When cats are hairdressers, rats will always go around with unkempt hair. That is to say, any cat and rat relationship will never yield fruits for either camp. Perhaps this could explain what I experienced last week Tuesday.
I received a call from a journalist friend who complained about how he was ill-treated by a public relations manager (PRM) of a certain commercial entity. Apparently, he was pursuing an assignment which demanded that he gets the side of the story from this institution in order to balance his story. Upon calling this PRM, he was advised to send his questions using formal channels so that a proper response could be provided in writing. The colleague obliged by sending the questionnaire through a WhatsApp message. For three days, he waited without a response. When he tried to follow up, he was advised to send the questions again but, this time round, through email, and he obliged. A day later, he tried to follow up on his questionnaire but the PRM did not pick the call. He tried to remind her through WhatsApp messages, to no avail.
Probably annoyed by the journalist’s incessant calls and messages, the PRM sent a WhatsApp message to the reporter’s editor, complaining that she was being harassed by the journalist.
Similarly, spokespersons or PRMs have also complained about the behaviour of some journalists, who they blame for being too pushy – insisting to get information instantly. Some PRMs have, without even providing valid reasons, blamed journalists for distorting information while journalists have accused the PRMs of not responding to questionnaires on time.
- Advertisement -
Not long ago, a spokesperson for a certain water utility entity decided, without giving a reason, to casually vent his anger on his social media page by calling journalists “unprofessional and unethical”.
- Advertisement -
These are but a few incidences where journalists and PRMs have crossed paths and, sometimes, traded barbs.
However, it has to be understood that both parties need and rely on each other in their line of duty of disseminating information to targeted audiences. Therefore, any altercation between PRMs and journalists should always be a serious cause of concern because the public becomes the loser, as they are deprived of timely, accurate and crucial information.
While appreciating that this natural tension between news sources and journalists will always be there, both parties should appreciate each other’s role and the environment in which both operate. This is considering the fact that public relations (PR) and news production are highly dependent on each other.
For instance, journalism, as a field, occupies an important space in the communication of progress and conflict messages. A journalist, in an ideal situation, would always want to be objective and critical. He or she is vested with a responsibility to undertake his/her duties with impartiality while serving as a cautious watchdog who pursues nothing but the truth. He or she is trained and expected to report on news and events independent of any political or economic influence.
- Advertisement -
On the other hand, a PR practitioner is usually subjective and committed to serving the interests of the entity he or she works for. A PRM, being the custodian of an institution’s image and reputation, would like to see his or her entity being portrayed in positive light.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that both journalists and PR practitioners work within some set parameters. PRMs should understand that journalists have targets and tight deadlines to adhere to while ensuring objectivity by balancing their stories. PRMs should, therefore, be aware that any delay could affect their performance.
Journalists, on the other hand, should understand that PRMs work with a variety of stakeholders who have to be consulted, especially on policy issues. Therefore, some information might not be readily available. Sometimes, it has to be vetted by executive management before it goes out. The delay could even be more pronounced when the PRM is not in the dominant coalition or executive management. No wonder, some journalists would prefer to get information direct from chief executive officers, although this approach has its own pros and cons.
Besides, the speed at which the responses are provided will depend on a number of factors such as size, nature of the business, sensitivity of the information, set internal procedures on dissemination of information and the like. Some institutions would even demand questionnaires, probably to avoid being misquoted or misrepresented.
PRMs should, therefore, be able to explain at the onset to the journalist that some information might not be available instantly. Nevertheless, it is advisable for PRMs to always be resourceful and on top of things with regard to operations and nature of the business in order to reduce these time lapses.
Furthermore, companies, ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) should have effective PR and communication machinery which should create a good interface between the institution’s PR department and journalists.
But when all is said and done, it has to be appreciated that journalists and PRMs, in both the private sector or MDAs, are partners although they are natural adversaries with totally different functions. All that is required is for each one of them to respect the role of the other through mutual trust.
