Free Media Database for UK Media

Here's another free online database of journalists, covering the UK media: journalisted.com

It's pretty simple: just go to that page, type in as much of the name as you know, and get a set of matches. For instance, here's a link to a search for Smith.

And here's a page for one of the journalists on the site, Nick Parker of The Sun. They post whatever contact info they have, as well as links to recent articles and other similar journalists.

For a free resource, it's pretty cool.

Online Directory of Freelancers is a Media Relations Freebie

Most media directories cost money, but not this one: the Society of Professional Journalists' online directory of freelance journalists.

The directory lists 914 professional journalists who make a living as independents, and gives their names, coverage areas and best of all, contact info [including email], right there on the web. It's true.

The reason it's out there for free is that the directory is intended first and foremost for media editors who are looking for freelancers to hire. But that doesn't mean we PR folks can also scan the directory for potential journalists to pitch our stories to.

One more tip, an obvious but important one: do some homework on the freelancers you are pitching to see if they would be a good fit for your story. They usually have samples of their work posted on a web site and sheesh, you can always Google them.

Sure Fire Elements of Media Stories, Or How to Get in the Times if You're Looking for a Job (Hint: Be Cute, Young, Blond and a Twin)

Part of my media training curriculum is explaining to people that the media covers only a set group of topics -- they are broad, but they are really all you will find in American mainstream media, so if you want coverage, you better figure out which buckets your story fits in.

They are:

• Novelty: things that don’t happen everyday


• Familiarity: things that DO happen every day, such as the weather, the City Council and the stock market


• Big money and winners: the ups and downs of public and private institutions are always grist for news stories; everyone loves a winner


• Risk-takers: people who put their money, reputation, health or safety at risk


• Cat-fights: want coverage? Pick a fight


• Your wallet: everyone likes to learn more about how to make money, save it or spend it


• Sex, celebrities and scandal: because they have universal appeal

The story that prompted this post is this: cute blond female twins who want to work in journalism. This story appeared in the New York Times. Seriously.

Bucket analysis of this story:

• Cute blond twins = sex


• Want to work in the media = the media's favorite big institution, itself.


• Killing themselves to get a job = risk-takers, esp. if you are a cute blond twin


• And don't forget novelty! They're cute young blond girl twins! How unusual!

Here's another story making the rounds: Rush Limbaugh's desire to become a minority owner of the St. Louis Rams of the NFL. It has generated, for sure, the most publicity ever for someone who wants to buy a non-controlling interest in an NFL team. Limbaugh knows exactly what he's doing -- here's an interview to that effect.

Bucket analysis:

• Limbaugh = celebrity


• NFL = familiarity and big money


• Wants to buy small piece of NFL team = catfight!

See how easy it is!

3 No-No's When You Pitch the Media By Email

Almost all journalists say they want to be pitched by email. So guess what -- they are deluged with email pitches! And to make matters worse, most of them are bloated, non-news pitches that get deleted faster than you can say, "did you get my email?"

How to avoid the trash bin? That's easy -- pitch real news, facts and figures, information that the journalist's audience really might want to know. Skip the self-serving pseudo ads -- those are the ones that get deleted FAST.

But the title of this post is 3 no-nos, so here's a list of other no-nos:

1. Using ALL CAPs in the subject line -- why are ya yellin' at me?


2. Putting the words "press release" or "news release" in the subject line -- yer wastin' precious space, pardner.


3. Including attachments -- send links, not attachments. Repeat -- send links, not attachments.

For more handy email pitching tips, tune in to PR University next Wednesday, September 16, for a lively webinar called, "Perfect Email Pitches: Master PR Scribes Reveal How to Craft Copy That Boosts Opens and Media Coverage in Today’s Shrinking News Hole." I'm moderating, and the panelists will include:

• Harry Medved, Head of Public Relations, Fandango


• Jane Mazur, Executive Vice President/Director of Media Relations, Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide


• Dan Beeson Director of Media Relations for Mother Nature Network


• Nancy Brenner, Senior Vice President/Director of Media Relations, MS&L Global Public Relations

Even White House Reporters Don't Like Interviews "On Background"

One of the most important techniques every spokesperson should master is negotiating the "terms of the interview." All too often, spokespeople go into interviews assuming one thing, while the journalist assumes another. Later, after the spokesperson has blabbed about your their product, bad-mouthed the competition and otherwise made a fool of himself, he blurts out, "this is all off the record, right?" Oy.

