Written by Adam Goldberg, Co-Founder

One scenario we commonly face is when a client learns a reporter is investigating it before the reporter calls the client. The clues can emerge in various ways. Perhaps a reporter messaged employees on LinkedIn or through social media.

Typically, the client instinct in these instances – and that of too many communications advisors – is to go fetal, doom-say about worst-case scenarios, or search for leakers or sources. We’ve seen this time and again, and it is almost always the wrong crisis prevention and management approach. Generally, the right one is to call the reporter as soon as you learn that she’s sniffing around.

Why?  First, the reporter is the only person with the information you want, primarily the allegations she has heard about you and what she is investigating. You won’t get this from anyone else. Yes, you’ll get tidbits from people who’ve been contacted, but those will be mere pie slices at best and misleading and wrong at worst.  Moreover, the reporter has likely called far more people than those who’ve been contacted know.

Second, if the reporter shares what she has heard about you and what she’s investigating, you’ll be much more likely to either cut her off at the pass and educate her about what she’s gotten wrong or you’ll be able to begin preparing to address what she’s gotten right, something you’ll need to do later in any event.

At this stage, the reporter isn’t your enemy; she’s your friend. She’s letting you know what adversaries are saying about you and perhaps telling you things you may not have known. It’s incredibly hard to kill stories when apparently credible sources are making allegations to a reporter even when the allegations are wholly false. But you have the very rare chance to do just that if you engage early with the reporter and educate her about the facts.

Third, your call creates a record of openness and cooperation, laying a foundation to object to editors should the reporter try a last-minute request for comment an hour before posting.  While most reporters will give story subjects sufficient time to comment, some don’t and try to sandbag their targets. Reaching out to the reporter early helps prevent that from happening. This is especially important given that some reporters won’t engage with you even after you’ve called and will withhold the allegations they’ve been hearing until they’ve done more reporting. You want a record of positive engagement. And, if they don’t engage with you, it’s a point in your favor to go upstairs to speak with an editor to try for more openness and closer supervision as the reporting and writing unfolds.

Importantly, this should be a call and not an email. Calls build relationships; opening with an email signals distrust. Your internal communications lead or outside PR or crisis communications firm can make the contact. You can later follow up with an email confirming what you’ve heard, but put a voice to the name that first time.

Notably, clients often resist placing this call because of three understandable but misplaced fears: (1) they worry that calling the reporter commits them to answering any questions she asks; (2) they worry that reaching out will send a signal of fear that the reporter is onto something; and (3) they worry they’ll “feed the beast” and cause a reporter to publish a story she otherwise was not going to write. All are canards.

This call is about intelligence-gathering for you – talking with a reporter is not a commitment to answering questions. Whether you do the latter is a later decision. For now, see whether the reporter will share what she’s investigating. You actually want the reporter to ask questions on this call. The more questions she asks, the more opportunity you have to provide the facts, if you choose.

Furthermore, calling signals not fear but, instead, understandable interest in a potential story about you. Reporters assume that their sources  will tell you they’ve been contacted, and reporters won’t be surprised. Moreover, placing this call doesn’t tell reporters anything they don’t already know and, therefore, doesn’t bring a story any closer to fruition.

In the end, if you find yourself making a crisis prevention and communications decision from fear, the odds are it’s not the right decision. Reporters don’t write because targets they’re investigating contact them, and you shouldn’t feel pressure to answer every question they have as soon as they raise it. Rather, reporters expect you to be interested in stories about you and to advocate for yourself. Make sure you are and that you do.

One scenario we commonly face is when a client learns a reporter is investigating it before the reporter calls the client. The clues can emerge in various ways. Perhaps a reporter messaged employees on LinkedIn or through social media.

Typically, the client instinct in these instances – and that of too many communications advisors – is to go fetal, doom-say about worst-case scenarios, or search for leakers or sources. We’ve seen this time and again, and it is almost always the wrong crisis prevention and management approach. Generally, the right one is to call the reporter as soon as you learn that she’s sniffing around.

Why?  First, the reporter is the only person with the information you want, primarily the allegations she has heard about you and what she is investigating. You won’t get this from anyone else. Yes, you’ll get tidbits from people who’ve been contacted, but those will be mere pie slices at best and misleading and wrong at worst.  Moreover, the reporter has likely called far more people than those who’ve been contacted know.

Second, if the reporter shares what she has heard about you and what she’s investigating, you’ll be much more likely to either cut her off at the pass and educate her about what she’s gotten wrong or you’ll be able to begin preparing to address what she’s gotten right, something you’ll need to do later in any event.

At this stage, the reporter isn’t your enemy; she’s your friend. She’s letting you know what adversaries are saying about you and perhaps telling you things you may not have known. It’s incredibly hard to kill stories when apparently credible sources are making allegations to a reporter even when the allegations are wholly false. But you have the very rare chance to do just that if you engage early with the reporter and educate her about the facts.

Third, your call creates a record of openness and cooperation, laying a foundation to object to editors should the reporter try a last-minute request for comment an hour before posting.  While most reporters will give story subjects sufficient time to comment, some don’t and try to sandbag their targets. Reaching out to the reporter early helps prevent that from happening. This is especially important given that some reporters won’t engage with you even after you’ve called and will withhold the allegations they’ve been hearing until they’ve done more reporting. You want a record of positive engagement. And, if they don’t engage with you, it’s a point in your favor to go upstairs to speak with an editor to try for more openness and closer supervision as the reporting and writing unfolds.

Importantly, this should be a call and not an email. Calls build relationships; opening with an email signals distrust. Your internal communications lead or outside PR or crisis communications firm can make the contact. You can later follow up with an email confirming what you’ve heard, but put a voice to the name that first time.

Notably, clients often resist placing this call because of three understandable but misplaced fears: (1) they worry that calling the reporter commits them to answering any questions she asks; (2) they worry that reaching out will send a signal of fear that the reporter is onto something; and (3) they worry they’ll “feed the beast” and cause a reporter to publish a story she otherwise was not going to write. All are canards.

This call is about intelligence-gathering for you – talking with a reporter is not a commitment to answering questions. Whether you do the latter is a later decision. For now, see whether the reporter will share what she’s investigating. You actually want the reporter to ask questions on this call. The more questions she asks, the more opportunity you have to provide the facts, if you choose.

Furthermore, calling signals not fear but, instead, understandable interest in a potential story about you. Reporters assume that their sources  will tell you they’ve been contacted, and reporters won’t be surprised. Moreover, placing this call doesn’t tell reporters anything they don’t already know and, therefore, doesn’t bring a story any closer to fruition.

In the end, if you find yourself making a crisis prevention and communications decision from fear, the odds are it’s not the right decision. Reporters don’t write because targets they’re investigating contact them, and you shouldn’t feel pressure to answer every question they have as soon as they raise it. Rather, reporters expect you to be interested in stories about you and to advocate for yourself. Make sure you are and that you do.