays). Reporters, meanwhile, are still looking for stories. Releasing and promoting your report early on a Friday can be a godsend for reporters looking to bank a good story early. An advisory the day before may reinforce that so reporters may commit to cover your story even before Friday arrives. And just like a bad news story blowing up on a Friday and rolling across news channel tickers all weekend, so too can a good story. 

Stories with a good human angle are a perfect example. The Saturday/Sunday crews in newsrooms have fewer institutional stories to follow than the weekday roster. A story that gives them a new angle by talking to people in the park or another public venue relevant to the story is tailor-made for second day coverage. Suddenly, it’s Sunday and your story is still on the rotation of stories on CP24 or Newsworld.

This is just one important consideration when planning the best way, and best time, to communicate your important message.

PR Myth #5: Transparency equals raw disclosure

Consider the data dump. This idea often comes up when you have a heap of information sitting around that’s starting to take on an unpleasant scent. If you work in a government office, maybe a Freedom-of-Information request is asking for every invoice your organization has ever spent on coffee pods for employees. If you are in the private sector, maybe a reporter got ahold of an internal report indicating you have a log of customer complaints that your ice cream cone scoops are getting smaller. They demand to see the log or they’ll tell your customers you are covering up a cone-spiracy (sorry not sorry). 

Is the appropriate response to these requests: 

  1. Don’t respond to the requests; 
  2. We are a transparent company, so we should simply provide exactly what they asked for and be proud of our openness–It would be unethical not to; or 
  3. Reach out to the reporter in the hopes of better understanding the story before identifying the best approach.

If you chose ‘A’ you are at best fuelling the cone-spiracy (still not sorry), possibly breaching Freedom of Information legislation or disclosure rules. Possible headline: “Company freezes up at allegations it is scooping profits out of your ice cream cone.” 

‘B’ gives communications advisors heartburn because some colleagues think anything less than full, raw disclosure is unethical. Anyone who believes ‘B’ (I know you’re out there, friends) you may consider visiting a nudist colony to think about transparency in all its rawness. Possible headline: “Government agency spends thousands of taxpayer dollars so employees don’t have to walk to Tim’s.” 

If you picked ‘C’ your communications team, or outside consultants, can help you find a solution that respects the requester’s wishes while also ensuring that information is provided with context. Possible headline: “Office buys its employees coffee after local cafe closes – move triggers a social buzz in the canteen and higher employee engagement scores.” 

The difference is not how much information you put out. It’s how you do it.

Let’s focus on the difference between ‘B’ and ‘C’. The difference is not how much information you put out. It’s how you do it. By talking to the reporter, you can get more context. Asking additional questions can also be the first step in providing the reporter with context: “We will get you the details on our coffee expenditures as soon as possible. In the meantime, have you looked at what common or best practices are in other workplaces supplying employees with coffee and tea?” 

Working with the reporter can also help ensure you are providing important reasons behind the data. Spending thousands of dollars on coffee may seem outrageous at first glance. It can be a different story if you explain that it works out to half a cup a day per employee and that employees report being more connected by seeing each other in the canteen more, making them more effective at their job.

Bottom line: Before you try to bury a PR problem under a mountain of raw data, get advice on how to be open and convey a cohesive message.

 

If you need help with your media strategy or crisis communications, send us a message.