LBC news presenter and reporter Charlotte Lynch knows what it takes to get a story on air… and she’s sharing some of those secrets today!

She tells us exactly what makes her think “I need to get this person on the radio” as well as one phrase that makes her immediately delete a pitch. Charlotte does also give the phrase that makes her open a pitch immediately too!

Before we get into this week’s edition… there are a final few tickets left to our second Off the Record live event THIS THURSDAY in London! We have a stellar line up to talk about all things Budget - as well as how to secure political coverage. Discounted tickets are now available for the event here.

We’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders to talk pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking. Right, back to business!

Charlotte, you’re a news presenter and a reporter. Can you talk us through what your week looks like and how you balance both? In what way do they demand different things from you? I present a daily three-hour long rolling news radio show, where I “drive the desk” myself. This basically means keeping the radio station on air and playing all of the production and clips by myself! Because it’s rolling news I have to be constantly on alert for breaking stories, and there’s been loads of times where I’ve had to drop everything and roll on one story, even if we don’t have any audio. Reporting and presenting definitely demand different things, but I’ve found my seven years as a reporter has actually given me loads of confidence and skills in my presenting.

Reporting has given me the ability to freestyle live on air whilst making sure I’m hitting the key points and staying on track, and react quickly to breaking stories. After sevem years with Global and LBC they offered me the chance to present on LBC News full time, which was amazing! I was very keen to learn a new skill, and doing all the tech myself has definitely been a learning curve. I did want to hold on to reporting, so I still get the chance to go on what we call OB’s (outside broadcasts) on big political days like the Budget. I also have time to work on my own original stories when I’m not on air, so even though my show is only three hours long, I’m usually in the office several hours beforehand.

Subscribe now

What makes you think: “I need to get this person on air”? Anyone who has done something or uncovered something major. I LOVE to hear about people achieving amazing things, like a medical breakthrough, a great investigation or a massive personal challenge, and hear from them how they did it. I also want to hear from people who explain things in a down-to-earth manner with no jargon. It can be hard to find someone who’s able to explain a complicated piece of research in a clear, non-patronising way - it’s a real skill.

When something big breaks, what are you looking for in the first five minutes? First hour? Second day? First five minutes - who, what, when, where, why? First hour - AUDIO. Police, a reporter, an expert, anyone to bring it to life quickly. Second day - People affected by whatever has happened if they’re ready to start speaking out.

What is one thing comms pros obsess over that you think journalists don’t care about? Conversely, what is something journalists care enormously about that PRs often overlook? I don’t like being asked for the questions in advance - we’re usually not organising a massively controversial interview with a PR and we’ve often already received a press release and quote from them. Unless it’s a big name guest like the Prime Minister, I don’t usually prepare questions in advance (or have time!) and prefer to treat it as a natural conversation.

However, Journalists care enormously about the top line - and you’d be surprised how many press releases we get which are actually an advert with no realistic news line!

Leave a comment

Quick fire time…

• One phrase that makes you immediately delete a pitch? - a new study... (from a private company no one has heard of).

• One phrase that makes you immediately open one? Expert available today on a major breaking story.

• One thing journalists could learn from PRs? How to pitch! PRs pitch every day and have a really difficult job getting through to journalists. It takes a truly brilliant pitch to get a journalist to make space for a story and PRs know better than anyone how to put a solid one together. Journalists pitching an original story to their editor (or as I’ve had to do before - directly to presenter Nick Ferrari) could learn a thing or two from PRs.

• One thing PRs could learn from journalists? understanding the audience when deciding whether the story is right for your platform. What works for one channel doesn’t always work for another.

You can find Charlotte on Instagram and LinkedIn.

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X

  Share

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

A bit of nostalgia and a bit of politics today.

The sadness comes from the closure of the Tameside Reporter, a local paper that has served the people of Greater Manchester for 171 years.

Its patch to the east of Manchester takes in nine towns, including Hyde, Denton and Stalybridge. And if you’re not from the area, I imagine it doesn’t mean too much to you.

Subscribe now

But the Tameside Reporter was the first home to one of my journalistic heroes and inspirations, Harold Evans.

He went on to make his name at the Sunday Times. And although I was young (we’re talking late 1970s here), I loved the paper and the investigations team he set up, Insight. I think it appealed to my sense of adventure to do these big probes and unearth scandals.

Like us, did you think Andy Burnham’s conference speech might be the most significant for years? In that case you should be at our Off The Record live event where we have a stellar line up to talk about all things Budget - as well as how to secure political coverage. Discounted tickets are now available for the event here.

On 15 October in London, we’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders to talk pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking.

Grab your discounted ticket here. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss out.

When I was a bit older, I looked into the details of some of those stories and campaigns. The outing of Kim Philby as part of the Cambridge spy ring and the campaign for the victims of thalidomide to win compensation remain some of the best journalism I’ve ever seen, even 50 years later.

When I was training to be a journalist, I even hunted down his five-volume editing and design manuals. They were from the early seventies and out of print but I managed to get hold of a set. They are beautifully written and remain on my bookshelf.

