Frankie Flack: How I treat naughty biz journalists

This is the time of year that I really feel for Santa Claus. If he wants to reward the kiddies on the “nice” list, he has a wonderful range of options. But for punishing those twerps on the “naughty” list, the toolkit is a lot more sparse: all he can do to send a message is deliver coal.

That’s too bad, because I’m sure some of those kids deserve something more: a slap upside the head, a hammer to the Xbox, a couple of years at military school.

When it comes to the hacks on my naughty list, I’m a bit like old Saint Nick: there’s only so much I can do. But here are my coal-in-the-stocking options (and what it means for you):

The Delayed Call-Back: To be honest, it’s pretty rare that I’m petty enough not to call someone back as quickly as possible. But there are times when I have to prioritize who gets prompt service. In theory, I should triage those according to need (wires and dailies ahead of long-leads, for example). In practice, if you’ve jerked me around recently, you end up at the back of the line. Instant karma.

The Embargo Snub: I’m on the record as loving embargoes, and I’m all for sending embargoed news as widely as my clients allow. There’s only one reason why I don’t shoot people stuff under embargo: trust. If you don’t have a track record with me, or if you’re screwed me over–even once–by breaking an embargo or publishing off-the-record comments or any of that jazz, there’s no way you get the news early.

The Email Comment: The reality is that I want my C-level guys to talk live, in person or on the phone, with as many people as possible. But if I tell you that we can only answer questions via email, that’s another indication that I don’t trust you, either because you have a history of getting facts and context wrong, out of willful ignorance or general incompetence. If we keep everything in writing, I get to keep some semblance of control. I’ve yet to have an on-the-record email misquoted.

The Low-Level Exec: My ass is on the line when my CEO takes an interview. If I think you’ll make me look dumb, I’ll funnel things to lower-level executives who are less likely to go ballistic if you ask stupid questions or publish a hatchet job. If I refuse to put top talent on the line with you, at least one of two things is true: you don’t work for a particularly meaningful outlet or you haven’t shown yourself to be particularly responsible. The former is negotiable (I love helping out smart go-getters climbing the ladder). The latter is not.

There’s a sense that flacks will blacklist people, keep news and execs away from certain gadflies. The reality is that I dance with (almost) everyone. There’s no benefit in prosecuting a vendetta against the guys with the audience. There have been one or two exceptions over my career, hacks who just had it in for my client or my industry, but in general, if you’re getting stiffed, it’s not because you’re an asshole. It’s because I can’t trust you.