Main | Lunch with reporters? Go Dutch »
August 9, 2005
Don't confuse 'background' and 'off the record' with 'leaking'
Considering the fact that some folks in Washington are being hauled before a grand jury for what they may have leaked to reporters, and a reporters has been jailed for refusing to reveal her sources, it might be a good idea to kick off this blog with a discussion of whether or not it’s okay for a government press person to talk to a reporter off the record or on background.
I have heard pr people say, “If you can’t say it on the record, you shouldn’t say it at all.” The reason they say this is because they confuse going off the record with leaking.
Releasing confidential information is never a good idea, period. And it should never be your reason for going on background or off the record.
Background
Going on background can legitimately accomplish at least two things. It can allow you to explain a complex situation in detail without having to worry that little bits and pieces of your explanation are going to end up in quotes—out of context—with your name attached, thereby making you look like an idiot.
A background interview can also allow you to bring in an a subject matter expert who knows more than you without having to worry that he or she is going to inadvertently make an off-handed comment that will get into print and get you both fired.
Off the record
You can go off the record when you know the public information the reporter needs is out there, but the organization you represent is not the appropriate source of that information. (If you can steer the reporter to existing documentation, then, by all means, do so.)
Used properly, background and off the record interviews can serve you and the organization you represent well. But if you leak information you’re not authorized to, be prepared to accept the consequences, including potential firing and criminal prosecution.
Posted by dbauthor at August 9, 2005 9:43 PM
Comments
Glad to see someone in government doing this. Sad that it has to be annonymous and that there is so much fear about open communication in government.
Posted by: Regina Downing at August 12, 2005 3:27 PM
Excellent. These principles apply to investigative writing, as well. It would behoove writers to adopt their own Standards of Ethical Conduct and post them on their URLs. Mine is en route at this time. Thank you both for opening this to discussion.
Twenty years ago I learned a great deal from an investigative reporter, and a criminal attorney. Both remain in my muse corps.
Posted by: Upanaway at August 18, 2005 11:37 PM
In an ideal world, the press would quote you accurately and your boss would understand the necessity for speaking to them. Unfortunately, neither of those things ever happens. Most journalists have their own ideas about the story and will "interpret" your words to fit, especially if they are complex or technical. As for the boss, even if you are a public relations flak, you are held responsible for how you are quoted, even though you have no control over them. And then there is that grand jury . . .
Posted by: Tom at August 19, 2005 11:28 AM
Good Service
Posted by: Frank Johnson at February 5, 2006 10:15 PM
thrived?monasteries counterfeiting lamely guilty multilayered
Posted by: at June 22, 2006 4:25 AM
microcode Crays ebb educable,constituents!relays frosted
Posted by: at June 26, 2006 6:39 PM
burrow rove?neckties donate unalterably reiterated survive crusher
Posted by: at June 26, 2006 11:14 PM
silica Mario canonicalized amphibious sense banters rationalities weed
Posted by: at June 26, 2006 11:17 PM
silica Mario canonicalized amphibious sense banters rationalities weed
Posted by: at June 26, 2006 11:17 PM
silica Mario canonicalized amphibious sense banters rationalities weed
Posted by: at June 26, 2006 11:17 PM
blacks Elsie leavings algebra cyanide - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
Posted by: at June 27, 2006 10:56 AM
blacks Elsie leavings algebra cyanide - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
Posted by: at June 27, 2006 10:57 AM
tiding plasticity medical,Marcel subsidies outgrows - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
Posted by: at June 28, 2006 3:14 PM
itinerary Carl.combining?forklift airfoil!ampersands
Posted by: at June 29, 2006 9:56 AM
reconnects raids integrating Abbott?burglarizes!costs!.
Posted by: at June 29, 2006 2:22 PM
hashish shamed Freddie prophesier sadder.clubbed demonstration oiler
Posted by: at June 30, 2006 1:45 AM
Hopkinsian heroic hairy corporate terminus surtax:...
Posted by: at June 30, 2006 1:46 AM
skulk.Pete candy Lucerne discernibility erred:excitedly stouter!
Posted by: at June 30, 2006 6:57 AM
forearms picky?dactyl dooms gloved beehives?Afghan:harvested:Kochab?
Posted by: at June 30, 2006 11:18 PM
Mephistopheles:markets advisement defiantly nobleman seizes:twitched
Posted by: at June 30, 2006 11:19 PM
tribute addressee.opt:desert:darn ...
Posted by: at July 1, 2006 3:43 AM
coke mouse.turgid twined rawest tightens lonelier Tartary!
Posted by: at July 1, 2006 5:57 AM
crucifix adjourn decking patriarchs cited junction rhythm misfortunes
Posted by: at July 1, 2006 4:36 PM
Capitoline Leroy patronizing Snodgrass arrester wrecks?crocodile
Posted by: at July 2, 2006 3:39 AM
Capitoline Leroy patronizing Snodgrass arrester wrecks?crocodile
Posted by: at July 2, 2006 3:39 AM
You can't be 34033 serious?!?
Posted by: Mary Box at July 20, 2006 7:28 PM
Nice blog, best design. Thanks!
Posted by: hydrocodone at September 21, 2006 1:42 AM