No More Homeless Pets Forum November 3, 2003 Getting Good Press

Are you getting good press? How can you successfull reach out to the public through the media? Merritt Clifton, editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE will answer your questions about media relations for your shelter; everything from managing a crisis to proactively reaching out successfully to the public through the media.

Introduction from Merritt Clifton:

You may have heard somewhere that journalism consists of "Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How," but have you applied that formula to your own hard-to-publicize project?

What it really means is, "Who gives a damn? What's in it for me? Where's my cut? When do I get it? Why isn't it here yet? How do I get mine?"

Another way to put it is that all writing that anyone else reads is ultimately not about the writer, nor about the nominal subject, but rather about the reader, making the reader give a damn, showing him what's in it for him, where to get it, when, why, and how.

Back when I started in journalism, the U.S. was killing homeless animals at eight times the present pace, twice as many men hunted, three times as many women wore fur, and there were a tenth as many vegetarians, I was told when I proposed articles about animals that animals don't buy newspapers.

I didn't take that for an answer. Instead I took a job on the farm-and-business beat, in rural Quebec, a seemingly impossible environment, and -- paid by the published inch -- began finding out how to make enough readers give a damn to keep eating, while writing news stories that routinely inverted conventional perspectives on such topics as pig poop in the rivers, hunting and trapping, the ecological role of coyotes, the value of animal testing, and the activities of the local roadside zoo.

Animals still don't buy newspapers, but most newspapers now routinely publish at least some breaking news about animal issues, and the volume of coverage has quadrupled just since 1992, when Kim Bartlett and I commenced ANIMAL PEOPLE.

There is not any holy mystery to what we do. You can do it too, and I promise to help you learn how.

Questions

Getting coverage in small towns
Is it better to tackle bad press head on or ignore it?
Getting papers to run more animal stories
Rectifying negative publicity created by previous administrations
Can media coverage hurt a new program?
What about reporters who never seem to get the coverage right?
How often is ideal to get a story in the media?
Should media people be allowed to volunteer at your shelter?
Cultivating relationships with the media
Should you pay for media?
Exposing a bad shelter in the media
Where to start with media when you are a new group and making newsletters newsworthy
How best to reach the media - using snail mail or email
Is it good to have media sponsors for an event?
Do you talk to the editor if a story doesn't run?

Getting coverage in small towns

Question from Karen:

I am a fairly new transplant to a small town. Over the last two years I have tried several times to get the local paper to cover local animal problems (feral cats) and most recently our new animal group (we promoted national feral cat day). While they put our event on the calendar, they would not do an article on it. It seems its only who you know in this town, and apparently I don't know anyone in the right place. How can we overcome this apparent uncaring attitude? Many people in town care for animals, but you wouldn't know it by reading the paper!

Response from Merritt:

I could be much more specific and probably more helpful in responding to this inquiry if I had more information about the paper, especially if I could go and have a quick look at it on the web.

At a guess, you are in a rural area, where just about everyone has been acquainted for years and values tend to be quite traditional. The newspaper probably has a circulation in the low thousands, limited growth prospects, limited space, and survives by publishing the name of every citizen at least once a year.

This does not mean you are permanently consigned to being an outsider, nor does it mean that you will never be successful in promoting concern for animals.

What it does mean is that how rapidly you become locally newsworthy will be closely associated with your community standing.

In other words, how many local people want to read about you? How many do you personally know and say hello to on the street? How many say hello back?

Are you involved in other civic projects? If church going is important, do you attend a church? Are your children involved in sports? Is your husband a member of a business association or labor union? Do you have relatives locally? Do you participate in local potluck dinners?

Most important, are you perceived as someone who will be there for life, or just someone passing through?

If you don't have any of the connections that make someone positively newsworthy in a small town, you can develop them - or you can acquire them by recruiting volunteers who already have them.

Even if you are just passing through, you can also become newsworthy if you are perceived as being particularly useful, helpful, and popular, but your anticipated transience will always be a handicap.

It is a positive sign that Feral Cat Day was added to the local community events calendar. This means you are beginning to be accepted. The paper may be watching, though, to see if your event did in fact attract interest and participation.

There may be other factors to consider. If the editor of the paper is a hunter or a birdwatcher, he may be deeply suspicious of animal rights activists and feral cat advocates. If the community is economically dependent upon ranching, hogs, or poultry production, vegetarians may be suspect. Even if the editor doesn't personally view you with suspicion, he may be worried about adverse response from advertisers and other subscribers.

All of this can be overcome. When I worked for the Sherbrooke Record, in rural Quebec, one of my strongest allies on animal issues of all sorts was hunting columnist Real Hebert. We disagreed about hunting, but he hated cruelty, as he recognized it, just as much as anyone else, and he had a great admiration for the resourcefulness and intelligence of feral cats. Another of my strongest allies was game warden and farmer Sherman Young, who drove far out of his way to say goodbye when I married outside the region and moved away.

When I worked for the Enosburg Falls County Courier, in rural Vermont, I also pitched for the local men's baseball team, and enjoyed the backing of hunting club president Carroll Boudreau, who also happened to be the team manager and #2 pitcher. One night, unknown to me until later, a bunch of hunters were going to let the air out of my tires. Carroll and his cousin Robin, our cleanup hitter, told them that they'd get their butts kicked if they tried. They too disagreed with me about hunting, but not with most of my other views about animals, and stood up for me as a teammate and friend when push came to shove.

