See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/37628291

Media Relations

Article · January 2005

Source: OAI

CITATION READS

1 29,054

1 author:

Elspeth Tilley
Massey University
130 PUBLICATIONS 386 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Oral-experiential communities and workplaces View project

Adult literacy and employment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Elspeth Tilley on 29 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MEDIA RELATIONS

12.

Media Relations

Elspeth Tilley

On March 20/21 2004, the headline “Maori Fish Scams” dominated the
front page of Wellington’s Weekend edition of The Dominion Post newspa-
per. The story began, “Customary Maori fishing rights are being widely
abused, fisheries officers say” (Loh Ho-Sang, 2004, p. A1). Two photo-
graphs accompanied the story. One showed seven people in wetsuits
and scuba gear walking through calf-deep water (one man held his
thumb and little finger in the air); and the other showed crayfish piled on
the ground and in orange plastic buckets.1
This chapter analyses the “Maori Fish Scams” article using agenda
setting, a model of media influence on public opinion. Various individu-
als and organisations responded to the article, and the overview below of
those reactions introduces a range of practical media relations techniques
that can be used by any organisation seeking to voice a public opinion.
For businesses in particular, media relations skills can critically influence
vital factors such as brand awareness, reputation and crisis survival.

What is Media Relations?

Media relations and public relations perform quite different functions.

Public relations (PR) is communication management and aims to make
organisations transparent and responsive. Since the 1960s, organisations
have increasingly faced legal and moral obligations to balance financial
success with social, environmental and ethical responsibility. PR as a
three-step process ensures firstly, that organisations listen to and under-
stand public expectations for reasonable behaviour, secondly, that or-
ganisations’ behaviour matches those expectations and finally, that they
are publicly recognised as responsible.
Media relations (MR), on the other hand is a specialised sub-branch
of public relations dealing primarily with step three of the process —
recognition. MR staff increase public awareness and understanding of
an organisation’s activities by sending information to the media and by
inviting the media to see operations firsthand. MR is not necessarily the
best method of obtaining public recognition, however. Patterson argues
that today’s main PR challenge “isn’t getting noticed, it’s getting be-

- 145 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

lieved and trusted” (1999, p. 731). A common historical argument for

using media to communicate has been that editorial (anything written by
a journalist) has more credibility with audiences than direct communica-
tion (such as advertising), because it is seen as coming from an inde-
pendent third party.
However, academic research suggests that this may be one of the
many popular ‘myths’ surrounding media influence (Hallahan, 1999).
Many experienced PR practitioners consider MR to be less ethical and,
given increasing media and public cynicism towards ‘PR stunts’ and
‘spin doctors’, less effective and trusted than other PR methods (Grunig
& Grunig, 1992). Direct and personalised communication that enables
organisations to gather feedback and create dialogue with employees,
communities, governments, shareholders, members, customers, trading
partners and other stakeholders is increasingly gaining ground (Bartlett,
2004). The media remain, however, too powerful for any business to ig-
nore.

Media Power

The media are extremely influential social agents. Some media theorists
suggest that media power can range from discrediting political leaders,
to toppling governments and even to starting or stopping wars (Griffin,
2003). For businesses, negative media coverage can decrease sales, re-
duce financial standing and destabilise trading relationships. Con-
versely, media have the power to disseminate information rapidly,
which can be invaluable when organisations need to reach mass audi-
ences cheaply and quickly, such as during product recalls.
Organisational MR, therefore, deals both proactively and reactively
with the risks and opportunities of media power. Proactive MR builds
positive reputation by communicating good behaviour. Typical tasks
include running events and collating media information kits, along with
creating a media policy and media risk management plan. Policies de-
termine who is authorised to speak with the media, and ensure that all
spokespeople are trained. Risk plans assess the likelihood of, and pre-
pare for, negative media scenarios or crises (from a serious accident to
hostile or biased coverage). Reactive MR responds to damaging cover-
age, usually by launching and adapting a pre-prepared response plan,
including key messages that demonstrate the organisation’s concern for
the safety, wellbeing and interests of all its stakeholders. Reactive MR
communicates evidence that the organisation is behaving appropriately,
and can only be effective if that evidence is available and accurate.
Quality MR, then, takes a strategic view that any publicity is not nec-
essarily good publicity. Even positive media exposure is wasted effort if
it does not reach audiences connected with the organisation, such as

- 146 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

politicians who make laws regulating the relevant industry, customers

who buy products, donors who respond to fundraising requests, com-
petitors who adapt to news about strategies, or shareholders who base
investment decisions upon financial news. MR’s key consideration is the
nature and number of audience members reached, not the nature and
number of media stories.
When media coverage does reach relevant audiences, however, it
can significantly impact their views and decision making. How, and just
how much, the media can influence these publics is explained in the the-
ory of agenda setting.