So, it’s sad to see the closure of the paper that set Evans, who came from a very humble, working-class background, on his way. His autobiography My Paper Chase, which was published in 2009, is well worth a read. Ironically, its subtitle is True Stories of Vanished Times.

There’s a wider point here too. Press Gazette estimates that at least 293 local papers have stopped the presses in the last 20 years. It’s bad for democracy and creates news deserts (which the government has at least started to address) which leave whole communities uninformed and ignorant of what is happening in their neighbourhoods.

There’s lots in play here. Changing ways of consuming news, the struggle with Google and AI overviews.

But Chris Bird, who took over the Reporter and other media after the last owner went bust, adds a new one. The effect of taxes on local advertisers – still the lifeblood of print products, particularly when sales are falling.

He told Press Gazette rising print and operating costs, together with continued pressure on print advertising revenue, had made the Reporter unsustainable.

“Local businesses right now on the high street are under huge pressure because of tax, National Insurance and business rates. They need to find ways of saving money, and local advertisers cannot be expected to advertise everywhere,” he said.
“Tameside has taken a real hit. A walk around the high streets in its nine towns shows that retailers and other hardworking businesses are having a tough time. The impact is clear.”

Mr Burnham has hinted at the need to help business and that the increase in national insurance contributions imposed by Rachel Reeves was a mistake. With the budget just a few weeks away it will be worth watching to see if changes are made that boost business and the economy – and maybe encourage firms to advertise a bit more.

Enough politics!

Let me finish with a last bit of nostalgia.

It’s hard to make modern-day comparisons with Jeffrey Archer, who was the son of a journalist and who died at the weekend. Multi-millionaire author, Tory politician, friend of the rich and famous, art collector and bon viveur. Host of Krug champagne and shepherd’s pie soirees at his penthouse suite just down from Parliament. But a serial liar and rogue.

His 1987 libel case against the Daily Star, which had accused him of paying off a prostitute he was seeing, was the media law case of the century. He won, despite prostitute Monica Coughlan giving evidence, after his wife told the court her Jeffrey would never stray. The judge asked the jury how could anyone disbelieve the “fragrant” Mary Archer? And Archer walked away with £500,000.

Archer v Daily Star is still the go to case study for the dangers of journalists relying on the truth defence.

The verdict was a disaster for the Star – its editor Lloyd Turner was sacked six weeks later. But the story doesn’t end there. A few years later it emerged Archer had lied about his alibi in court. He was jailed for perjury, his reputation sullied forever.

What did he do? Wrote a bestselling book about it of course. Rest in peace Jeffrey, a man whose own life was even more engrossing than his novels.

Leave a comment

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X.

  Share

I know it can sometimes feel difficult to get journalists to leave the office for a coffee… nevermind a site visit. I’ve already written the ultimate guide to getting a journalist to meet you for a brew, so I won’t repeat that here.

Instead, today I want to focus on what you can do to persuade reporters to leave their desks for a site visit, press trip, tour or in-person briefing. I’m a firm believer that one of the best parts of journalism is being out and about… and that means meeting weird and wonderful people, seeing weird and wonderful things and getting access to places most people never get to see.

And this job still offers plenty of those opportunities. Don’t get me wrong, newsrooms are shrinking and the demands on reporters are growing. There’s video to shoot, analysis to write, live blogs to man, news stories to file, podcasts to host… the list goes on. But that doesn’t mean the roving reporter is a thing of the past.

Come say hi! There are discounted tickets available for our second Off the Record live event.

We’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders on 15 October in London to talk about pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking.

Grab your discounted ticket here. Right, back to business!

The bar is just higher than it once was to get a journalist to come to you. It still happens, though. And there are some things you can do to increase your chances of getting a reporter out of the office and to your site.

1. Give reporters a reason to do the visit now. I hate to say it but a site doesn’t suddenly become interesting because there’s a press day on. There still needs to be a news hook or a reason to run the story now. Is something new being announced? Has a site just hit a significant milestone – one that’s of interest to the public, not just the company and its shareholders? Is there a seasonal development? A political policy impact? New research? All of this helps build a decent package.

2. Spell out what the journalist will see and experience from the get-go. “Come and see our new facility” is rarely compelling. Instead, make clear what they will see that they can’t see elsewhere. Who will they get access to? What can they photograph or film? Why is this timely now? Give them a reason to make the visit.

Read more

Read more

Sit back, relax and enjoy this edition… which is pretty much a newsletter about a newsletter!

Politico’s London Playbook and Sunday Crunch are mandatory eading in Westminster. They’re the guide to what’s happening, who’s talking to who and what everyone in the SW1 postcode needs to know. They’re read by political journalists, special advisers, ministers and the wider political world alike.

But what agoes on behind the scenes to produce it? How does it land in our inboxes fully formed, twice a day, every weekday? And how can comms pros get in on the action?

I’m thrilled to have Noah Keate, Politico’s Sunday Crunch author, in the hot seat for this edition. He’s pulling back the curtain on how it all comes together, what makes a story Playbook-worthy and what comms pros need to know if they want to get on his radar.

A quick plug before we get into this week’s edition… discounted tickets are now available for our second Off the Record live event.

