When HotJobs.com secured Samuel L. Jackson as the voice-over talent for its 2000 Super Bowl spot, the online firm's agency, Burson-Marsteller, offered the dish as an exclusive
to USA Today. "It wasn't front page news, but USA Today was important to us, so we gave it to them," says Peter Himler, managing director, media relations at
Burson's U.S. corporate financial practice.
Such is the stuff that most "exclusives" are made of these days - moderately interesting news bits or evergreen fare, but not items of man-on-the-moon proportions. To be sure,
in the age of 24-hour news cycles and cutthroat media competition to break stories, reporters are asking for first dibs at an increasing rate. But a shrewd media relations
counselor will think carefully before indulging the first major daily or TV network that comes knocking.
"Offering a single outlet the opportunity to break a story has the potential to either help or hinder a story's vitality," Himler says. In some cases, a few column inches in
an agenda-setting paper such as the New York Times will catalyze additional coverage in broadcast outlets and the trade press, prolonging the life span of a piece.
But an exclusive can also be a double-edge sword. "More often, exclusivity tends to bend [competiting] reporters' noses out of shape, prompting the need for a quick
explanation of why the news is being served up secondhand," he adds. An exclusive in the Times may be thrilling, but not if it gets you a permanent spot on the Wall
Street Journal's non-grata list.
The safer strategy - particularly in the case of highly coveted scoop - is to embargo information to big media players on an equal basis (fully disclosing to each who else is
getting dibs on the news).
"Will this tactic get you on page one of The Wall Street Journal? Probably not," concedes one seasoned SVP at a Washington-area technology company. "Will it get you
[moderate] coverage in both the Times and the Journal and not piss someone off whom you might need down the road? Yes."
What about the wire services? "Maybe you [give Reuters] the backgrounder and a heads-up on the information, with the understanding that they can't run the story on the wire
until the Times and Journal have posted the story on their Web sites," he says. "Financial wires are often agreeable to that."
When and Who
Exclusivity's major advantage, of course, is that it can be used as a bargaining chip to secure more favorable coverage, more page space/air time, or the affections of a
powerful journalist. But it's a tactic that should be used discriminatingly.
"Rarely is there a time that someone will come with an offer of an exclusive without it meaning there's something they need from [us]," says Robert Long, VP, News for NBC news
affiliate WRC Channel 4 in D.C. "Either [we're] the dominant station in the market and they're trying to lock in our commitment, or they have a marginal story they're trying to
make more attractive. Editors have to approach this with some skepticism. When they're offered we have to wonder why."
While many reporters bemoan the fact that outlets like the Journal, Times, USA Today, CNBC and the "Today" show "always get all the good stuff first," a wise media
relations practitioner will maintain a broader perspective of the playing field, and, at times, eschew the bandwagon.
"A prominent exclusive in The Washington Post easily can set the domestic news agenda, while a salacious item in the New York Post's 'page six' has legs that
extend well beyond the island of Manhattan," Himler observes. Major entertainment stories often are "hatched" as small items in gossip columns. And a spread in an influential
trade pub may precipitate more interest in a tech-laden b-to-b story than a small piece buried in the cacophony of a major daily. The biggest media brand names won't always
offer the biggest bang for your pitch.
Make Your Own Bed
In truth, there is no plug-and-play manifesto on exclusives - which makes media relations veterans a hot commodity. In today's orgiastic press environment, the exclusive game
is one giant judgment call, in which rules are often sliced and diced, using qualifiers such as TV vs. print, or market penetration.
When the Michigan-based office manufacturer Steelcase introduced its new Leap chair at last year's NeoCon trade show in Chicago, the company negotiated an exclusive with the
Detroit bureau of The Wall Street Journal (PRN, Sept. 18). While the venerable paper officially "broke" the story nationally on June 8, Steelcase spokesmen had free
rein to tout their product on a handful of local Chicago radio stations the day before the newspaper story ran.
"The Journal didn't care about local radio," says Ted Birkhan, management supervisor at PepperCom, the agency representing Steelcase. "They were more concerned about
The New York Times and national business magazines like Investors Business Daily, Forbes and Fortune." But you'd better believe he covered his butt
before he booked the airtime.
Birkhan's bigger challenge was staving off an overture from a Forbes reporter who got a hot tip and wanted to break the news. "I was honest and kept him informed
[thinking he might make a good backup], but when the Journal was pretty much committed, I called him and told him," Birkhan says. In the end, Forbes was appeased by
receiving full access to Steelcase execs at the show - along with the first round of available product shots. The magazine was the first to run a national story with photos, two
weeks later.
Such is the sort of strategic finesse that's become critical in maximizing exclusive opportunities. "Today, the magazine market is so stratified that you can offer an exclusive
to more than one magazine," contends Jonathan Hirschon, founder of the Silicon Valley agency Horizon PR. "If I pitch a tech story to Red Herring, I can't give it to
Upside or Business 2.0 because they are competitors. But I can spin the financial or business exclusive to [Red Herring] and then pitch the technical angle
to eWeek. For them, the story would entail an entirely different approach and different sources."
Of course this level of courtship gets more complicated, and dangerous. "You always have to consider how a story will be 'seen' by the media," Himler says. Some daredevil
practitioners will even go so far as to circumvent their exclusive agreements by leaking the item to an additional publication at the last minute - without giving the full story,
and without offering anyone for interviews or quotes. "This way it can appear as late-breaking news, doesn't give the story away, and it's not attributable...but you're playing
with fire," Himler warns.
Those who get too greedy run the risk of losing credibility (a major scarlet letter in the PR biz). After all, reporters are a bitter and unforgiving lot, and they don't like
to be cheated on. Lose their trust and you may never be able to place another exclusive - or any other story, for that matter.
(Birkhan, 212/931-6119; Himler, 212/614-4082; Hirschon, 408/969-4888; Long, 202/885-4000)
Power Plays
In media circles, last May's announcement of a merger between United Airlines and U.S. Airways has become notorious - not because critics and Senate leaders are questioning the
viability of the deal, but because reporters at the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and The Washington Post were tipped off in advance, with the
proviso that they break the news without seeking comments from outside sources. All three papers accepted the terms. But the Times let the cat out of the bag by disclosing
its behind-the-scenes negotiations with airline communicators, thus sparking a frenzied debate over the journalistic ethics involved in the exclusive arrangement.
"It handcuffed the reporters," Chicago Tribune aviation writer John Schmeltzer said in an American Journalism Review article. "This is a new wrinkle; it even
restricted them from going to do their job."
But others have defended the airline's PR approach, noting that such bargains are common in situations where SEC nondisclosure restrictions preclude the involvement of analysts
and other stakeholders prior to an announcement that may have a material affect on the company's bottom line. "It's standard practice," said one Shandwick exec in a similar
Brill's Content story. Reporters would rather have the exclusive, with restrictions, than nothing at all.