Repeat after me: agree on the terms of the interview before you start talking, not after. If you're unsure of the terms, ask the reporter what their understanding is. And don't say anything until you're satisfied. That's because you have leverage before you start talking -- you have something the other person wants. Afterward, the power is reversed.

One of the fuzziest interview terms is "on background." This term got started in Washington, and still has the most currency there. It means that someone is speaking not for attribution, and that the information can be used for background only, not reported directly. Presidents and their staffs love this technique, because it allows them more freedom to explain complex decisions without having to worry about making a "gotcha" goof.

Traditionally, the DC media has gone along with this, and I'm sure they will continue to in the future. After all, how many people can resist an invitation to sit down with a general or a cabinet secretary in a historic office building and be told important secrets?

Nevertheless, the DC media corps occasionally rouses itself to complain about this technique, basically for the purpose of trying to change the power dynamic, if only for a brief time. Last month, the press briefly fulminated about it and the story was reported on Politico.com:

After a “senior administration official” briefed reporters on a conference call about Chrysler last week, the Associated Press’s Jennifer Loven circulated an e-mail among her colleagues suggesting some kind of joint action to protest the use of not-for-attribution sessions.

“We’ve been concerned about the needless use of ‘on-background’ briefings when it comes to sharing straightforward information,” AP spokesman Paul Colford told POLITICO, adding that the AP had “relayed” its views “to other news organizations in Washington” and is “eager to work with them in addressing the issue.”

But when the White House held two more background briefings this week — one on the president’s budget, the other on Pakistan and Afghanistan — AP’s reporters and all the other usual suspects were there.

New York Times Bloggers Dish With PR Pros

Three New York Times writers/bloggers sat down for a lively panel discussion on the second day of the Media Relations Summit in NYC: Andrew Ross Sorkin of DealBook, Saul Hansell of Bits, and Tara Parker-Pope of Well. Following are notes from each:

Hansell:

Interested in: spot news, little things, debates, interactive features, news analysis and commentary, stuff that's interesting about the business of tech that would be interesting to the general community

Parker-Pope:

Interested in: prostate cancer, thinks mens health gets short shrift. Health doesn't happen at the doctor's office, it's about decisions you make everyday. Action oriented health information. All about a conversation you can have with your doctor right now.

Look at her "tag" list next to her blog to get an immediate view of what i'm thinking about (this is excellent advice for blogger relations in general).

She's about to run her first marathon and is interested in stories about running, fitness and nutrition.

Sorkin:

"My job is to find out about your deal before you announce it.

Sorkin says he reads all the comments on DealBook because he's "egomaniacal." If you say something nasty or nice he might say something back. He gets good stories from comments and might even hold a moderated comment before putting it up because it's a good story.

When You Pitch the Media, It's Not About You

If I could wave a magic wand and change one thing about PR, it would be this: to make all press releases and PR pronouncements about the interests of readers, users and editors, not about the organization issuing the press release.

Think about it: aside from pronouncements from the White House, how often are news stories just verbatim press releases from an organization? Virtually never, right? Instead, all news stories are broad stories about a particular situation, with many elements, possibly including you, your boss or your organization.

Yet to this day, the vast majority of press releases are written in that stilted, third-person style ("So-and-so announced today") as if we were contributing an article to an imaginary media outlet.

Why, just today, I surfed over to PitchEngine.com to check it out -- this is a site that intends to help PR people shift from issuing stilted old media-style press releases to new style press releases that are supposedly more user-friendly for the social media environment. But they don't apparently have editors stopping users from taking their old third-person perspective and jamming it into the SMR format.

A couple of today's PitchEngine headlines, plucked fresh from the site:

• THE WILMA THEATER Announces Becky Shaw by Gina Gionfriddo as the final selection for its 2009-2010 Season


• Paws Unlimited Foundation Holds their Open House to Raise Awareness and Funding for their No-Kill, Ten-Acre Animal Shelter in the Greater New York Region

Do you care? Why should you?