On 15 October in London, we’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders to talk pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking.

Grab your discounted ticket here. Right, back to business!

Noah, for someone who has never read London Playbook, how would you describe what it is trying to do every morning? London Playbook is a twice daily newsletter published at 7am and 5pm every weekday. The morning edition, which launched in September 2017, tells readers what’s happening in Westminster that day. The opening subheading “Driving the Day” is the clue — it’s a product designed to inform very busy people first thing in the morning about the forthcoming hours in SW1.

Key to the newsletter’s success is its usefulness — from highlighting striking scoops in the papers, last night’s events in the House of Commons or conveying information about what the party leaders and key spokespeople are up to, a reader should finish the newsletter informed about what those at the heart of power are talking about. Of course, the newsletter shapes, as well as reflects, that conversation.

The main readership is proudly and unapologetically the Westminster bubble: Cabinet ministers, special advisers, MPs, parliamentary staffers, political journalists and civil servants. As such, the stories included are designed first and foremost with them in mind. What do they need to know? Does this actually move things on? I began reading Playbook at university while studying politics — while my nerdery enthusiasm would have been appreciated, I was on the outer layer of the newsletter’s target audience.

Share

Playbook — alongside the whole of POLITICO — is studiously impartial but that doesn’t stop us having lots of fun along the way. Nobody wants dull emails, especially at 7am, so the copy has a tremendous sense of irreverence and cheekiness with a plethora of puns to lighten people up. We never want readers to scroll past anything, meaning a playful approach alongside the hard-hitting news is essential.

Playbook PM is a very similar offering, except it explores what’s actually happened since 7am to move the political agenda. Often, there are well timed parliamentary statements, speeches or interviews that land just before 5pm, which provide a fresh offering for readers who may not have checked the news since the morning. If there’s a big event happening later in the evening, such as Andy Burnham meeting Donald Trump, the newsletter can also throw forward to this.

Sunday Crunch, which I’ve written since June, is released on Sunday afternoons and rounds up the best of the weekend political shows and stories. Sunday has been a political day that sets the Westminster weather for decades, so this provides a helpful guide for those tuning back into SW1 after steering clear of the news. It also means Monday morning’s Playbook can focus on the week ahead and doesn’t need to look back at the weekend too much.

If you could give comms pros three rules for dealing with London Playbook/Sunday Crunch, what would they be? Reach out to the author writing the next day’s newsletter. My colleagues Andrew McDonald (Monday to Wednesday) and Sam Francis (Thursday and Friday) split morning Playbook responsibilities while Emilio Casalicchio writes Playbook PM. They each spend lots of time reading press releases and speaking to ministers/advisers meaning a bid sent solely to the Playbook inbox might get lost in the deluge of news. Morning Playbook in particular involves strange working hours (more on that below), so expect calls/messages at unusual times to clarify information.

Subscribe now

Make sure you’ve read some past editions to get a sense of what topics are likely to make the cut. In a packed newsletter, the information needs to be relevant to the audience mentioned above, telling them something interesting, engaging and, where possible, revelatory. The newsletters are forward facing, so timely bids that throw ahead to what’s going to happen are likely to land well.

Don’t be disappointed if your submission fails to make the cut. There’s a high demand to get featured and space is always tight, especially when there’s a lot of news going on. The team is very appreciative of pitches and, as the newsletters run so regularly, there’s always next time. We’d rather have too much to pick from than too little. For more information, I imagine newsletter authors would be happy to get coffees on what content works best.

How early does the Playbook team start working on the newsletter? Can you tell us a bit about that process? Morning Playbook appears to arrive effortlessly into your inbox every morning — but a bumper amount of work has gone into it behind the scenes. I spent my first year at POLITICO as the morning Playbook reporter, which involved writing the lower half of the email. I’d work from mid-afternoon putting blurbs together, attending events, speaking to press officers and following late breaking news.

For the main morning Playbook author, the work is on a different scale. The first editions of the newspapers don’t tend to drop until 9pm at the earliest, meaning an overnight shift poring over the political stories is the only option. A newsletter filed at 6pm the previous day is almost certain to be out of date by 7am.

Playbook PM’s hours, as you might expect, are slightly more normal — though a frantic writing time emerges at around 3pm right up until the newsletter’s publication at 5pm. The newsletter could be upended at the last minute by breaking news at 4.45pm, or a press conference kicking off at 5.15pm, which could make the copy redundant if the newsletter is sent early. There really are no hard and fast rules.

Sunday Crunch has an early start to trawl through the Sunday papers before the weekend political shows start. Cabinet ministers and opposition spokespeople are likely to get asked about topics/scoops which appear in the press, so being across what’s likely to get discussed is invaluable. It’s then a game of listening to the shows and picking out the freshest newslines ready for those who chose to have a Sunday off watching the weekend programmes.

All the newsletters involve not only writing but speaking to lots of people — special advisers, press offices, ministers, civil servants — for clarification about the day ahead and to ensure the newsletter is at the heart of the Westminster echo system … even as the morning Playbook authors are asleep when SW1’s day is beginning.