The most important part of becoming perceived as part of a small community is being seen as a positive presence. Achieve that, and your differences will be tolerated, and perhaps even eventually be boasted about. Having experienced the warmth and appreciation of small towns in several different regions, after initially being perceived as a person from space, I know it can be earned, no matter how much of a challenge to the status quo you seem to present.

Comment from Celeste:

If I may add our experiences to what Merritt had to say...
Our Neutermobile almost exclusively serves rural areas. We'll pull into town, invited by local volunteers, and spay, spay, spay for an extended visit. In many locations, we've been in the paper just about every week of our stay – and it's usually front page or feature coverage, with full color photos, etc. Television and radio appearances have also been rampant.

I think the reason for all the good press is that we're simply the biggest news to happen in quite some time for these small town counties.

So, I'd think that even if you are an outsider, having a hands-on, action-oriented, photographable project is very important. The more events, press conferences (maybe that's a reach), and 'real' things happening, the better!

I might also send them photos of REALLY CUTE, preferably local, feral cats, the best quality you can come up with. Maybe feral cats are just an idea to them, and they don't realize that they're adorable felines that could pass for tame pets in a photo. They need to have something pleasant to look at in order to really get the public's attention.

Comment from Josie:

I have just a little bit to add to Merritt Clifton's excellent response. I first got coverage for animals by writing the articles myself, keeping them short, positive, "reporter-y", and in the third person. In other words, as press releases – "Local group saves stray cat colony" type stuff. I would include a picture and a title. Inevitably my title was changed, but everything else was put in. (No by-line, which was fine with me; it looked like the paper did it.) If you want to report the sad stuff, you can, but don't be blaming about it. You can say: "it's so sad to see starving cats around the dumpsters in our county", then suggest what to do about it. You don't have to say: "if people around here cared about animals they wouldn't leave them to starve around the dumpsters in our county".

Never send in an article that criticizes the paper or other local groups like the Hunt Club etc., except in letters to the editor, and even there, be darned careful what you say; your stuff will be read and remembered. If you come across as a whiner you will be discounted. When you're mad at people's insensitivity etc., write a vituperative, angry letter, then tear it up, and go for a long walk.

If you're not a good writer, get someone good to do it for you. If you think you are a good writer, make sure a good writer sees your stuff before you send it in. You'd be amazed how much better it gets with a little collaboration.

Merritt Clifton's response:

Both Celeste and Josie are right on target.

To Josie's comments, I would add that at times it will be necessary for a humane organization, no matter how apolitical by nature, to challenge the position of an established local entity whether it is the town council or the hunt club.

When that must be done it is critical to debate not argue.

The difference is that debate considers rather than just glibly dismissing the points made by the opposition; concedes the existence of problems where others perceive problems (because the perception of a problem is in itself a problem); engages the facts; and proposes a resolution that if possible will satisfy the demands of all concerned.

Debates are won not by defeating the opposition, but rather by persuading them around to sharing one's own perspective.

Is it better to tackle bad press head on or ignore it?

Question from a member:

I work for our humane society and we just recently had some bad press about an employee improperly euthanizing an animal. Our director decided to not talk to the media and let it blow over rather than address it upfront and be honest about it. I felt that we should have addressed it because we could lose support and volunteers. How do you think it should be handled if you are getting bad press and it is true? Better to ignore or tackle head on?

Response from Merritt:

Your director made a major mistake that may eventually cost her job, quite apart from whatever happened involving the animal.

The current fracas may "blow over" for a while, but it will be remembered, especially in the era of Internet-facilitated archival searches for the history on just about everything and everyone, and each such incident will become part of an accumulating dossier kept by everyone who has any reason to hold a grudge against the humane society, or the director. Each time there is another incident the whole sorry record will be reviewed in print, contributing to a growing atmosphere of mistrust.

In time, disposing of the director may be the only way for the humane society to regain credibility and keep its donor base, and even then, the harm done by years of bad history will be hard to overcome.

One of our most useful of many tip sheets and handouts is Media Relations for Animal Shelters which is available in .PDF format by clicking on the link.

Two paragraphs from it are particularly applicable to this situation:

• Acknowledge problems. Most people, including reporters, have sympathy for those who face up to difficulties and try to work through them. Those who practice denial, on the other hand, are generally suspected of deliberate wrongdoing.
• Never lie to a reporter. You will always get caught, and you'll lose more credibility in five minutes than you've built up in five years when it happens.

You'll come out looking better with the simple admission, "I goofed," than with a string of circumlocutions, excuses, and evasions. The next question in such a situation is always, "Why?" Then you can give your explanations, and then the reporter will be listening, whereas previous to your admission of a goof, the question is not why it happened but rather what happened.

Every reporter understands that people make mistakes. Every newspaper publishes a "corrections" box from time to time to straighten out the mistakes made by reporters and editors. Reporters and editors appreciate comparable candor on the part of sources - and so does the public.

Getting papers to run more animal stories

Note that Merritt broke Terri's questions into parts that he addresses separately.

Question from Terri:

Our local paper is very eager to run animal stories. We usually have some sort of event or issue going on but at the moment nothing news worthy.

