Why We Lurk

One of the most common complaints I hear from reporters about flacks is our usual insistence of joining our spokespeople on interviews, whether in person or on the phone. I can understand why reporters don’t like this. After all, if everything goes as it should, the flack will just sit there and do nothing. On the phone, it has to feel a little creepy knowing that there is a third person on the line, monitoring everything that you say.

If more reporters understood why we sit in on interviews, they may come to see it as a value add. Below is my my short-list of “reasons we lurk.”

• To keep the spokesperson from getting fired, the SEC from filing action, and to not lose any business. In all honestly about 95% of the interviews I’ve staffed would have gone fine without me present. But the ramifications of the 5% that go wrong can be disastrous. With the exception of the top levels of executive team, it is usually not the interviewee’s job to know ALL the details on what we can, and can’t say publicly. It is, however, my job. Reporters, please understand that a bit of information given by a well intentioned mid-level employee could put him in hot water with the company or even cost him his job (I’ve seen it happen), it could impact the company’s stock (I’ve seen it happen), or result in losing a million dollars in business (I’ve seen it happen). We want to help you with your story, but part of my job is not put an interviewee in a situation that is going to turn out bad for him.

• To act as an information resource for the spokesperson. Typically the reporter talks to an expert on a specific topic. My job is to be a generalist. If a reporter is talking to an engineer about a specific project and asks a question about revenue numbers, etc.-the engineer may not know the answer, but I do.

• To defend the reporter. I am willing to bet that most reporters don’t know how often we defend them to our execs to try to keep the relationship on solid ground. When an exec does an interview unstaffed and is not happy with the resulting article, the first thing he says is “he took me out of context,” or “he totally did a hatchet job on me.” In cases when an exec says this following an interview I staffed, about 90% of the time my response has been something like “You know Bob, it is tough to think of a “good context” for a statement like ‘We’re not in this business to make money.’ (true story).
  

• To play the heavy. People don’t like to say no. In general they want to be helpful. I’ve experienced reporters playing off this trait by trying to wheedle information out of a subject after he has declined. If the subject starts to waffle, I usually step in. I’d rather the reporter think I was a dick than the interviewee.

• For follow up. Often something comes up that requires some follow up. Confirming some number, or forwarding some additional information. In these cases, it is best to hear the request first hand so there is no confusion about what the reporter wants.

• To provide feedback. Good spokespeople are always looking to improve. Did they speak too fast? Were they not answering the reporter’s questions directly enough? All this is part of the debrief flacks typically do after interviews. The result (ideally) is a spokesperson who can act as a better resource for the reporter in the future.