Leave a comment

If I’m a comms pro and I think I have a story for Playbook, how should I pitch it?It’s best to contact the newsletter author directly via email or WhatsApp with a specific message about why the story is relevant to Playbook’s audience. A generic mass email is both easier to miss and harder to identify the key point. Our audience are clued up and in the know, so there’s a high bar for inclusion in a product read by key figures in SW1.

Given the earlier comments about the product driving the day, any details about how, where and why something is being done helps immensely. Playbook also values fun, colour and mischief — where appropriate, sprinkling that might also prompt a better chance of getting in if it’ll deliver a wry smile on readers’ faces.

The newsletters rely heavily on linking out to stories/reports, so that readers interested in the specific item previewed can pursue it in more detail. Therefore, flagging the key statistic/recommendation/finding very clearly is super useful, especially with an explanation about how it might move the dial in Westminster and is distinct from reports/campaigns that have been covered before.

What do you want a reader to feel they know after reading Playbook/Sunday Crunch that they wouldn’t necessarily know from reading the morning papers?The newsletters provide an engaging, insightful and thought-provoking narrative that links the key stories from the papers together — and saves readers time by leaving out the non-political stories that, while possibly important, aren’t relevant to their day. Rather than just a discrete reading of each paper, the newsletters offer a wider message/angle about what they’re conveying — and how that will affect subsequent behaviour in Westminster.

Playbook and Crunch also flag scoops and long reads of our own, as well as great political stories on online websites/Substacks that might not necessarily get an outing in the press. Again, while many of the papers reflect on yesterday’s events, Playbook is forward facing — all while feeding in the previous evening’s events where relevant.

Playbooks also have their own bread and butter basics which serves the Westminster crowd just right. Morning Playbook links to all the newspaper front pages, the political media rounds and a ‘London Calling’ section containing the Westminster weather, people’s birthdays (it’s often how some people remember to wish someone a birthday greeting!), notable job moves, political podcast recommendations and the infamous ‘Spotteds’ of people at receptions last night — made all the more better with an amusing speech or unexpected encounter.

Afternoon Playbook also includes many interesting political social media posts, highlights upcoming evening dos taking place and has some similar features to ‘London Calling.’ It helps the readers to all feel part of the Westminster village — and is integral to the newsletter because of who our audience is.

What’s something comms pros often think is important that actually doesn’t matter very much to you? The broad nature of British politics means some bids flagging reports, events or surveys can have a rather tenuous link to SW1 and don’t, on the surface, appear relevant to Playbook’s audience. While many of these pitches are worthy and fascinating, they don’t always meet the bar.

A report, for example, featuring the words/endorsement of a minister or senior political figure and a contemporary Westminster political hook is likely to do far better than a generic sounding survey which could feature in any newspaper.

Quick fire…

Finish this sentence: If you want to get into Sunday Crunch/Playbook, never… send pitches too late. Timing is always tight and the publication deadlines come far quicker and earlier than they first appear. Newsletter writers are busy people meaning as much notice as possible gives writers the best chance to come back with queries.

Email or WhatsApp? Both have their uses and are always jam packed with messages. WhatsApp is easier for quick one to one chats while email works better for lengthier press releases and links to, say, where a document or article will appear.

One thing that instantly makes you suspicious of a pitch? Good journalists should, to some extent, regard all pitches with a degree of suspicion. Any that appear overly generic but made to look personal are likely to raise a newsletter author’s eyebrow. There’s been a lot of coverage about this recently, but polling for an organization which confirms what the organization already stands for may also struggle to pass the sniff test.

You’ve ramped up your multimedia journalism recently. Tell me about that… Over the last few months, I’ve started posting videos on X, LinkedIn, Bluesky and Threads (remember that platform?) highlighting my work, including articles and Sunday Crunch. It’s a great exercise for concisely summarizing the top line of the newsletter and encouraging people to read the product. Even though I am a journalist who writes first and foremost, the opportunity to engage in more multimedia storytelling is very rewarding and fulfilling.

What’s your favourite part about being Sunday Crunch Author? The opportunity to analyze the political week that’s been and the one to come, by reading and watching quality political journalism and then imparting that insight to readers. Writing Crunch helps me feel more prepared for the week ahead, so I hope it provides the same service to readers.

To contact Noah, visit his Politico profile page . Read Sunday Crunch here. You can get hold of him on LinkedIn too.

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X.

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

A quick plug before we get into this week’s edition. Discounted tickets are now available for our second Off the Record live thanks to our early bird offer.

On 15 October in London, we’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders to talk pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking.

Grab your discounted ticket here. You never know, maybe we’ll talk about op-eds too.

I’ve been doing some legal consultancy in the last few months with a variety of publishers including regional papers and trade publications.

I should hold my hands up now and say I am not a qualified lawyer, but I am the chair of the National Council for the Training of Journalists law board and have always been on top of media law developments as part of my journalism career.

Interestingly, wherever I go there’s a similar conversation at the moment: can we name someone and if we do and later get a request to remove it from a website, do we have to?

Subscribe now

It’s more of a live issue for publishers than ever before – and I think it’s of value to PRs to know a bit of the thinking and how it can impact their work.