Agenda Setting

Journalism professors McCombs and Shaw, who first used the term
‘agenda setting’ to describe news selection in 1968, say the media have
the power to choose which events are considered significant or unimpor-
tant by society (McCombs, 2000). Not all daily world events can fit into a
newspaper or news bulletin, so the media select and filter events when
crafting ‘news’. Further, McCombs and Shaw argue that elements not
selected by the media are not usually discussed in the community either.
McCombs and Shaw conclude that the media decide what will be ‘on the
agenda’ for public discussion, arguing that these selections are made ac-
cording to an informal code of ‘news values’.

News Values

O’Sullivan Hartley, Saunders and Fiske (1983) define news values as

“professional codes used in the selection, construction and presentation
of news stories in corporately produced mainstream press and broad-
casting” (p. 153). You will not find such a code framed on the wall at
your local newspaper — partly because news values are slightly differ-
ent for each publication, depending upon its market positioning and
competition, and partly because evidence of hard ‘rules’ would contra-
dict press freedom, journalists’ most revered principle. Instead, then,
news values are naturalised values, learned by watching and imitating
others on the job. Journalists learn what is newsworthy, developing a
‘nose for news’ (Manning, 2001; McGregor, 2002a).
In its simplest sense, news means something new or new informa-
tion about an old happening. (The SS Titanic sinking, for example, was
particularly news in 1912 when it happened, in 1985 when scientists lo-
cated the wreck, and again in 1997 with the release of a big-budget, star-
studded movie about the incident.) News also has to be ‘interesting’.
Commercial news is selected on the premise that sensation — highly
emotive stories, particularly about sex, crime, scandal, drugs or violence

- 147 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

— will appeal to a wide audience and increase media circulation, in turn

generating advertising revenue.
For example, in New Zealand newspapers specifically, research has
shown up to 56% of news devoted to crime in a single issue (McGregor,
2002b). Other common news values include proximity (economic, geo-
graphic or other relevance to the target audience); impact (a large effect
on a few people or moderate effect on many people); conflict or competi-
tion (especially with a deserving underdog winner or an ‘innocent’ vic-
tim); and elite people (anyone who is already famous such as celebrities,
royalty, sports stars or politicians).
O’Sullivan et al. (1983) argue that, in all mainstream media, priority
is given to stories about the economy, government, industry, foreign af-
fairs, any domestic affairs with a conflict or human interest angle, disas-
ters and then sport. Within such stories, priority is given to personalisa-
tion (‘human interest’), conflict, violence, and reference to elite nations,
elite people or negativity (bad news). In New Zealand, Gideon Porter,
an experienced broadcast journalist and at the date of writing Television
New Zealand (TVNZ) Māori Issues Correspondent, argues that main-
stream news values also have a racial inflection. He says all bad news
has an “ooh-ah factor”, but “Māori bad news” has “more chance of mak-
ing the front page” (G. Porter, personal communication, August 19, 2004;
Walker, 2002).
Whether MR staff consider news values appropriate or not, they of-
ten use them to obtain media coverage. Not-for-profit organisations, for
example, use celebrity endorsement for fundraising drives. Unless the
fundraising is for a disaster (impact), it is unlikely to be newsworthy on
its own, but using elite people to add news value increases the likelihood
of coverage.

Social Factors in Agenda Setting

News values partly explain why only some recent and interesting occur-
rences receive media coverage. Sometimes there are also social and in-
terpersonal factors at work. For many audiences, regular news con-
sumption provides an important element of social belonging. The
broader and deeper the base of shared material, the more bonding gen-
erated. The social benefit of being ‘in the know’ about current news
builds group members’ appetites for more on the same topic (Rubin &
Windahl, 1986). Conversely, the ‘spiral of silence’ theory suggests that
people who feel they are in the minority in their understanding of a topic
are likely to keep quiet and ‘go with the flow’, even when they do not
share a group’s interpretation of an issue (Noelle-Neumann, 1984).
These factors help to explain why public opinion largely follows media
agendas.

- 148 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

In the absence of other information, media agendas dominate deci-

sion making about what topics are important (Iyengar, 1990). McCombs
(2000) also argues that the media “may not only tell us what to think
about, they also may tell us how and what to think about it, and perhaps
even what to do about it” (para. 5).

