By Elizabeth Jia and Julie Asher
Journalists and public information officers at a Aug. 12 National Press Club panel discussion disagreed over federal agencies’ accessibility, or lack of it, to reporters trying to get the story about an agency’s policies, programs and personnel in their quest to keep the public informed about their government.
But all the speakers could agree that the changing media landscape, staff downsizing and reporter layoffs have resulted in the exit of veteran journalists who take with them reporting skills honed over time and a depth of knowledge of the federal bureaucracy that informed their stories.
“Not so long ago I walked the halls of federal agencies just like this was the United States,” said longtime freelancer Kathryn Foxhall, but in last 20 years reporters’ accessibility to federal officials, she said, has dried up. “People in power are stopping the flow of information to the public,” she said. Foxhall cited what she said is an all-too common experience with PIOs who make her “jump through hoops” to talk to an agency official and who, if she gets the rare interview, insist on being in the interview.
Panelist Linda Petersen, managing editor of The Valley Journals of Salt Lake City, said PIOs “should facilitate the information, not stall” it.
While most PIOs are cooperative, she said, a fair number aren’t. She described a local PIO in Utah who declined to give one of her reporters the location of a 500-million gallon water tank, citing “national security concerns.” Petersen, who is SPJ’s national FOI Committee chairwoman, said she and another staffer drove out and physically found the water tank in Salt Lake City and published the address in the paper. Another time a PIO wouldn’t even give her reporter the time of an Easter egg hunt.
Peterson said some young reporters seem fearful of PIOs. They do what they’re told, that if they can’t get information, “that’s the way it is … And that’s why I have to hire and fire them,” she said.
Panelist Carolyn Carlson, assistant professor of communication at Kennesaw State University near Atlanta and a past national SPJ president, supplied some data:
— In a survey of more than 100 government public information officers, about 65 percent said they felt it necessary to supervise interviews of their agency’s staff. Seventy-five percent of those surveyed said monitoring interviews helps ensure accurate quotation of their staff.
Conducted by the Society of Professional Journalists and the National Association of Government Communicators (NAGC), the survey responded to a 2012 poll of government reporters who said PIOs and public affairs officers monitoring their interviews were censoring the media.
Panelist Tony Fratto called some of the criticism of PIOs “hyperbolic.” Currently, a consultant in strategic communications and crisis management, he’s a former press officer, including at the Treasury Department and the White House, where, during the Bush administration, he was deputy assistant to the president and principal deputy press secretary.
He said trust has eroded on both sides — reporters and public affairs officers -– because of the fast speed of information, communication habits, and varying levels of competence. “When there is trust … where we can have a great discussion on policy, (it) works really well.”
He criticized reporters’ “heavy use of email” to do interviews or get comments and sees a lot of inexperienced beat reporters working on beats. Fratto also took to task reporters who work all day building their story, then wait until deadline to contact a press officer for a comment from a federal official in an attempt at “balance.” Reporters need to start contacting the PIO early in the day, because it is “hard to develop trust” with a reporter in those circumstances, he said.
In his eight years at Treasury, he never turned down a reporter who wanted to speak about policy. He also said it was his job to “prepare officials to be very good communicators.” Press officers have to master the issues/know the information, so the job is hard to be “really good at it.” he added.
“We have the same goals in mind. We both want to communicate,” said panelist John Verrico, president-elect of NAGC.
He, too, emphasized that today a reporter covering federal government is much more a general assignment journalist and not an expert or beat reporter with years of knowledge on the subject matter.
Agency experts are often not able to speak the general “layman’s terms” language that the reporter needs, he added. A reporter wants the big picture impact or effect, but experts are now micro-focused and don’t speak plain language. Officials are afraid to be misquoted or taken out of context, Verrico said.
He shared some advice for journalists: “Trust is a mutual thing. … Don’t hide your agenda when you call (for comment). … Don’t assume government is out to hide something.”
Just like journalists, Verrico said, PIOs do follow a code of ethics and believe public information is essential to civil service.
The panel was sponsored by NPC’s Press Freedom and Young Members committees. It was moderated by John M. Donnelly, senior writer/defense reporter at Congressional Quarterly, who is chairman of the Press Freedom Committee.