So, a few thoughts on privacy, court orders, standard anonymity and the right to be forgotten (we have covered other legal issues like defamation in the past here ).

PRIVACY
The days of kiss and tell stories in the Sunday tabloids are long gone because of stricter privacy laws around relationships. And I’m assuming not many of you are in that field anyhow. But other privacy rules are just as strong and since the introduction of the Human Rights Act 25 years ago have been largely settled by the courts and precedent.

So beyond a footballer being out injured, it is largely impossible to discuss someone’s health without their explicit permission.
That means if you are a health PR, case studies need to give their consent to be identified and pictured. But many other lines of PR will also come across the issue. A senior director stepping down from his role because of illness for example. If you say what is wrong with him make sure it is agreed with the executive. If it is sent out to the media, they will fairly assume they have permission to report it.
There are public interest defences to a breach of privacy – exposing criminality or a danger to public health and safety.

Read more

I am going to admit something right off the bat… I have commissioned far more op-eds than I’ve written. I probably deal with around one op-ed a day (we’re a big fan of them at the Express)! So, I thought I would dedicate this edition to pitching and writing them, from a journalist’s point of view… including my thoughts on AI-written pieces.

Before we get into the nitty gritty of op-eds, a quick plug: discounted tickets for our second Off the Record LIVE are now available with our early bird offer.

On 15 October in London, we’ll be bringing together senior political journalists and Westminster insiders to talk pitching, building relationships, the Budget and how “the lobby” works… followed by drinks, nibbles and networking.

Grab your discounted ticket here. You never know, maybe we’ll talk about op-eds too.

So, back to that topic!

An op-ed is an opinion article published by a newspaper or magazine that is written by an external contributor. It is usually pegged to a current event (which is key when pitching)! They’re a great way of getting your voice and expertise out into the world.

So…how long should they be? Should you write the whole op-ed before pitching it? What makes me commission one? What makes me ignore one?

1. Don’t write it all before pitching it. I often get sent fully written op-eds in an initial pitch. I would steer clear of doing this for a number of reasons but the main one is that it isn’t necessarily a very good use of your time. You could be writing about something that never sees the light of day if it isn’t commissioned. I’d suggest stringing together a few sentences with your argument and information about the author and putting that in an email to a journalist. Also, every publication has a different word count so you might write and pitch a 1,500-word article (which has happened to me) and then find out the publication wants 350 words instead.

2. Give me a reason to publish it now. This is probably one of the most important tips on this list. An opinion piece shouldn’t just be “here is what I think about X topic”. Give journalists a timely reason to run the piece. I often get op-ed pitches on topics that aren’t in the news agenda currently. Try to make sure the issue you’re writing about (or the person authoring it) is newsworthy. Sometimes the “who” can be as important as the “what”.

3. The author matters. I want to elaborate on a point I’ve made above. The author can matter. Not always, but sometimes. The person with the biggest job title isn’t automatically the best person to write an op-ed. Sometimes a person who has first-hand experience of an issue makes for a much better piece than a CEO. Pitch authors who genuinely have a point of view.

Read more

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

It’s the holy grail for publishers – not just how to make money now but how to attract a younger community who will stay engaged and will be the audience for years to come.

So interesting research from the Press Gazette earlier this month on how the UK’s top 50 publishers are getting on with finding and keeping readers who are under 35.

Subscribe now

And I say with some confidence that you’ll never guess which publication has the highest number of under 35s as a percentage of its readers. The Financial Times. Nearly 27% of their readers are under 35 – and even more impressively that younger age group represent 36% of time spent on the FT’s online platforms and its distributed content (on Apple News etc).

That is a phenomenal success – probably aided by business subscriptions and a young, wealthy workforce working in finance.

Beyond the FT though, the figures show a more difficult trend. The Guardian has the second highest percentage of under 35s with just under one in four of its readers in that age group. But they make up less than 8% of the time spent engaging with its content.

The Times and Sunday Times have similar figures. The Telegraph, Mail, Express and Star can get barely 4% of engagement time from under 35s.

In other words, no mainstream publisher can get young people to stay with their content for any length of time.

It’s perhaps not a huge surprise. Younger people consume news in different ways. Publishers are slowly learning that you can’t just make a younger generation consume news like baby boomers do.

It explains why there’s a push away from home sites as a front door (and Google changes have made getting them to that front door more difficult than ever) to going to the places where younger consumers take in their information. That means TikTok, Instagram, WhatsApp and YouTube (Facebook as well – although again that site is trending towards an audience who is a bit older). Interestingly, Ofcom suggests 21% of UK adults have used AI for news in the past month.

There are ways that publishers are making that happen. Turning journalists into personalities on podcasts, YouTube and Substack. Concentrating on explaining the news and the behind the scenes views rather than straight reporting. And ideally in a way that is short and to the point and tells why it matters to the viewer.

So, in this changing landscape, what does it mean for PRs and Comms experts? Here are nine ideas on how you might want to change your thinking

Stop measuring success by the masthead alone

A piece in a major newspaper may still be valuable for credibility and what your clients want to see, but it doesn’t automatically mean you’ve reached a large young audience. Increasingly, persuade clients to move away from this as the only metric.