Response from Merritt:

If you have animals, and have a good volunteer photographer you always have something newsworthy. Just take good seasonally appropriate photos of appealing animals with cheerful people, and send them in for use at any time as filler. Children and animals are a frequent winning combination, as are attractive women with animals and well-respected members of the community with their pets.

Pay attention to atmosphere and location. Mug shots against a shelter wall won't do it. Take your photos in places that convey a specific sense of time and place. The appropriate filler photo for this week might show the high school homecoming queen with an animal. A month from now it might be the postmaster as Santa Claus. Last week it might have been a kitten in a pumpkin.

Anticipate the needs of next week, and submit those photos with a brief caption this week.

Terri:

They have done a series of articles on the shelter, number of animals, number of euthanasia and within the series of articles the importance of spay/neuter. They have covered the plight of the animals at the shelter.

Merritt:

Get to the general through the specific. Tell the story of one particular charismatic animal, and let that one animal stand for all of them.

The most accomplished master of this technique in the humane field is probably Leo Grillo of DELTA Rescue. Look at his ads inside each ANIMAL PEOPLE front cover. Every ad tells the story of just one animal, but that animal represents hundreds.

Note that each story is not just about an animal, or a problem, but also about a relationship. Often Leo is telling love stories.

Remember that a compelling story begins by drawing the reader into a relationship. Everything else proceeds from there.

Note also that this is even more true of writing successful appeals than of writing successful press releases. Successful appeals and press releases both use the same technique. They differ in that successful appeals move many people; a successful press release just moves a reporter to speak on your behalf.

Terri:

I would like to come up with another series of articles to suggest to them.

Merritt:

I don't recommend suggesting a whole series. Sharpshoot. Point out the links between the animal cases you are handling now and the community issues that are currently in the news. The paper may have the feeling that they have "done" animals, and may be ready to move on, so make sure that the animal angle is noticed in connection with whatever they move on to.

Terri:

I would like to find a way to reach the people who remain ignorant to the consequences to society for not spaying/neutering.

Merritt:

Those people don't read newspapers, unfortunately, so this won't work. At this point, more than 80% of all pet cats and 70% of pet dogs are already sterilized, nationwide, with the percentage of pet cats fixed rising over 90% in the urban northeast and along the west coast. Most of the people who have not yet sterilized their pets are generally alienated and indifferent to community values, or are senior citizens on fixed incomes and/or younger people below the poverty line. One of the commonalities emerging from demographic research is that these people simply do not read, or at least do not read in the English language. They must be reached in some other manner.

Terri:

I would like to reach out to the community to look at our county run shelter and see we have a long way to go to reach a good level of care for the animals and generate a community interest to turn our shelter into a more inviting and positive place to go.

Merritt:

This may also be barking up the wrong tree.

A tax-funded shelter can do no more for the animals than the taxpayers are willing to support, unlike a donation-funded humane society, and economically difficult times make "luxuries" provided to animals a particularly inviting target of budget-cutting politicians.

Worse, if a donation-funded shelter support group succeeds in raising money and volunteer help to do more for the animals in a tax-supported shelter, the budget-cutters may try to cut necessities in order to shove more of the economic burden over on the volunteers.

What you really need to work on is keeping animals out of the shelter, through sterilization, improving the lost-and-found network, fostering, adoption, and training to ensure that animals stay in new homes after they are placed.

Focusing on improving the shelter just perpetuates the illusion that shelters solve pet overpopulation. They don't. They just buy some animals an extra few days or weeks to wait in jail, hoping someone shows up to bail them out. Shelters are at best a back up when all other systems have failed.

Concentrate on making all other systems work, and as the community standard of animal care and concern rises, the quality of the shelter will come along with it.

Rectifying negative publicity created by previous administrations

Question from Elizabeth:

The animal shelter that I work for has recently gone through some administration changes. With the changes, the people now in charge have discovered that there may have been some illegal activity involved and the shelter is in serious debt. Of course this made it to the paper, but those people are now gone. The shelter is cleaning up and under new people who want to make a difference. How does the shelter combat this negative publicity and make the public aware that the situation is rectified?

Response from Merritt:

The words "new" and "improved" sell a lot of products. They sell a lot of news stories too.

This situation sounds made to order for press releases following more or less this format:

• We're doing something different.
• Here's why.
• This is who we are.
• The bad guys are gone.
• Help us make a new day!

Don't depend on just the news media. Hold public events, including open houses, and participate in community events such as sidewalk festivals.

Be visible! The more visible you are, in a likeable way, the more good publicity you will get, and the sooner the past will be forgotten, except when people mention how much your organization has improved.

Can media coverage hurt a new program?

Question from a member:

We operate a feral cat TNR program that is in its first year. We have a good partnership with all of the local humane groups participating and the vet association is also supporting us. However, our Health Department and Zoo do not support TNR and we are afraid that if we get press on our efforts they will then try to fight our efforts and stop our program. We want to wait on press until we have some good statistics and have built up our support base more.

Response from Merritt:

This is dimwitted. When introducing an unfamiliar or controversial concept having to do with a topic of public concern and discourse, it is absolutely essential to get your accurate explanations of what you are doing, and why, on the record, before what you are doing is distorted and misrepresented by the opposition.

You don't have to present great statistics from your own program. Just demonstrate that the concept has worked elsewhere - many other places, in fact, for more than a decade. I'll be happy to e-mail to you all the statistics from elsewhere, worldwide, that anyone can stand to read.