Topic Frames

Once ‘newsworthy’ topics make the agenda, there is a second level of

agenda setting where the media emphasise certain attributes of those
topics and cue audiences to ‘read’ them in certain ways. Entman (2002)
calls this ‘framing’. McCombs and Shaw believe that media frames tell
audiences how to think about topics, for example, by choosing which
viewpoints on each topic are aired and in what order or priority. Frames
include ‘contextual cues’, which are not actually part of the content, but
are familiar or understood ‘points of reference’ as to how that content is
intended to be read (Iyengar & Simon, 1993).
For example, an item is cued as ‘important’ if it is placed on the
newspaper’s front page or as the ‘lead’ (first) article in a news broadcast.
The source quoted first, with the largest or only photo, or with the most
‘column centimetres’ is cued as the most ‘important’ viewpoint in a
story. Most media coverage uses headlines, pictures, captions and pri-
oritised sources to tell an authoritative version of what is happening.
Entman (2000) believes media frames “promote a particular problem
definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment rec-
ommendation for the item described” (p. 391).
For example in the “Maori Fish Scams” article, the headline sets a
particular problem definition and causal interpretation for the story that
follows. First, the issue is categorised as a particular category of ‘prob-
lem’: a ‘scam’. Scam, defined in Princeton University’s WordNet online
dictionary as a “fraudulent business scheme” (2004, para. 1) has two key
connotations. These are ‘intentionality’ (i.e., a scam is deliberate, not ac-
cidental fraud) and ‘organisation’ (scams are planned and systematic
recurrences, not isolated incidences, of fraud). The “widely abused”
comment in the story’s first line and subsequent reference to “organised
criminals” reinforce that frame (Loh Ho-Sang, 2004, p. A1). Second, the
headline defines the problem’s cause as a collectivised racial group,
“Maori”. Finally, the headline’s front-page centre position, and large
bold type, cue readers that they should consider the ‘scam’ of great im-
portance and relevance.
Framing analysis also examines numbers and ratios of sources in
stories. Of the “Maori Fish Scams” story’s 23 paragraphs, 21 are attrib-
uted to a single source, identified as a Fisheries Ministry team leader.
The source is reported to allege various criminal offences “by [persons

- 149 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

doing] illegal customary fishing”, including fraud, poaching, intimida-

tion and vandalism. The other two paragraphs quote a judge in a fish-
ing-breach case describing a particular fishing permit as “disjointed”
(Loh Ho-Sang, 2004, p. A1). None of the quoted sources provides evi-
dence of widespread criminal activity that would support the headline’s
“scam” frame. That does not necessarily prove that either headline or
story is ‘wrong’, however, only that one does not completely reflect the
other. Lack of fit between stories and headlines is not unusual, because
headlines are created in the subediting and layout stages of newspaper
production, not by journalists.
Framing analysts also consider photos and captions. The main ac-
companying photo is captioned, “Dive training: A member of a Gis-
borne-based dive course flashes the Mongrel Mob sign as he emerges
from the sea” (Loh Ho-Sang, 2004, p. A1). The reference to “Mongrel
Mob” is not explained in the story. For readers familiar with the term’s
customary use to refer to a ‘gang’, and previous media coverage alleging
that ‘gang’ is linked with violence, drug use and crime, the caption rein-
forces the story’s frame of an organised crime problem. Framing analy-
sis asks, however, what other captions could also fit a depicted image,
and how that might alter the way the photo is interpreted by audiences.
The hand signal may be a gang sign, but it may equally be the ‘hang
loose’ gesture, which the ‘Riptionary’ surf lingo lexicon describes as a
gesture in “universal use” since the 1960s to indicate “being in a relaxed
metabolic and clear minded state” (Mathews, 2004, para. 6). The caption
does not provide date, time or names of those photographed to substan-
tiate its chosen interpretation of the gesture. The caption provides a
tenuous link between photo and story via the ‘organised crime’ frame. A
subsequent complaint by one of those photographed confirmed that the
image was not connected with the story directly; those pictured had no
factual relationship to the story content.
The second photo is captioned, “Seized Crays: More than 500 cray-
fish, many undersized, confiscated recently on the East Coast. It was
claimed they had been caught according to customary rights” (Loh Ho-
Sang, 2004, p. A1) This caption also avoids specific time and date in-
formation, and uses passive voice (“it was claimed”) to avoid identifying
who made the customary rights claim, where and when. No information
about quotas or legal sizes is given to enable readers to make their own
judgement. Again, the photo-story link is at the level of the frame and
not based in the actual story content; the fisherman discussed in the story
stated that the photograph did not show his catch. Frame analysis asks
how a different photograph (for example, of fishing infringements by a
recreational Pākehā or international commercial trawler) might have
changed the frame, perhaps from a ‘Māori problem’ to ‘protecting NZ
fisheries’.