Pitch to the journalist, not the publication

Journalists, including staffers on national papers, are increasingly being encouraged to develop their personal brand on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok and Substack or similar sites. The individual journalist’s distribution network can therefore matter as much as or even more than the publication’s brand.
So look at their social following, their YouTube presence, podcasts they appear on, the formats in which they communicate best and what their audience responds to.

Give journalists something that works on video

Read more

Artificial intelligence is everywhere but what makes an AI story worth a journalist’s time?

Effie Webb, from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, takes the reins of Off the Record to share what she looks for when investigating Big Tech, the questions comms teams should be asking themselves and the responses that don’t help when a journalist comes knocking.

What makes you look at an AI story or pitch and think: “Yes, I want to investigate this”? Usually there needs to be a person, or a group of people, somewhere in the story who are feeling the consequences of the technology in a very real way. AI accountability reporting can become abstract very quickly, especially when the conversation is dominated by models, benchmarks and sweeping claims about the future, so I am much more interested in who is benefiting now, who is paying the price and who has the power to make those decisions.

A lot of the strongest investigations seem to fall into one of two categories. There is AI going wrong, where somebody uses a system to scam, deceive or harm people, and then there is AI working much as intended, where people use a product in ways its creators have actively encouraged and the consequences turn out to be rather less benign than the marketing suggested. I often find the second category more revealing because it tells you something about the incentives built into the product rather than simply pointing to a rogue user.

Your Character.AI investigation contributed to the company announcing major safety changes. What did that experience teach you about the relationship between investigative journalism and corporate accountability? It was a fairly rare example of being able to see a connection between sustained scrutiny and a company making substantial changes to how its product worked. Character.AI even cited media reporting when announcing some of those changes, which is unusual and made the relationship between scrutiny and response unusually visible.

There were other pressures involved, including lawsuits and families who had been raising concerns for some time, so I would be cautious about drawing a neat line from one investigation to one corporate decision. Even so, it was encouraging to see that reporting could form part of the pressure that forced a very large technology company to respond in a meaningful way.

The less comforting lesson is that many of the concerns were hardly invisible beforehand and families had already been speaking out for a long time. That raises a more difficult question about why it took lawsuits, sustained reporting and public pressure before some of those safeguards arrived. Accountability journalism can help force change, but sometimes the more revealing story is why the change required that much pressure in the first place.

If a company is using AI in its products or services, what questions should its comms team be asking internally before a journalist comes knocking? I would begin with an almost embarrassingly basic question, which is what the AI is actually for. If there is a genuine use case, the company should be able to explain what problem it solves, provide some evidence that it actually works and say clearly who benefits from it. From there, I would want to know who could be disadvantaged, what foreseeable misuse looks like, what happens when the system gets something wrong and whether those risks were considered before the product was launched.

Then there are the less glamorous questions that become extremely important once something goes wrong. What data is being used, where did it come from, who has access to it, is there meaningful human oversight and can somebody challenge a decision made by the system? I would also ask whether the company would feel comfortable explaining all of this publicly, because if the answer is no then that is probably worth examining internally before a journalist asks the same question.

Cost is going to matter much more too, particularly where public money is involved. If an organisation has spent millions introducing an AI system, it should be able to explain why the technology was needed in the first place and whether there is evidence that it represents value for money. I realise this starts to sound slightly like a compliance checklist, but these are exactly the sorts of questions reporters begin asking once the shiny launch announcement is over.

When a journalist approaches a company with difficult questions about its use of AI, what is the worst possible way for the comms team to respond, and conversely, what information do you wish companies would volunteer? Not replying at all is obviously fairly high on the list, but one of the more frustrating versions is a long phone call on background where a company gives genuinely useful explanations and then follows it with a written statement so generic that almost none of that context can actually make it into the story. You can end up in the peculiar position of understanding the company’s argument reasonably well while having very little usable material with which to represent it fairly.

I also become slightly suspicious when the first response is to ask which competitors I am approaching or whether everybody else will be getting the same questions, because usually I am asking about a specific decision made by a specific company. What another business may have done does not really explain that decision.

The most useful responses are often surprisingly straightforward. Answer the questions, point me towards relevant policies or documents, explain how the decision was reached and tell me if there is important context I have missed. If you think the premise of the story is wrong, say why and show me the evidence, because a substantive disagreement is far more useful than three paragraphs about how seriously the company takes safety.

You’ve investigated the people and systems behind AI, as well as the companies developing and monetising it. What do you think comms professionals most misunderstand about the AI industry? I cannot really speak for comms professionals as a whole, although I think everyone working around this industry has to be conscious of how extraordinarily good the AI sector has become at describing itself. There is an enormous, expensive and very polished messaging machine behind the industry and we are regularly told that large language models are going to transform medicine, education, science, work and almost every other part of human existence.

Sometimes there is good evidence behind those claims and sometimes there is a demo, a prediction and a very enthusiastic chief executive. The danger is that the industry’s preferred language starts becoming everybody else’s language too, so claims about capability, safety or productivity get repeated often enough that they begin to acquire the status of facts before the underlying evidence has really been tested.

