< Back to Articles Menu

WHY BEATING UP ON JOURNALISTS DOESN'T WORK - WHAT WE JUST WITNESSED IN JAPAN
by Richard Newell ©2003

Last month, while in Japan on business, I met with the senior director of the Government Pension Fund, one of the largest investment pools in the world. He's been fiercely criticized in the Japanese media for his policy of investing the fund in overseas stocks (See? Cullen isn't the only one!) You'd figure this guy could have afforded the best media advice money can buy. Right? Wrong!

After a run of three of the worst years on record for stocks, the criticism of this gentleman has been particularly harsh. But he was having none of it. According to his public tirade, which you had to see to believe, the dumb old media just didn't get it. The fund was investing with a 30-year view. He lashed out at journalists for their lack of financial market knowledge. He accused them of ignorance and of blindly sticking to pre-planned agendas, rather than trying to understand the complex issues that he grapples with.

Yeah right, I can hear what you're thinking. You may very well share his view! We know in the natural order of things, journalists are often considered scum of the earth. If they can't think of anything to write, they just make it up, right? And since this has proved to be an accurate description, at least in the case of the ousted New York Times reporter, we're here to offer you solid advice on how to get your message across when the journo (you think) has a pre-determined agenda - or is just too stupid to understand what the heck you're talking about!

• Prepare your material. Take care to present your points in simple terms, avoiding the use of jargon.
• Give the journalist every opportunity to learn more. Don't assume they understand everything you're saying.
• Don't leave it up to them to ask what something means. Say, "Do you want me to explain how that works? Or what that means?" It's not uncommon for an interviewer to gloss over an issue if they don't understand it, for fear of looking stupid. It's in your interest to make it easy for the journalist to get behind the story.
• If it's clear the journalist wants to follow only one line of enquiry, don't show your frustration. If you've said all you want to say, do what all good politicians do - give a very dull, repetitive answer. But do vary the words, saying the same thing in a different way. Otherwise, you sound like a pre-programmed robot.
• A classic example? An interview British MP Michael Howard, then Home Secretary, gave to the BBC's Jeremy Paxman. Howard was on the back foot, but refused to budge to Paxman's persistent line of questioning. Paxman asked the same question a total of 27 times, and Howard gave a different variation of the same 'non-denial denial' 27 times.

< Back to Articles Menu