- 150 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

In agenda setting terms, both stages have occurred in this article.

First, the topic has been selected by the media as newsworthy and placed
onto the public agenda. Second, the issue has been framed. It has been
signalled as important by its front-page placement, and certain attributes
of the issue have been shown as important by their inclusion, prioritisa-
tion and added emphasis in headlines, introductory paragraph, photos
and captions. Other possible viewpoints and interpretations are shown
as unimportant by their exclusion.

Framing Analysis as a Tool for Media Response

The first step in responding to media framing is to determine what type

of frame is being used. Knight (1999) defines fact-based frames as those
providing objective information or documented evidence, including up-
to-date background or context to issues. Sometimes a fact-based frame
will use highly educated or scientifically trained advocates or experts to
present a range of facts. By contrast, interest-based frames tend to focus
on needs, desires and visions of ‘how it ought to be’, rather than concrete
data. Value-based frames centre on disagreements about right or wrong,
cast opposing protagonists in the roles of ‘moral’ or ‘immoral’, or allocate
blame for ‘doing wrong’. Relational frames concern emotional bonds
among disputants, often using emotional, accusatory language to high-
light issues (especially breaches) of trust, control or intimacy.
The “Maori Fish Scams” article is primarily value-framed, in that the
collective group referred to as “Maori” is blamed for moral wrong-doing
in fishing practices, and for making “threats” that prevent the inter-
viewed fisheries officer from enforcing fisheries law (Loh Ho-Sang, 2004,
p. A1). The Fisheries officer is framed as a David-sized defender of fish-
eries law’s moral standard, in conflict with the Goliath-sized might of an
organised Māori “poaching labour force” (Loh Ho-Sang, 2004, p. A1).
The second step in responding to framing is to analyse how the par-
ticular frame defines the problem, its causes and remedies. The “Fish
Scams” issue is defined racially, as a “Maori” problem. It is also framed
as a situation of widespread lawlessness, in which fishing is “out of
hand” and law enforcement is “increasingly dangerous” (Loh Ho-Sang,
2004, p. A1). Although no explicit remedies are proposed, the Fisheries
officer’s claim that “something needs to be done” suggests he lacks
power to uphold the law. The inferred remedy is to supply more power
and resources to Fisheries officers, to strengthen their side in the conflict
with Māori poachers. Framing analysis does not seek to prove such a
frame is wrong, but rather to show its effects, and that other frames are
possible.

- 151 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

Frame Effects

It is likely that placement of any article about widespread lawlessness

and violent conflict (the Fisheries officer alleges his car may have been
torched by poachers) on the front page will create public interest in the
issue. Opposition politicians often add their voices to calls for action,
with the result that governments feel it prudent to respond by address-
ing community anxiety. In this instance, Prime Minister Helen Clark
responded immediately. The following day, the New Zealand Press As-
sociation (NZPA) reported that Clark had requested fisheries minister,
David Benson-Pope, to “look into ongoing claims of abuse of customary
fishing regulations” (NZPA, 2004, para. 1).
If Clark’s request for an inquiry eventually leads to the actual rem-
edy implied, that is, greater resourcing of the Ministry’s policing role, the
article will have contributed to a spiral of events known to media theo-
rists as ‘empire building’. Louw (2003) argues that groups such as the
military or the police focus media attention on rising crime or security
threats, creating ‘moral panic’ in the community, which in turn pressures
governments to increase funding and resources to those same security
organisations. Whether rousing such ‘moral panic’ is deliberate or not,
‘securocrats’, as Louw calls them, do usually benefit from media cover-
age that reinforces reasons for their existence.
In the “Maori Fish Scams” case, even if Benson-Pope’s inquiry leads
to a different remedy, or all allegations are found false, media coverage
did motivate political action; Benson-Pope launched a review. The cov-
erage also necessitated a response by Fisheries’ communication staff.
Fisheries’ Communications Manager, Alan Meek, says fishery issues are
always “of huge interest to the public” (A. Meek, personal communica-
tion, August 19, 2004) in New Zealand, but particular concerns emerged
around customary fishing as a result of a range of media coverage, in-
cluding a Coastwatch documentary on Television One which showed
Fisheries’ officers, coastguard and marine police on duty. A key concern
was whether customary fishing rights were being “abused for non-
customary activities i.e., selling”, but there “wasn’t any evidence of
that”. Meek says his communication department’s role is both proactive
and reactive — to “try and anticipate issues” — and, in this case, to “re-
act as swiftly as we can” (A. Meek, personal communication, August 19,
2004).