Journalists fall into this trap as well and I certainly have. The useful corrective is usually to return to fairly basic questions about what the system actually does, how often it works, what it is being compared with, who produced the evidence, who makes money if we believe the claim and what happens to the people on the other side of it. AI is an unusually hype-heavy industry, so treating that hype as something to investigate rather than simply relay is increasingly important.

Subscribe now

What AI story should comms professionals be paying more attention to over the next year? The changing public mood around AI. For the last few years there has been an assumption that putting AI into a product automatically makes it sound newer, cleverer and more desirable, but I think that period is fading as people become less impressed by the label itself and more interested in whether the technology actually improves anything.

People are starting to ask much more basic questions about whether these systems work, why they have been introduced, whether they are collecting more data, whether somebody is losing their job because of them, why they cost so much and whether users can simply turn them off. That shift matters because “AI-powered” is starting to look less like a universal selling point and more like something companies may actually have to justify.

I would also watch the growing world of GEO and AEO, and more broadly the question of what happens when information about companies is mediated through chatbots. If somebody asks ChatGPT, Gemini or another assistant about your organisation, what does it say, where did that information come from and is it accurate? For years communications teams have thought about what appears on the first page of Google, but increasingly the person asking the question may never see a page of search results at all. That creates a strange new reputation problem because the company is no longer dealing simply with what has been published about it, but also with what an AI system has decided to synthesise from everything else.

Quick fire time…

How do you use AI in your job? Mostly to help deal with enormous quantities of information. NotebookLM is a firm favourite and Google Pinpoint is brilliant when you have mountains of court documents or records that would otherwise take days to search manually. I find these tools most useful for helping me locate the interesting needle in the haystack rather than for doing the reporting or making the judgement that comes afterwards.

AI buzzword you never want to hear again? Anything implying inevitability, whether that is “the horse has bolted”, “the second industrial revolution” or the claim that AI is simply going to revolutionise everything. I always want to know what exactly is being revolutionised and on the basis of what evidence, because declaring something inevitable can become a very effective way of avoiding the more difficult argument about whether it is desirable, useful or even true.

What does “off the record” mean to you? It means you are giving me information that can help inform or advance my reporting, but I cannot publish it as information you gave me or identify you as the source. If I subsequently establish the same information independently, I can report what I have established without revealing where the original lead came from.

More importantly, those terms need to be agreed before the conversation starts because different journalists and newsrooms can use “off the record”, “background” and “not for attribution” differently. I would much rather establish exactly what we both mean at the beginning than discover afterwards that we had two completely different interpretations.

One piece of advice for a PR trying to build a relationship with you? If I have approached you for a comment, pick up the phone. A short conversation can often resolve something that would otherwise become ten emails and several misunderstandings, and it also means I end up with an actual person in my contacts who I know I can speak to rather than another communications address sitting in my inbox.

I would also make sure pitches are genuinely relevant. Flattery is lovely when it is sincere, but telling me you adored an investigation before making an extremely tenuous connection between it and whatever product you are selling tends to suggest you did not adore it quite enough to read it.

How to contact Effie? LinkedIn or email at effiewebb@tbij.com

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X

  Share

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

Sometimes being in government can be tricky.

And I don’t even mean the decisions about spending, welfare cuts, the economy, defence and the rest.

Even what seems like a relatively benign plan with good intentions can rupture into rancour and recrimination – and as a former special adviser I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

Subscribe now

So, it is with some sympathy for Labour that I’ve been reading the ongoing row over the party’s green paper and its plan to “explore legislative options to require social media to make news content from public service media providers, and potentially also national and local news publishers, prominent and easily discoverable”.

The move, launched while Keir Starmer was still Prime Minister, aims in simple terms to get mainstream views back in front of more eyeballs. It is, I think, sparked by two ambitions.

One is to try and give what it believes to be honest players in the media - both broadcasters and publishers - some support at a time when changing algorithms, AI overviews and the plunging value of Google searches to the media is destroying legitimate journalism.

The other is to try and counter misinformation and more extreme and often uninformed views, particularly in those heated moments we have seen such as after the Southport murders and the asylum hotel riots.

We have covered this before here, and although it may not be a perfect solution, I can’t help but be supportive of a plan that will help decent journalism, particularly locally.

Anyhow, it’s fair to say that the proposals have proved more controversial than I think any minister or adviser would have imagined – topped this week with a dressing down from the Trump administration.

The US Government said the move would undermine independent journalists and raised “serious concerns” about free speech if the UK government or its proxy were to decide which outlets were trustworthy.

It could be a “mechanism for viewpoint-based censorship” a statement on the US Embassy website said.

It added: “If the UK compels platforms to boost government-preferred media in algorithmic feeds, the effect on a government-disfavoured speaker or media source’s reach is not meaningfully different than outright removal. The US Government would likely consider such a measure as facilitating censorship.”

There is of course also the fact that nearly all the major platforms that carry digital news are US-based and very close to the Trump regime. It doesn’t mean they don’t have strong views on censorship, but I’m just saying.