But, there was a ray of light in this headline:

• Revenue Sharing Cuts from Governor, Legislature to Trigger More Crime, Layoffs Statewide

It's about Michigan (should have been in the headline) and was posted by the Michigan Municipal League. But at least it's about other people and not about them!

Do You Know What Stuff Journalists Like?

"Think like a journalist." It's one of the most important skills a PR person can have. As a former journalist, frankly, my experience in the media gives me a big leg up. For PR pros who have never pulled a paycheck in the media, it's a never-ending quest to get inside the head of journalists to do a better job anticipating their needs.

Here's some new help: a partly tongue-in-check, partly serious site called Stuff Journalists Like, playing off the "Stuff White People Like" phenomenon. Some of their dead-on posts:

• Free food


• Election day


• Statistics


• Reporter's notebooks


• Swag


• Year in reviews


• Weather stories

For a flavor of their style, here's part of their post on Anonymous Sources:

... And that’s why journalists like anonymous sources, because journalists like the truth. And one cloak and dagger call can level crooked politicians and deplorable corporations breaking the law.

Without Deep Throat, Nixon would have finished his presidency and Woodward and Bernstein would have just gone on to become two reporters among the bunch at the Post (and would probably be receiving buyout packages by now).

Anonymous sources can alter the course of history and undo injustice, which all journalists aspire to do. And the stories from anonymous sources can lead to fame and glory, which isn't bad either.

Need to do a better job Thinking Like a Journalist? Check out this site and better yet, use it to brainstorm ways to reach out to journalists more successfully.

To call or not to call? That is the follow-up question.

When you send an email pitch, do you always follow-up with a call? Or do you never follow-up? This is one of the trickiest questions in PR.

On today's PR University audio conference with top editors of womens' magazines, there was a definite split among the panelists regarding their receptivity to follow-up calls.

"Please don't call me," said Lea Goldman, Features Editor of Marie Claire. Goldman says that she religiously checks her email and reads all email, at least the subject line. If she wasn't intrigued at the time, calling to plead your case rarely if ever helps.

Cari Dineen, Senior Editor of Redbook, and Jeanine Detz, Senior Editor of Shape, both agreed 100%.

On the other hand, Stephanie Emma Pfeffer, Senior Associate Editor of Family Circle, and Nancy Minikes, Research Editor of Women's World, were somewhat more open to follow-up calls, but not minutes or even hours after you sent the pitch. Give them a couple of days to get back to you -- remember, most editors are getting hundreds of pitches a week.

Minikes made an interesting point about customizing your pitch: if you address it directly to her by saying "Hi Nancy," she will make a point of responding by email and telling you whether or not she's interested. But if you just send PR spam, she will very likely ignore it and will not respond.

The bottom line for all these editors: customize your pitch! [How many times do we have to say this?] Address them by name, know their slice of the female demographic they are targeting, know the sections that they edit, and then make your pitch accordingly.

The dumb pitch that got the biggest laugh from this panel: emails that say something like, "I have a good expert or story about [fill in the blank]. Can you help me figure out whether it's a good fit for your publication?"

So, back to follow-up calls, here's a poll: do you make the call or not?

[polldaddy poll=1490921]

GM's Wagoner Uses the B-word and Gets Burned

Being a spokesperson is hard -- seriously. And being the spokesperson when you are also the CEO of General Motors in 2009 must be close to impossible. But hey, that's why they get paid the big bucks, right?

GM's CEO inadvertently used the phrase "bankruptcy...could work," at a media breakfast with the Wall Street Journal in attendance, and they didn't miss the opportunity to write the following:

General Motors Corp.'s chief executive, once a staunch opponent of bankruptcy as a way of reorganizing the ailing auto maker, has softened his view, suggesting the company could possibly emerge from a Chapter 11 filing.

This interpretation of Wagoner's comments so disappointed GM that the company posted a rebuttal on its blog called "Never Let the Facts Get in the Way of a Good Story." Tom Wilkinson, GM's Director of News Relations, takes the Journal to task for taking Wagoner's comments out of context and making more of his reference to bankruptcy than Wilkinson says Wagoner intended.