What you must do, without fail, is prevent public misunderstanding.

Member:

A local TV station and paper want to do a story on us. We feel that if we say no, they will just do it anyway and it could turn out worse but we are afraid to draw too much attention to our efforts. Do you think we have anything to worry about in trying to keep media attention to a minimum until we are ready?

Merritt:

I think Peter Marsh was correct a few years ago in pointing out that people who are intensely concerned about particular kinds of animal tend to take on the characteristics of those animals - for instance, I have the long legs, big nose, vegetarian diet, and disposition of a jackass - and in the cases of feral cat and pit bull terrier rescuers, this is very much to their disadvantage.

Like feral cats, you are trying to be furtive and hide in the shadows rather than attract attention that you fear may be predatory.

Your fearful behavior is in itself likely to create problems, because you are probably coming across to the TV and newspaper reporters as paranoid, therefore possibly concealing something you should not be doing.

The more you try to evade attention, once you have already been noticed, the more certain a typically very canine reporter is to decide you need to be barked at and chased.

What you need to do is walk right up, tail high, and introduce yourself.

What about reporters who never seem to get the coverage right?

Question from Susan:

Our local media is always very willing to do stories on animal issues but it seems like they never get the story right. Every time we read the coverage we are amazed by the spin they put on it or the facts they got wrong even though we gave them background material in writing and spent a lot of time talking with them. How do we ensure that we get better coverage and if something is wrong should we let the media know or will that offend them and risk us never getting good coverage?

Response from Merritt:

The portion of the ANIMAL PEOPLE's Media Relations For Animal Shelters quoted below this response goes into these issues in greater depth. Beyond what you'll find there, there are several other points to consider:

First, are you perhaps being excessively self-conscious about "spin"?

PETA, for example, thinks almost all publicity is good publicity, and does not seem to have ever been significantly harmed by some of the most hostile press that any animal advocacy organization has ever endured. I am no great fan of PETA myself, for many reasons, but on balance I find myself defending them to fellow reporters against cheap shots and inaccuracies at least as much as I ding them for what I believe they are misrepresenting themselves and doing wrong, just because I don't like to see anyone attacked unfairly.

Usually PETA manages to use bad publicity to attract good publicity. In so doing, they handle many sensitive aspects of media relations quite well.

Second, is your local paper a training forum for reporters doing internships? Local dailies are often where cub reporters first handle a beat, and animal issues are often handled to the newest reporters, so you may be dealing with a succession of rookies who make rookie mistakes.

One hint that you are dealing with rookies is that cub reporters are often told that they should look at whatever "spin" a source has and then try to spin the material some other way, to avoid becoming someone's mere publicity mouthpiece. This is frequently good advice, but also can be taken entirely too literally by rookies who do not yet realize that if the "spin" is true and can be substantiated, there is not really any good reason to change it. The point of looking for "spin" and changing it is simply to detect and avoid falsehoods.

If your problem is dealing constantly with rookies, the only way to solve the problem is to become very good at helping rookies get things right.

From the tip sheet: Don't hold grudges against the media.

• Never ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity, and never ascribe to stupidity what can be ascribed to ignorance or miscommunication. If you think a reporter blew a big story involving you, invite the reporter to visit for some intensive backgrounding. The humane beat is a low priority with most papers, so you'll often be dealing with rookie reporters who just don't have enough background either in what you do or in reporting to make seasoned judgments about a lot of the information they receive. Most reporters will appreciate a friendly response to an apparently unfriendly story. Very few really have an axe to grind.
• Never telephone a reporter with a complaint. Write it down. When journalists err, it is usually because of the pressure to become an instant expert on something complex in just a few hours before deadline. Telephone calls in response to yesterday's story interrupt gathering information on today's story, and are rarely appreciated. (And, bearing in mind deadline pressure, don't assume that the reporter who screams an obscenity in response to your hostile call really means it. Try a more friendly approach after a cooling off period.)
• Write letters to the editor in response to anything that you feel deserves response, whether or not it involves your shelter directly. Keep you letters brief and factual.
• Never threaten to sue a journalist if you are not really willing and able to follow through. And even then, don't do it. Most publishers will fire a journalist rather than defend against a lawsuit, even if the journalist is absolutely in the right, because journalists are more cheaply hired (and fired) than lawyers. Thus, when you threaten to sue, you're directly threatening the journalist's livelihood. The journalistic grapevine is swift and influential. If you go after one journalist's job, every other journalist in your community is going to know about it almost instantly. Unless you have one hell of a good case against someone who's know to colleagues as a sleazeoid, you will never again be trusted no matter how long you live and no matter what you do to cultivate good media relations.
• Don't blame one reporter for something another one wrote or broadcast, even if it was for the same newspaper or TV station. Once again, journalist tenures are short. Chances are, the reporter you are talking to today does not have a clue what appeared in print last month or last year - and it may be that no one else there does either.
• Don't blame a reporter for quoting you accurately when you say something idiotic. People often don't say clearly what they mean to say, or think they said. In a situation where you come across as an idiot, explain that your explanation of thus-and-such may have been garbled at one end or the other, and go on to clarify the matter, without accusing anyone of bias or underhandedness. Remember, the reporter probably never had a clue what you meant to say, and therefore took whatever you did say at face value, not realizing that something wasn't clear or complete.
• There are bad reporters. There are three categories of bad reporters: "squirrels", young and inexperienced, who spend all their time chasing after nuts; airheads, usually TV or "Lifestyle" reporters, who want no more than a superficial take on any given topic; and would-be muckrakes who never let the facts get in the way of a good story, having decided in advance what the story is. If you feel a bad reporter has victimized you, and attempts to straighten the situation out with the reporter have only verified your suspicion, contact a good reporter, who will usually be sympathetic, and try and try again. Bear in mind, though, that many reporters are bad reporters before they become good reporters. It takes experience to cut through all the mendacity and fluff a reporter runs into, and to build the background necessary to understanding of any and all stories. You're usually better off helping a reporter than writing him or her off because of one bad encounter.