Other Frames

The third step in using frame analysis for MR is to show how alternative
frames define the problem differently and, if applicable, suggest alterna-
tive remedies. One way to assess alternative framing is to ask ‘what’s

- 152 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

missing?’ Missing perspectives may include the opinions of individuals

or organisations discussed by the article but not quoted, anyone subse-
quently affected by the article, or anyone who could offer expert insight.
In the “Maori Fish Scams” article some inclusions could be: a senior
Fisheries voice, voices representing Māori, comment from the police on
organised crime, detail directly from lawyers in the reported legal case
and a response from the fisherman whose case is mentioned. Comments
from any of those sources could potentially shift framing in follow-up
coverage.

Responding to Media Frames

If an organisation has been disadvantageously framed in the media there

are several possible avenues of response. First, MR staff consider
whether to respond at all, and if so whether to respond in the same me-
dium. Dilenschneider (2000) recommends only choosing to respond in
media outlets “where facts are important” (p. 9). In other words, if a tab-
loid medium known for sensationalism treats an organisation with sen-
sationalism and bias, MR staff should accept that most audiences recog-
nise it as such and maintain a dignified silence.
Another key factor is whether primary stakeholders use and trust the
medium in question. Hoani Jeremy Lambert, a senior consultant on
Māori communications, argues that Māori organisations are wary of re-
sponding to criticism in mainstream media, first because of high uncer-
tainty as to how they will be portrayed, and second because many of
their stakeholders neither use nor trust such sources (H. J. Lambert, per-
sonal communication, June 9, 2004). Increasingly, direct and personal-
ised communication, perhaps via regional newspapers, Māori radio,
community newsletters or a hui, is preferred (H. J. Lambert, personal
communication, June 9, 2004). Walker points out that unrepresentative
and largely negative coverage in mainstream media has led to Māori
“seceding from mainstream media to construct their own positive stories
. . . in magazines such as Mana and Tu Mai and newspapers such as
Kokiri Paetae” (Walker, 2002, p. 231). Porter says Māori audiences are
increasingly listening to Māori radio and watching Māori TV (G. Porter,
personal communication, August 19, 2004). Organisational communica-
tion efforts must respond to these audience shifts and preferences.
Agenda setting theory suggests that if stakeholders are well informed by
trusted methods, impact on their decision making from mainstream me-
dia coverage is minimised.
The only fisherman named in the “Maori Fish Scams” article, for ex-
ample, did not respond in The Dominion Post, but was interviewed in The
Gisborne Herald, where he was more likely to reach the local community
whose opinions he was most concerned to change. The story claimed the

- 153 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

fisherman had been “used as a scapegoat and made an undue example

of by the Ministry of Fisheries” (Curtis, 2004, para. 1), and was now the
topic of gossip, to the extent that he found it hard to leave his house.
The quotes that the Gisborne article attributed to the fisherman re-
framed two aspects: first that The Dominion Post’s photo of an unidenti-
fied crayfish catch, which he said had been assumed by readers to be his
catch, was unconnected with him and many times larger than his catch,
and second that he would appeal his conviction for illegal fishing. The
article’s relational framing of events reversed the ‘David vs. Goliath’
moral frame of the first article, in which individual Fisheries officers
were portrayed as facing the overwhelming and faceless might of organ-
ised crime. In the Gisborne article, the fisherman became the scapegoat,
up against the faceless might of “the Ministry’s current campaign” (Cur-
tis, 2004, para. 12). The fisherman’s quotes created a relational frame that
questioned Fisheries’ level of community consultation: “I've used those
permits for years, if there was a problem why didn't (Fisheries Gisborne
team leader) Martin Williams tell Mrs Nikora that she couldn't give out
permits” (Curtis, 2004, para. 10).
The fisherman’s response in the local paper with a smaller circula-
tion was more strategic for his personal objectives than trying to be
heard in the larger newspaper, The Dominion Post, because it was the Gis-
borne community whose opinions impacted on his quality of life. The
fisherman did not try to directly refute the original article’s frame by ar-
guing about morality or rebutting the organised crime allegations.
Rather, he used different frames to put an alternative viewpoint.
The lesson for organisational MR is that a ‘knee-jerk’ response using
the same frame and media as negative coverage, even if refuting the ar-
gument, may simply reinforce how audiences perceive the issue, and
what they see as its important aspects. A more strategic response could
mean using different media, writing directly to all members, customers
or shareholders, or inviting stakeholders to a meeting or information
event, which can be an opportunity to shift the issue to a different frame.
By placing an advertisement, giving a calm and factual version of the
issue, in a local media source that is used and trusted by those audiences
may also be an effective tactic.