In the blog post, Wilkinson posts the entire exchange [as transcribed from a recording of the session], and here's what Wagoner said"

A lot of people who write about bankruptcy, I don’t think have ever been in bankruptcy. And what I have learned after studying it in detail is that it brings significant risk on... what I have learned is that it could work. And it might not work.

After vehemently complaining that the Journal was out to write a pre-conceived story and that Wagoner didn't mean what he was quoted saying, Wilkinson ended his post with this query:

Did The Wall Street Journal ignore what Wagoner really said so it could write the headline and story it wanted? I’ll leave it to you to decide.

OK Tom, I'll take the bait and answer your question: No. I will grant you that the Journal may have unfairly taken Wagoner's comments out of context and written a story that GM didn't want written and one that may prove to be inaccurate, but I'll also say that Wagoner should never have said what he said and essentially got what he deserved for uttering the words "bankruptcy... could work."

No one forced him to say what he said. Every media training always includes the admonition, "don't repeat a negative." Meaning, if the question is, "Could bankruptcy work for GM?" you DON'T say, "bankruptcy could work." You say something like, "that's your word, not mine. We are focused on getting GM back on solid footing, etc."

Even if the question wasn't as simple as the above example, it's the job of the spokesperson to avoid using negative words. Journalists are listening for the most controversial thing you are going to say, and they are going to lead with that. Your job as a spokesman is to make those words the LEAST controversial you can.

If you're Rick Wagoner and you're sitting at a media breakfast, it's no time to get informal and utter the word "bankruptcy" if you absolutely don't want that word to ever come out of the mouth of GM's CEO.

Another thing: I'm guessing Wagoner has had to answer some form of this question 1,000 times, and on the 1,000th time, he finally let the words "bankruptcy could work," slip from his mouth, even though he added "it might not" afterward. I'm sure he's tired and under incredible stress, but again, it's not the media's job to look the other way. It's the spokesperson's job to keep repeating their talking points 1,000 times if necessary, not 999 times.

Don't Waste Precious Real Estate With Bloated Email Pitches

Be concise. Tell the journalist how your pitch will help them do their job, in the crucial first words of an email pitch. Customize your outgoing email address, if you have to, to make it more recognizable and user-friendly. Bottom-line: every character counts, and you have zero to waste.

That is the key-takeaway from today's Bulldog Reporter PR University audio conference on email pitching: make every character count.

LA-based journalist Gary North of Variety had a couple of key tips: your subject line should contain an active adjective, a noun and a verb that your recipient might care about. As in, "Doctor Wins Nobel Prize." Contrast that with: Interview opportunity with Dr. Frederick Smith, M.D., on New Research into Cancer Treatment." Which one would you open?

North also suggested that senders make sure their email addresses mean something, too -- that just like we all do when sorting our postal mail, he and other journalists look at who sent them something as they decide how much importance to give it.

A few other takeaways:

• Think about the recipient -- you are filling space in their life with your email. Are you adding value or just spamming them? (from Richard Laermer, BadPitchBlog)


• No client names in the subject line -- it's a dead giveaway that you are seeking publicity rather than offering a story to the journalist (from Heather Hamann, Dr. Dean Edell radio show)


• Every email pitch should answer this question: what can I uniquely offer that no one else has? (from Kim Metcalfe of Weber Shandwick)


• Write for the Blackberry! Meaning, short and pithy, not wordy! Example: "Inventor Helps Seniors Plug In." (from Nancy Brenner, MSL)

The Big PR Lesson of "Thank You For Smoking"

I finally got around to seeing "Thank You For Smoking" last week -- my bad. It's an absolute must-see for anyone in the PR industry and if I was a university PR professor, I would use this film in my course and devote a couple of weeks to watching and analyzing it. It is a pitch-perfect study of the role of PR in society.

Even though I may be the last person in the industry to see it, I don't want to recount the plot here and spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen it yet. But I did want to comment on one of the key turning points, when the main character, Nick Naylor the tobacco industry spokesman, lets his guard down (among other things) and tells a journalist a lot of information he thinks is "off the record."