Always say thanks for good publicity, and neutral publicity, and especially for fair coverage of difficult situations. Damned near nobody ever says thanks for a story. Even fewer subjects of stories ever say thanks for stories that balance the negative with the positive. If you can do that, you can bet your gracious response will be remembered for years to come.

How often is ideal to get a story in the media?

Question from Jill:

How often do you think is ideal to get a story in the media? I've heard that once a month is good....

Response from Merritt:

You want to get as much publicity as possible as often as possible. Don't worry about getting too much now; next month may be a hectic news month and you may not even be mentioned. Seek as much as you can get, say thanks, and don't worry about the gluts and droughts.

Jill:

...but I'm afraid of sending so much stuff to the media that it bombards them and they won't want to cover us. Do you think you run the risk of over-saturating them if you are constantly sending things or do they appreciate that because they can use it as fillers if they need a story?

Merritt:

It is not a good idea to continually bombard just one person. Pay attention to who handles which beat, and target each reporter with just what is appropriate to that beat.

For example, send cruelty case stories to the crime reporter, pets-are-wonderful stories to the lifestyles reporter, announcements of fundraisers to the community events reporter, items about animal control to the municipal affairs reporter, and material relevant to humane education to the education reporter.

At small papers, one reporter may hold numerous beats. At the Sherbrooke Record I was officially the farm-and-business reporter for Brome and Missisquoi counties, but was also the art reporter, the aerobic sports columnist, the environmental and occupational safety reporter for the western half of the circulation radius, the humane beat reporter for the same region, and handled whatever else came up in my territory that wasn't assigned to someone else.

At large papers, beats can be quite narrow.

The largest paper I ever worked for was the Oakland Tribune where I was a copyboy during the summer of 1970. It was then a vastly larger and more broadly circulated paper than it has been under the last several owners. Altogether we had about 115 news staff employees of whom about 70 handled specialized beats and about half of those people would fly off the handle if a copyboy failed to identify their often closely related beats correctly when sorting the incoming mail.

To ensure that everyone who should have gotten a particular item did, we often resorted to copying releases that needed to go to multiple beats, and then wrote each reporter's name at the top of the page by hand so that none of them would think they were getting material dumped on them at random.

This was at times sensitive, as in distributing long, rambling letters that began, "Dear Asshole," but appeared to contain information relevant to news coverage. I got chewed out a number of times for allegedly handling such items to the wrong asshole. Frankly, I was never particularly certain that I had made a mistake.

Another sensitive missive was the mash note for "the reporter with legs like Marlene Dietrich". We had a reporter who was a dead ringer for Marlene Dietrich, but she didn't like anything that struck her as sexism. While wondering how to hand it to her without getting my head taken off, I was advised by my supervisor to hand it instead to the guy in the same row of desks who had once worn a kilt while covering the Highland Games. Problem solved: he laughed his head off then handed it to "Marlene" for me.

Hardly any paper has a staff that large in the era of computerization, and very few papers even have copyboys to sort the mail any more, but the same premise applies: make sure you reach everyone you should reach, personalize your approach, and try not to send anyone anything extraneous.

Should media people be allowed to volunteer at your shelter?

Question from Greta:

Our shelter just had some bad TV coverage and the story was done by a media person who volunteers at our shelter and was dismayed by some of the things she saw.

Response from Merritt:

This sounds like a very highly problematic situation to me from a media point of view because most news media would not allow a reporter to write or broadcast anything other than an opinion column about something in which he/she had personal involvement.

Further, many news organizations have policies against news staff participating in any kind of volunteer work that might overlap their beats.

Accordingly, while this case is not without precedent, it is highly unusual, and not very likely to come up again, either there or anywhere else.

If most news organizations knew that a reporter had produced a news item about something in which the reporter had personal involvement, the reporter would be fired. There are rare exceptions made in cases where the editors and publishers know all about the personal involvement in advance, and see to it that it is acknowledged up front, but those articles usually also receive extra-intensive pre-publication screening for possible bias and distortion, and the screening process can be quite uncomfortable for the reporter.

For example, I once wrote about an occupational safety issue involving a young woman who had been my marathon-training partner. Before the article ran, the editor, publisher, and newspaper attorney grilled me quite thoroughly about the extent of our relationship, which as a matter of fact had not gone beyond being athletic teammates. I understood the legal reasons why they were asking and would have done the same thing in their position, but most other reporters would have preferred to give the story to someone else.

Greta:

At first our Director tried to say she couldn't volunteer here anymore but then decided to implement a policy that if a media person is a volunteer they can't do a story on the humane society. I don't see how we are going to be able to stop them if they want to...