Direct Responses

If an organisation’s important stakeholder groups use and trust the me-

dia source in question, MR advisors may feel it necessary to respond in
editorial within the same media. In these circumstances, several options
are available. One is to approach the journalist directly and request an
interview. If the approach is positive and non-confrontational, with an
offer of new information that will ensure a follow-up story is newswor-

- 154 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

thy, most journalists readily accept such offers. Journalists are usually
dedicated to principles of balanced and unbiased reporting and welcome
opportunities to present alternative viewpoints to those already pub-
lished.
Howard and Mathews (1988) suggest MR staff should also be willing
to take some responsibility for any media mistakes or omissions. Even
after receiving information, journalists may not have been able to find an
appropriate contact within an organisation to comment or elaborate, so a
key MR responsibility is to check that the website and switchboard staff
have clear, up-to-date media contact information, and to make sure that
nominated spokespeople can be reached at any time.

The Media Release

The media release, a short story written in journalistic news style and
using one or more news values, is the most common method of alerting
the media to an organisation’s views. Releases are usually e-mailed or
faxed to media outlets, briefly draw attention to a newsworthy item, and
provide a spokesperson’s contact details.
For example, Fisheries provides regular media releases on its web-
site; releases posted publicly in this way have the advantage of commu-
nicating directly with the public and stakeholders as well as being avail-
able for use by the media. Fisheries did not respond immediately to the
“Maori Fish Scams” article. Within three weeks, however, a release was
posted that used a factual frame to reposition the problem as “customary
fishing” (Ministry of Fisheries, 2004, para. 2) regulations, not “Maori Fish
Scams”. The release framed the problem as a combination of unclear
regulations and “abuse by an irresponsible minority of fishers”, propos-
ing “review of the amateur fishing regulations” (MFish, 2004, para. 1) as
the solution. The word Māori did not appear at all in the first half of the
release, and appeared only twice in the context of “collaboration with the
Minister of Māori Affairs and Associate Minister of Fisheries, Hon. Pare-
kura Horomia” and “endeavouring to work with Māori leaders to ad-
dress a range of issues relating to the management of customary fishing”
(MFish, 2004, para. 5). The original article’s frame of a ‘Māori versus
Fisheries’ conflict was not rebutted; rather, it was simply avoided, as was
any suggestion of a ‘scam’ or organised deception.
Fisheries minister David Benson-Pope particularly emphasised the
review was “prompted by the actions of a small number of abusers”
(MFish, 2004, para. 8). The Dominion Post appears not to have reported
the review announcement, although it was covered in The New Zealand
Herald (Taylor, 2004). Regardless of whether The Dominion Post reported
Fisheries’ release, however, Fisheries’ low-key, fact-framed response suc-
cessfully avoided a ‘worst case scenario’ in which a response that denied

- 155 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

there was a ‘Māori scam’ may have simply led to repetition of those key
words (and reinforcement of their accompanying racial stereotypes and
moral oppositions) in subsequent headlines (e.g., ‘No Māori Fish Scam,
says Minister’).

When Journalists Won’t or Can’t Report Additional Views

If speaking directly and sending a media release both fail to elicit a re-
sponse from a journalist, Hudson (1994) recommends using letters “to
circumvent journalists if they are not willing to give you a hearing” (p.
61). She says letters should be “short and make one or two points
clearly” (p. 61). In response to the “Maori Fish Scams” article, for exam-
ple, Kewene Pepperell wrote a short, sharp rebuke to The Dominion Post,
which appeared in the Letters column on page 6, March 25, 2004. Pep-
perell called the article a “cheap shot”, listed two fraud cases involving
non-Māori, and questioned why those were not labelled “Pakeha scams”
(Pepperell, 2004, p. 6). Pepperell’s retort used a moral frame, but with a
different perspective to the article’s original Fisheries vs. poachers frame,
this time placing The Dominion Post and aggrieved Māori at opposite
ends of the moral spectrum:

Little wonder Maori feel aggrieved right now. This sort of sensa-
tionalism falls a long way short of the standards I thought you'd set
for yourselves. Shame on you. (Pepperell, 2004, p. 6)