When the information becomes the basis of a blockbuster expose about him, Naylor complains to the reporter that he thought their conversations were "off the record." Wrong! No conversation with a journalist is off the record unless you get specific buy-in from the journalist before you start talking! That's when you have the leverage and can negotiate the terms of the interview. And furthermore, some of the best times for journalists to get candid information from you is in the informal exchanges you might have in the elevator, sitting down for the interview, or making small talk over lunch, when you think they aren't taking notes.

Why Media Interviews Are Like Listening to the Radio

Anyone who listens to the radio knows that the time is split between "content" and commercials. Even public radio now has its share of commercials.

When you are listening to content on the radio, you instinctively feel like you are getting what you want. But you only endure the commercials, waiting for the content to resume.

Sitting in a media interview recently, I was struck by this analogy as it relates to the reporter's experience. For them, usable information is like radio content. It's what they are listening for, and why they are conducting the interview.

When spokespeople lapse into promotional mode, talking only about their product or service, that's the equivalent of radio commercials. The journalist will endure the promo long enough to get back to the content they are seeking. Too many commercials/promos, and the journalist will turn the dial, i.e, end the interview.

Just as in radio, it's the commercials that support the content. Corporate spokespeople wouldn't be doing the interview if there wasn't something in it for them -- getting mentioned in the media, in the hope of driving sales or raising awareness.

But too many commercials, or too much promotional talk, is a turn-off. So spokespeople and their handlers have to remember to tamp down the promo talk and make sure they are offering compelling media content -- otherwise the journalist will spin the metaphorical dial and work with a less promotional source who offers them more usable content.

How to Get Book Authors on NPR

Here's a first-rate tip from the recent Bulldog Reporter webinar I moderated on building relationships with journalists:

The question was this: how can unknown authors, and their publicists, get on prime NPR shows like "All Things Considered"? Answer: create a relationship with NPR Senior Producer Ellen Silva, who produces the "You Must Read This" segment and blog. The segment asks authors to name their favorite books and explain why they chose them. So you aren't getting a flat-out plug for your book, but you are a) getting visibility, b) getting the name of your book out there and c) creating a relationship with Silva and NPR that could be nurtured over time.

Here's Silva's email to get you started.

Show a little love to build blogger relations

News bloggers who are competing on a minute-by-minute basis with other blogs -- such as the feverish competition among technology gadget blogs -- are always hungry for an exclusive, or at least to the get the news about a new product a few minutes before the competition.

So the next time you have a story such as this to pitch, consider giving it first to a smaller blogger, or one who's trying to build up his readership and online rankings. You'll make a friend for life, and may very well help drive traffic in a way that will benefit both you and the blogger.

This piece of wisdom is from Charlie White, Deputy Editor of DVICE.com, one of those competitors in the gadget space. DVICE.com doesn't have the traffic of some of its competitors yet, so every once and awhile, you could help Charlie and his team by giving them the excloo first.

Twit-pitching is the future of PR

What's "Twit-pitching?" It's using Twitter or other social networks to reach out to the media to pitch stories. But you can't really pitch them the old-fashioned way -- that's the beauty of it.

In a nutshell, Twit-pitching involves two things: relationships and concision. In other words, you have to have some sort of relationship with the journalist to twit-pitch them, and you don't have a lot of space or time, so you've GOT TO BE CONCISE.

On Twitter, for example, you are limited to a mere 140 characters in each tweet. That’s about the length of this paragraph. (including spaces!)

On other social networks, such as Facebook, there's no specific space limitation, but you know you aren't sending a pitch letter or email, or even making a phone call. You know you've got at best, a moment or two of the person's time.

These thoughts are reflections from yesterday's excellent Bulldog Reporter audio conference with four top journalists using Twitter, Facebook and Linked In to do their jobs. My thanks to:

• Julio Ojeda-Zapata, Consumer Technology Reporter, St. Paul Pioneer Press and Author, “Twitter Means Business: How Microblogging Can Help or Hurt Your Company”


• Ina Fried, Senior Writer, CNET News


• Chris O’Brien, Business Columnist, San Jose Mercury News


• Dan Patterson, Digital Audio Manager, ABC News

We were also supposed to have Brian Stelter of the NY Times on the call, but he got pulled away on assignment. But he did drop one nugget on me when I talked to him before the conference: that he keeps his Twitter page open on his desktop, posts queries on it when he needs help and teases people with previews of what he's working on.