Merritt:

This is completely beyond the authority and ability of the director to do, even though it more-or-less mirrors what the usual policy of news media would be: if you volunteer somewhere, or have stock in something, or a member of your immediate family is involved, you cannot report about it.

Frankly, I think a shelter director who would respond in that manner is displaying such a paranoid and would-be domineering attitude that he/she probably earned the bad publicity, and should find another line of work, out of the public eye.

If you are going to run a public institution, you have to be willing to work in the open, and must be comfortable about exposure of any kind.

Even if someone writes your name on the walls of public restrooms all over town in an unflattering context, and draws pictures to illustrate the point, you have to be able to shrug it off and even laugh about it (and if you can, most news people will develop a much greater respect for you as a source.)

Greta:

...and I don't think we should shut the media out as volunteers because that could make them more prone to do a negative story on us couldn't it?

Merritt:

Shutting the media out under any circumstance is stupid, and it is especially stupid to institute a hostile policy toward all reporters because of the perceived sins of one, who in this case was also in violation of the prevailing standards of the profession.

Nonprofit organizations of any kind, and especially animal shelters, need media support. You need to get reporters coming in the door as often as possible, and - even though most news organizations would not allow reporters on a related beat to work in a shelter - I suspect most shelters would be thrilled and delighted to have a reporter as a volunteer.

Cultivating relationships with the media

Question from Mary:

How do you know which person is the best to talk to at the radio, TV, or newspaper? We don't have someone who covers an animal beat per se so I don't know how to find who is an animal lover or who would like to do an animal story. It seems like if I do find a good contact, the person moves on. A lot of our media are only there for a short period of time. I have tried calling the news assignment editor but it seems like I don't get much further than that in getting the story assigned to someone.

Response from Merritt:

This is another question with an answer straight out of the ANIMAL PEOPLE's Media Relations for Animal Shelters.

Get to know your local media.

Find out who edits each of the newspapers and broadcast news programs in your area. Find out who covers the "Lifestyles","Children", city, crime, and wildlife beats, as well as who writes the "pets" column, if the paper has one. Make sure all of these people get letters of introduction, welcoming them and explaining what your organization does, followed by copies of all your newsletters and announcements.

Be aware that journalists usually have short tenures. Four to five years with a publication is often the maximum. Read the papers! Every time someone new appears on a beat that might overlap humane work, send a letter or at least an e-mail of introduction, which should always include an invitation to come by for a visit, any time.

Contact media with relevant background information any time a topic comes up that involves animals. Do not assume they are automatically going to think of you as a resource when, for instance, they are dealing with a child abuse case or a civic budget crisis, even though you may have reams of information they need.

Getting to know your local media is always an ongoing and continuous project. You don't necessarily have to "find who is an animal lover or who would like to do an animal story," but you do have to hand your news tips and story ideas to the appropriate person for each item.

Incidentally, a lot of very positive coverage about animals and animal issues comes from reporters who start out knowing relatively little about the subject, but become interested through pursuing the story for other reasons.

Many of the calls we get here at ANIMAL PEOPLE from reporters seeking background are from people who have never handled a related news item before. They simply want to do a conscientious job, and set about filling in the gaps in their knowledge - and very often they do a better job than reporters who presume they know more already than is actually the case.

Should you pay for media?

Question from Katie:

Do you ever think it is good to pay for media? We have been thinking about trying to do a media campaign encouraging people to adopt vs. buy and why to spay/neuter.

Response from Merritt:

What you are asking is, "Should we advertise?"

Absolutely.

If you do not advertise, you do not have a hope of success.

The guidelines for the operation of a nonprofit organization published for all charities by the Wise Giving Alliance and adapted specifically to the unique aspects of animal charities by ANIMAL PEOPLE anticipate that each organization should spend up to 35% of its total budget on fundraising, promotion, and administration. The actual norm among animal charities is 28%, based on our 13 years of compiling annual reports based on IRS Form 990 filings.

Of that 28%, one third will usually be administrative expense and two-thirds will normally be the promotional budget. Among national advocacy groups, the greater portion of the promotional budget is usually spent for direct mail fundraising. At the local level, fundraising and promoting program work is less clearly differentiated. Any publicity you get, or buy, will tend to help both your fundraising and your program work. What it important is to try to maximize the returns on behalf of both.

Your promotional time investment, by the way, should be proportional. When I hear someone bragging that their organization spends "only" 10% or less of their time and budget on fundraising and promotion, I hear a suicide mission underway.

There is no virtue in self-destruction. In order to develop and continue successful programs you must make the requisite effort to promote and fund them. To shortchange yourself in the name of cost-efficiency is every bit as offensive and damaging to long-term goals as to go too far in the other direction and do too much fundraising and promotion relative to program work.

Virtue lies in the balance.

Katie:

TV is so expensive that we want to make sure it is worth doing. We are afraid if we just ask them to air the PSAs when they can, they will only air very limited at 3am. Or would you recommend buying radio or newspaper?
Personally I don't think buying TV time is worthwhile to promote a specific local program. TV time is great for airing general concepts, including "Buy this, available everywhere," but if what you are trying to sell is available in only one place TV will not give you the best bang for your buck.

Merritt:

Radio is also a bad value for promoting a specific program if anyone needs to write down an address, web site, or telephone number. Most radio listeners are driving their cars and don't have hands free to write.