The 128-word letter was published in full and provided a powerful al-
ternative perspective.
Another possible remedy for media inaccuracy is a letter to the edi-
tor marked ‘not for publication’. If an approach to a journalist has been
unsuccessful, possibly a phone call or e-mail to the editor explaining
what happened may obtain a follow-up story, apology or retraction.
Howard and Mathews (1988) recommend that if organisations want a
retraction or correction printed, the request should specify its size and
placement. They advise being prepared to negotiate on these elements,
but caution against offering to drop further action even once a retraction
is printed, because organisations may need to seek legal damages later.
Finally, if trust has irreparably broken down with both journalist and
editor, and an organisation feels a media outlet has injured it and is un-
willing or unable to offer sufficient remedy, MR staff may seek legal ad-
vice about defamation. They may also consider complaining to the New
Zealand Press Council (NZPC) or the Broadcasting Standards Authority
N.Z. Porter urges injured parties dissatisfied with the outcome of a di-
rect complaint to a media outlet to pursue complaints as “an important
part of the process of slowly changing media attitudes” (G. Porter, per-

- 156 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

sonal communication, August 19, 2004). He says media outlets “won’t

blacklist” complainants, but complaints will “make them [media] think
about what they do”.
Shortly after the “Maori Fish Scams” article appeared, a woman who
was visible in the main photograph successfully complained to the
NZPC. The NZPC found that the combined photo and caption “would
lead a reasonable reader to the clear inference that this group is associ-
ated with the Mongrel Mob” (“Complaint Over Photo,” 2004, p. 10), and
that The Dominion Post had “breached Press Council principles relating to
accuracy, correction, subterfuge and manipulation of photographs”
(“Complaint Over Photo,” 2004, p. 10).
While such remedies may in time change media attitudes, in the
short term, an organisation’s interests are best served by establishing
strong, positive, professional relationships with the media in the first
instance, so that whenever anything about the organisation is planned
for publication, MR staff are the first to know and have ample opportu-
nity to provide plentiful, accurate information.

Review Media Planning and Policy

A final, important aspect of any media encounter is to learn from the

process and, if necessary, adjust media policies and risk management
strategies. For example, if reported comments by an employee were un-
authorised, MR staff might need to reinforce media policy internally and
provide additional media training. In this case, there was no breach of
Fisheries’ media policy. Meek explains that, because Fisheries works
closely with communities and community media in isolated locations, a
centralised, tightly controlled media policy is inappropriate for its needs,
and regional officers are authorised to comment on most issues. Excep-
tions are made for ‘national issues’, for example, whether officers need
defensive equipment to work in the field (A. Meek, personal communica-
tion, August 19, 2004). Likewise, all organisations need a media policy
that balances stakeholder needs with anticipated media interest, consid-
ering carefully which spokespeople are appropriate for what topics, and
preparing suitable responses.

Conclusion

This case study has provided an opportunity to show how the media use
headlines, pictures, captions, placement, selection and prioritisation of
sources to frame issues that they cover. Examining the responses to the
article has illustrated how an understanding of framing and counter-
framing can help keep responses to media coverage constructive and
avoid repeating media frames. A framing analysis approach looks at

- 157 -
COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

how the issue has been framed, considers the effects of that frame on key
audiences and ensures those audiences have access to alternative inter-
pretations. This may mean using alternative media, or avoiding the me-
dia altogether in favour of other PR methods, such as direct mail or
meetings.
As the range of responses to the “Maori Fish Scams” article suggests,
there are alternatives to engaging directly in argument with the media.
A key role of MR staff is to assess which avenues will enable an organi-
sation to reach important stakeholders, with a message that is framed in
its preferred terms. This should only ever occur, however, within the
context of broader three-step PR activity which ensures firstly that or-
ganisations are transparent and responsive in their dealings with all
stakeholders, before communicating those dealings to the media.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Jane Johnston, of Griffith University, Australia, and

Hoani Jeremy Lambert, of Huia Communications, Wellington, for their
generosity in providing expert feedback and guidance which greatly en-
hanced this chapter's quality. Any remaining errors, of course, are my
own.

References

Bartlett, J. (2004). Making a difference after all: The relationship between

media and strategic public relations. Australian Journal of Communica-
tion, 31(1), 75—87.
Complaint over photo upheld. (2004, October 2). The Dominion Post, p.
10.
Curtis, S. (2004, April 13). Māori fisherman to appeal decision. The Gis-
borne Herald [Electronic version]. Retrieved July 10, 2004, from
http://www.gisborneherald.co.nz/archives/April2k4/news/news_
13-04-2k4.htm
Dilenschneider, R. L. (2000). Getting your message across while under attack.
Public Relations Quarterly (Summer), 45(2), 9—11.
Entman, R. M. (2002). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured
paradigm. In D. McQuail (Ed.), McQuail's reader in mass communica-
tion theory (pp. 390—397). London: Sage.
Griffin, E. (2003). A first look at communication theory (5th ed.). New York:
McGraw Hill.

