Handling The Media

Occasionally, when the press calls a corporation, it’s a cause for celebration.  The publicity will be positive: Your gang made a charitable contribution, or invented something, or introduced a new, great product.

If so, enjoy the call. Bask in the glory. Let the good times roll.

But often, when the press calls a corporation, it’s bad news. Those, of course, are the times when the corporation involves its lawyers. How do you limit the damage?

First, do not mention to one media outlet that a different media outlet has called previously.

Media outlets compete with each other. Everyone’s aiming for a scoop. Once you tell the Post that the Times called earlier in the day, it’s 100 percent guaranteed that the Post will run a story. After all, the Post knows that the Times is interested; there must be a story here, and the Post wants to break the news first.

If you want to make trouble for yourself, tell Media Outlet 2 that Media Outlet 1 has already called. That ensures bad press.

Second, strive to limit the bad press to one media cycle — or, at a minimum, to the fewest media cycles possible. If your company is going to take a hit, you want it to be one hit, allowing the corporation to go on with its corporate life. You do not want it to be one hit, followed a couple of days later by another hit, followed by another and another and another as the corporation staggers on.

It is thus often a bad idea to engage in extended conversations with the press.

Suppose the press asks you to confirm something. You do.

The press then asks a couple of follow-up questions. You can answer, possibly extending the story, or you can refuse to answer, which piques a reporter’s interest, because you originally were so open about the subject. Either result is bad.

Thus: Did Darnay attend the meeting?

“We confirm.”

Who else attended the meeting?

“Jarndyce and Summerson.”

What was said?

Oh, my God! What have I started? How do I stop talking to this reporter without causing the reporter to think that something nefarious is afoot?

Your conversations with reporters often lead to a series of articles, or a more extended article, than otherwise would have appeared. It thus often makes sense to refuse to answer questions about even basic matters, for fear that discussing the basics will lead to questions about other things. Unless your corporation wants the publicity, be wary.

You can occasionally confirm a fact: “We confirm that we received a subpoena. Otherwise, we do not comment on client matters.”

You can occasionally confirm an indisputable fact: “Our CEO did meet with the President on April 1, as the White House log book confirms. Otherwise, we do not comment on client matters.”

Under some circumstances, you might correct a single fact that is mistaken and makes you look terrible: “You asked us to confirm that our CEO met with Mickey Murderer on April 1. If you investigate the name ‘Mickey Murderer,’ you will see that there are actually two different people with the name ‘Mickey Murderer.’ One is a paid assassin. The other is an upstanding citizen who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2018. Please note that our CEO met with the second ‘Mickey Murderer.’ Otherwise, we do not comment on client matters.”

Finally, remember the limits of what you can do: If an investigative television show — 20/20 or 60 Minutes — is calling, it’s probably very bad news. And it’s extremely unlikely that your client, the pharmaceutical company, is going to convince the producer not to run the story. You might be wise not even to try.

On the other hand, if the local newspaper is running a story, and it makes a difference that all the evil companies acted under Section 7 of the law, but your company properly acted under Section 8, there’s a chance that you’ll convince the reporter to leave your company off the list of wrongdoers. In that situation, you might confirm a fact or make a call.

Finally, in major crises, where massive publicity is unavoidable — your corporation is about to spend a week on the front page of the Times, and congressional subpoenas are about to drop like autumn leaves — you should remember the conventional wisdom of crisis managers: First, scrub the facts.  Then: Tell the truth; tell it all; tell it first.

That at least reduces the likelihood that facts will slowly emerge (and be reported) over time, prompting more stories and accompanied by accusations that your company concealed the truth.

---

Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and is now deputy general counsel at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at [email protected].