That leaves print media. Local newspaper ads often do well, but look into householder mailings too. In my view, the householder mailing that hits every postal address in the community is by far the best bargain available in animal-related advertising.

Katie:

And lastly, do you think media will ever donate things for free like a "pet of the week" feature or free radio time?

Merritt:

Your chances of getting donated time or space go up markedly if you are also buying time or space but the era of having "remnant space" or time available for free or at substantial discounts all but ended with the advent of computerization. These days, unlike in the hot lead and live mike eras, it is very easy to rearrange page space to avoid having unfilled holes available for unpaid ads, and to pre-record programs to avoid having potentially available dead air time.

For that reason I don't think preparing PSA videos is even worth the bother any more. If you want to do a 15-second ad that can also run as a PSA, sure, go ahead, but don't do it just in hopes of getting a free 15 seconds that may never come.

Exposing a bad shelter in the media

Question from a member:

Our local humane society has been the primary shelter in our county for over 20 years. Their practices, unfortunately, do not seem to have progressed at all in that time. The refuse to work with rescues, operate off-site adoption programs, use foster homes or volunteers. At the same time they say they have to kill animals and blame lack of resources and community support. Our group and other rescues and individuals in the county have tried to work with them, but they just dig in their heels. We think it is time to let the public know what is happening. Letters to the editor have not been printed, however. How can we get the media to do an expose on this shelter?

Response from Merritt:

There may be many reasons why your letters have not been printed. I would have to be familiar with the paper to know for sure, but one common reason for letters from animal advocates not making the cut is that editors receive far too many of them from campaigns organized by national organizations, and therefore have come to suspect that all letters on animal issues are written to a template furnished by a national group.

It is in general a huge long-term mistake for activists to use the form letters from national groups, because as this tactic has been exposed, more and more letters page editors have felt badly burned, and the consequence is that animal issues are getting less exposure instead of more.

Another problem may be that as a matter of priorities, the editor may give animal issues less weight and therefore less page space than local people issues.

It is possible that the editor is familiar with the humane society and is inclined to cover for them to some extent, but it is also possible that he feels your criticisms are simply not credible, since he is unfamiliar with the alternatives to what the humane society is doing.

It is possible that your letters are too long, include claims that the editor may suspect are libelous, or come across as self-serving, since the letter-writers are involved with rival projects.

In any event, letters to the editor are most likely to be printed when they come in response to news coverage, not in anticipation of it.

The way to get news coverage is to do something newsworthy. This could run the range from holding a public event such as a discussion forum to actually filing a rival bid on the animal control contract. Discussing the perceived deficiencies in the present contract at a town council meeting might also help.

What I would do, in your position, is research the expose that you think needs to be done, write it up, assemble it in a format that fits into a newsprint page, front and back, concluding with specific recommendations for change and a description of what recipients can do to help, and then have it printed and mailed to every household in town.

This tactic is quite inexpensive compared to the numbers of people you reach, costing pennies per copy to produce and distribute at householder bulk rates, and it's the basic publicity method used by local candidates for political office. It also curries favor with whichever local newspaper actually does the printing – and it amounts to doing something newsworthy, toward obtaining ongoing coverage.

You need to make sure that what you say is true, verifiable, and stated in a non-libelous manner. If you have any doubts about doing this correctly, the standard newsroom reference is The Copyright, Permission, and Libel Handbook, by Lloyd J. Jassin and Steve Schechter, and sells for $14.95 anywhere that books may be ordered.

Where to start with media when you are a new group and making newsletters newsworthy

Question from a member:

I read your media tips for animal shelters, and have been following this forum. Our group, so far, has done nothing with the media. We are a very new group. Now I have all these ideas, but I'm not sure where to start! Since we're really starting from scratch, what do you suggest we start with?

Response from Merritt:

Begin at the beginning: announce your existence. If you have a physical facility, hold a Grand Opening, an event, which typically follows a short period of operation that serves as a shakedown. If you don't have a physical facility, hold a community event of some sort that will have news value and provide lots of photo opportunities, and invite your local news media to stop by.

One debut gag I heard about a few years ago involved a spay/neuter group that advertised a "Naked Dog Wash". Cameras showed up and found only volunteers with their clothes on. Who was naked? The dogs, of course.

This enabled the lady in charge to explain, in a prim governess-like accent, that dogs don't have to go through all the rituals associated with disrobing in order to have sex, on a first date or otherwise, and therefore have to be fixed.

She got her message across before the TV crews stopped laughing, and s/n thereby got a lot of favorable free publicity.

Member:

We are thinking of putting out our first newsletter and would appreciate any tips on that.

Merritt:

Most humane society newsletters are, unfortunately, so dull that the compilers should be prosecuted for committing assault with a dead weapon.

On page one you have your sermon to the already persuaded from the executive director, delivered with all the originality and flair of dried cat turds, with her mug shot, looking uncomfortable, with glasses reflecting into the camera so that she looks like the Eyeless Zombie from Hell.

Get some life into it, folks! Use succinct, direct, colorful language, get an animal into the photo, and look warm. If you don't look good in photos, get someone to caricature you, and show a sense of humor.

It is okay to look fat, goofy, skinny, or just plain weird, so long as you look pleasantly so, comfortable with who you are and with the dogs and cats at your feet and climbing all over you, ready to help whoever responds.

Whatever you do, make your newsletter look like fun. Animals may be serious business to you but their appeal to the public is based on enjoyable relationships and that is what you have to build upon.