- 158 -
 MEDIA RELATIONS

Grunig, J., & Grunig, L. (1992). Models of public relations and communi-
cation. In J. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communica-
tion management (pp. 285—326). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hallahan, K. (1999). No, Virginia, it's not true what they say about pub-
licity's ‘implied third-party endorsement’ effect. Public Relations Re-
view, 25(3), 331– 350.
Howard, C., & Mathews, W. (1988). On deadline: Managing media relations.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
Hudson, M. (1994). The media game. Melbourne: Longman.
Iyengar, S. (1990). The accessibility bias in politics: Television news and
public opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2(1),
1—15.
Iyengar, S., & Simon, A. (1993). News coverage of the gulf crisis and pub-
lic opinion: A study of agenda-setting, priming, and framing. Com-
munication Research, 20(3), 365—383.
Knight, M. G. (1999). Getting past the impasse: Framing as a tool for pub-
lic relations. Public Relations Review, 25(3), 381—393.
Loh Ho-Sang, M. (2004, March 20-21). Maori fish scams. Weekend Domin-
ion Post, p. A1.
Louw, E. (2003). Terrorism kits: Propelling panic? PR-Axis News, 1(1), 4.
Retrieved July 14, 2004, from http://praxis.massey.ac.nz/fileadmin
/Praxis/Files/News_Letter/Newsletter1.pdf
Manning, P. (2001). Journalists and news production. In P. Manning
(Ed.), News and news sources: A critical introduction (pp. 50—80). Lon-
don: Sage.
Mathews, S. A. (2004). Riptionary.com surf lingo lexicon. Retrieved July 9,
2004, from http://www.riptionary.com/cgibin/ripsearch.pl?query
=h
McCombs, M. (2000). New frontiers in agenda setting: Agendas of attributes
and frames. Retrieved May 21, 2004, from
http://www.utexas.edu/coc/journalism/SOURCE/faculty/facul/
McCombs/Agenda_Setting.html
McGregor, J. (2002a, July 10-12). Restating news values: Contemporary crite-
ria for selecting the news. Paper presented at the ANZCA 2002 Confer-
ence: Communication; Reconstructed for the 21st Century, Queen-
sland, Australia. Retrieved December 21, 2004, from
http://www.bond.edu.au/hss/communication/ANZCA/papers/J
McGregorPaper.pdf
McGregor, J. (2002b). Crime news: The cutting edge. In J. McGregor & M.
Comrie (Eds.), What’s news? Reclaiming journalism in New Zealand (pp.
81-95). Palmerston North, N.Z.: Dunmore.
Ministry of Fisheries (MFish). (2004). Review of customary fishing rules.
Retrieved May 23, 2004, from http://www.mfish.govt.nz/cur
rent/press/070404.htm

- 159 -
 COMMUNICATION IN THE NEW ZEALAND WORKPLACE

New Zealand Press Association (NZPA). (2004). Minister asked to report on

alleged abuse of customary fishing. Retrieved July 14, 2004, from the
Factiva database, document NZPA000020040322e 03m0003c.
Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The spiral of silence: Public opinion and our so-
cial skin. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
O'Sullivan, T., Hartley, J., Saunders, D., & Fiske, J. (1983). Key concepts in
communication. London: Methuen.
Patterson, J. (1999). Ethics still count. Vital Speeches, 65(23), 731.
Pepperell, K. (2004, March 25). No wonder we feel aggrieved. The Domin-
ion Post, p. 6.
Princeton University. (2004). Wordnet:; Overview for 'scam'. Retrieved July
14, 2004, from http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn
2.0?stage= 1&word=scam
Rubin, A. M., & Windahl, S. (1986). The uses and dependency model of
mass communication. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 3(3),
184—199.
Taylor, K. (2004, April 7). Abuses prompt review of customary fishing
rules. The New Zealand Herald, p. A6.
Walker, R. (2002). Māori news is bad news. In J. McGregor & M. Comrie
(Eds.), What’s news? Reclaiming journalism in New Zealand (pp. 215-
231). Palmerston North, N.Z.: Dunmore.

1
The Dominion Post declined permission to reproduce the article and photo-
graphs as an illustration to this chapter, and at the date of writing online postings
of it at the www.stuff.co.nz website have been removed. However, the full text
without photos or captions is available in the Factiva database (Document
DOMPOS0020040323e03k0003i), accessible through most university libraries.

- 160 -

View publication stats