Wanna find out which journos are on Twitter? You can Google 'journalists on Twitter' and get a few results of pages with compilations. Or you can head to m1cr0pr.com where they have posted a wiki -- thanks to the great Brian Solis, who also joined us as a guest speaker on the Bulldog call yesterday.

Last point: if you want to see the tweets from yesterday's call by speakers and attendees, search for #bulldog at search.twitter.com.

PR for Start-ups

Good helpful piece on PR for start-ups (and most everyone else) here at BlueBlog.

How NOT to say "No Comment"

Great story in yesterday's WSJ about the subprime mess -- in classic Journal fashion, they looked at the intertwined relationships of players in the mortgage business, tracing the story from the misfortunes of a single homeowner up to giant multinational financial institutions that invested in mortgage-backed securities, including securities whose returns were dependent on the homeowner continuing to pay his mortgage. If you're at all interested in understanding the subprime situation, I recommend it.

Buried about 75% of the way into the story, though, was a media relations "teachable moment."

The story was about the tribulations of "Colorado truck driver Roger Rodriguez," who over-mortgaged his home in Westminster, CO. After he took out his mortgage, it was packaged into a security and sold to investors, including James C. Kelsoe Jr., a senior portfolio manager at the asset-management unit of Morgan Keegan & Co., a Memphis, Tenn., investment firm and unit of Regions Financial Corp.

When the mortgage market was riding high, so was Kelsoe's fund. But after the crash, his returns suffered, as Rodriguez and others started defaulting on their loans. "At the end of August," the Journal wrote, "Mr. Kelsoe's Select High Income Fund posted a loss of nearly 28% for the month -- dead last among its peers for the year and for five years as well, according to Morningstar."

Naturally, the Journal sought comment from Kelsoe. Here's what they got:

A Morgan Keegan spokeswoman said Mr. Kelsoe wasn't available to comment because he was focused on managing his funds.

Every moment of the day? 24/7? Of course not. This was just a way to duck the interview, to say "no comment" without saying "no comment." In my trainings, that's exactly the strategy I recommend, with one additional element: your dodge needs to be plausible. As in, "Sorry, I can't help you, that information is confidential." That wouldn't have worked in this case, and in fact, I'm not sure there's any plausible dodge in this situation. So the best strategy would have been to simply say, "Sorry, Mr. Kelsoe's not available for an interview," and hold your ground with that.

When you use an implausible dodge like the one above, the journalist will usually find a way to embarrass you. And they did a few grafs later:

In a letter to a Memphis newspaper, Charles Reaves, an attorney who had invested in one of Mr. Kelsoe's funds, wrote that Mr. Kelsoe was "hiding under his desk" and "should have the fortitude to face the public and explain...what he intends to do."

Bottom line: don't hide, and don't use implausible dodges. But if you don't want to talk, just say so and hold your ground. That's your right.

Talkin' FBN

Comcast hasn't added Fox Business to my line-up yet, so I can't really give you a first-hand take on the goings on. Needless to say, the global point for business news PR people is that a huge new mainstream media outlet just opened shop, which is very good news in the era of widespread newsroom cutbacks.

Some basic tips in this situation:

1. The paint is still drying at FBN, which means it's a really good time to pitch them and get to know them. No matter how long they've been in the business, they are all anxious to get off to a good start at their new home and eager to make new friends for themselves and the network. But remember, people: smart pitches. Smart pitches. Not dumb pitches.


2.  It's crazy over there at FBN. Going from pre-launch to running a 24-hour always-on news operation is almost unimaginably hard. So if you want to be helpful and establish a good name for yourself, get to the point, get to it fast, and get out of the way.

I could spend a lot of time compiling the mountains of stories that have already been written about FBN, but lucky for me and you, I don't have to. You can just head over to Talking Biz News and read up on FBN to your heart's content.

Attention DC Media Relations Pros

There's a story in the new issue of the Washingtonian about the idiosyncrasies of some top DC-based journalists. This is must-reading for DC media pitchers. File it away, pull out when you next pitch these folks, use it to build rapport. It can't hurt.