On page two of the typical newsletter you get a list of donors set up to typographically resemble a tombstone.

On page three, the most visible interior page, there is a list of memorials. Right where things need to be liveliest, it's a morgue.

On page four there is the plea for donations, including a wish list of supplies and equipment.

Usually there will also be an insert page of photos of pets up for adoption, and somewhere there will also be a calendar of events - or should be.

The content is exactly what needs to be there, but the monotonous predictability of it all, including the frequent misplacement of content, tends to lose readers.

News is novelty and surprise. A good newsletter is a letter full of news.

All of the work of a newsletter can be done in a more interesting manner than we usually see – for instance, illustrate the wish list by showing in a cartoon or a limerick or a great candid photo why exactly you need X-Y-Z.

It is not at all hard in the era of the digital camera and computer editing capability to produce gripping animal photography, but too many humane society newsletter photos still show just frontal mugs of animals, failing to tell interesting stories about them; show the exterior of the shelter, shot from such a distance that the photo looks like a real estate ad; show stiff grip-and-grin acceptances of checks from high donors, instead of anything looking like genuine interaction; and include images so dark or washed out that it is hard to tell who or what might be in them.

Good newsletters are short, read at a five-minute sitting. If you have more material than fits into one, send two, several weeks apart. Always include a prepaid donation envelope.

Beyond that the only firm rule is to look alive. Be welcoming and personable, and then even if you come across as a bit dotty, people will still like you and respond favorably.

One of my all-time favorite newsletter photos came in many years ago from a small group in Florida. Printed in the usual place on the first page, it showed a rear view of the executive director bending over to place flowers on the grave of an animal on Homeless Animals Day.

The caption said, "This is my fat butt. I don't spend much time here sitting on it. This is what I do all day," and it briefly listed several tasks, then added, "I'm tired. I need to sit on it for a while to answer all our telephone calls and plan for tomorrow, when instead of putting flowers on the graves of homeless animals we can be saving them all. I need help! If you can give me a hand please call..."

I believe it worked. It got picked up and reprinted by one of the local newspapers, and although the executive director left soon afterward due to a serious health problem, the organization now has a substantial and active volunteer corps.

How best to reach the media - using snail mail or email

Question from a member:

Does it really make more of an impact when you send snail mail letters to the media or is email acceptable? Also, will most papers accept a press release as an attachment or is it better to cut and paste the detail into an email?

Response from Merritt:

Send e-mail if you can, with snail-mail backup.

If you have written a letter-to-the-editor, the newspaper may set the letter up for publication from the e-mail but require the signed hard copy before going to press.

DO NOT SEND PRESS RELEASES AS FILE ATTACHMENTS!!!

In fact, do not ever send anything to anyone as a file attachment if you can copy it and drop it into the text box of an e-mail.

Unnecessary use of file attachments is -

• One of the major reasons for Internet traffic jams
• A surefire way to have many of your messages intercepted as spam
• A guaranteed way to have many of your messages garbled or rendered incompatible by system or program or font incompatibility
• Testimony that the sender is an Internet ignoramus.
• No text message should ever go out as a file attachment - and certainly not a press release.

Copy and drop. In the long run you will save yourself enormous trouble.

Is it good to have media sponsors for an event?

Question from a member:

We try to get media sponsors for our events and to have a media person be a spokesperson, kind of like endorsing our event. Do you think that you risk not getting your event covered by other stations, or papers if you have one station sponsoring and promoting it for you? We don't want to alienate the other stations and papers but we generally try to get one to be our lead sponsor and advertise with them.

Response from Merritt:

Much depends on the relationships among the media within your community. If the rivalry is deep and bitter, there is a chance that having one outlet as a sponsor or spokesperson will alienate the rest. That certainly used to happen among the San Francisco Bay area media 30 years ago, and among the Montreal media when I worked there - but even then, there were exceptions made for particularly appealing causes.

On the other hand, in rural Quebec all the local media (French and English) were on quite friendly and cooperative terms, and I have the impression that this is also the case in the greater Seattle area, although my perspective might be a bit different if I worked for one of the newspapers or TV stations that are involved in direct economic competition.

Do you talk to the editor if a story doesn't run?

Question from Mary:

How would you deal with this? I've spent hours with reporters, two different reporters for a major daily, a reporter for a weekly, and another reporter for a major daily, providing background for stories. I've met with them, provided documentation, been responsive to all requests only to have the stories killed by their editors. In the future should I ask if they have bounced the story off of their editor before I invest my time? Or should I speak with the editor if the story is killed?

Response from Merritt:

This sounds more like a big-city situation that anything that is likely to happen in a small town. It also sounds as if it has unique elements because usually news media will not invest anywhere near that much reporter time in a story idea that isn't going anywhere.

I have difficulty imagining what kind of story would persuade four different reporters to investigate something, only to have three different editors kill it - and it is important to realize that stories to which even one reporter is assigned are very rarely killed. Killing a story to which two reporters are assigned is extraordinarily rare.

My best guess is that you are briefing less experienced reporters about something locally controversial, perhaps involving a conspiracy theory, that to the more experienced editorial eyes looks more like a magnet for libel suits than a story of compelling substance. This is especially likely if it involves the use of anonymous sources or covertly gathered information.

Kindness to animals builds a better world for all of us.
www.bestfriends.org