Closer to home, the News Media Association – whose national and regional members you would think could potentially benefit from the plan – have also been critical. It said that the state deciding who is “trustworthy” and who is not, was against the concept of a free press. It also does not want membership of a state-recognised regulator (i.e. the Hacked Off supported Impress) to be a condition for the test.

In a statement it told the Press Gazette: “The effect is a transfer of visibility – and with it traffic and revenue – from commercial publishers to broadcasters already in receipt of public funding and other regulatory advantages.

“In this scenario, content from news media is put at a disadvantage even if the commercial sector is the first to ‘break’ a story.

“This would likely lead to newsrooms being disincentivised to produce public interest journalism that, while it has high societal value, may not produce sufficient commercial returns.”

Major publishers are of course genuinely very keen on free speech. But they also fear losing traffic and revenue if broadcasters are favoured in any way.

The green paper was debated on Tuesday so is still going through the parliamentary system despite a change of PM. We will keep a watching brief on what happens.

As the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Leave a comment

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X.

  Share

I had the great joy of working a Sunday shift yesterday. I now tend to work one in every six or so weekends which isn’t bad at all. So, in honour of that, I’m dedicating this edition to the unique pitching beast that is the Sunday for Monday special.

I’m thrilled to confirm that these stories have become a lot more popular in recent times. I have a feeling this LinkedIn post from a while ago may have something to do with it. For a long time, it really was an underutilised window when journalists were desperate for stories and comms pros weren’t sending them.

There is a very special place in my contact book for people who pitch me stories I can pull together on Sunday (if not earlier) for Monday’s newspaper.

So, when is the best time to send reporters these stories? How do you find out who is working on the weekend? Are there particular types of stories that lend themselves particularly well to this slot? I come bearing all the answers…

What is a Sunday for Monday? One of my key rules as a journalist (which I’ll admit I’ve been known to break) is never make assumptions. So, first things first… I need to make clear what “Sunday for Monday” actually is. It’s not about pitching a journalist on Sunday but more about creating a story that can potentially be published online on Sunday (or online early doors on Monday morning) which will also appear in Monday’s print edition.

What makes a good Sunday story? Journalists are looking for something that won’t be in the Sunday papers. If it’s strong enough for a splash (also known as the front page story) then that’s an added bonus. It also must not be dependent on Saturday events. Something built around new data, an investigation or a compelling case study is a helpful place to start. Think of it as something readers will still care about by 7am on Monday.

What doesn’t work? A pitch that’s poor on a Tuesday is still going to be poor on Sunday. Although there may be less news around, the desire for quality remains the same. Journalists aren’t looking for just anything to fill the paper with. They’re looking for something genuinely interesting that their readers will care about. So, don’t use Sunday as an excuse to dust off the story that didn’t get any traction during the week while sending it to a different inbox hoping for the best. The difference is that a great story can have a particularly good chance of cutting through when there are fewer competing pieces around.

Exclusivity is a huge help. But it is by no means a necessity. If a journalist thinks they have something other outlets don’t, it gives them a much bigger reason to invest time in getting it over the line. There's nothing wrong with an embargoed release that's gone out widely either though.

Best time to pitch Sunday for Monday stories?

Read more

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

My first job on a national newspaper news desk was as forward planner for the Daily Mail in the late 1990s.

It was a thankless task – and I’d suggest much harder than the equivalent role now. There was no digital diary, no electronic organiser and no alerts on the mobile (I did have a mobile but it was very much a brick).

Subscribe now

I remember doing phenomenally long hours some days. And the standard demanded was rightly high. I always remember being woken at 3am by an angry news editor calling to ask why some royal event was not on the daily news list I’d created (I had had it on there, but managed to delete it at the last minute. Doh!)

The thoroughness and attention to detail in planning that I picked up there has never left me. It makes a huge difference to everything.

And in that spirit, now we are all back to school, I wanted to highlight my idea of how the last few months of the year might look, what the events are that you can take advantage of to get coverage and how you might do it. It’s not exhaustive – but here’s seven dates to plot around.

Budget (October 28)
Obvious, but the first budget of Andy Burnham’s premiership will be a big one. By the end of October we should have more of an idea of what the Burnham administration plans to do. Will there be more of a move to nationalisation? How much emphasis will there be on transport, education and defence? And importantly, how will spending commitments be paid for? Will we see changes to council taxes, inheritance tax or will the Prime Minister feel forced to increase income tax, national insurance or VAT?
As always, if you have clients in some of the high profile areas that are likely to be the focus of attention, then promote them early. Can they do preview pieces, can you arrange for them to be available straight after the budget for reaction. Think words and videos.
And as always, mainstream media needs case studies. They don’t need to be experts – just people who will be affected by budget changes. Put forward your people and your clients - both individuals, businesses and charities. Provide good access and the chance for pictures and video footage and make sure they are available on the day of the budget. And of course the deal is you get a namecheck.

Holborn and St Pancras by-election (mid-October)

The parting gift from former PM Keir Starmer for Andy Burnham is a tricky by-election in what is traditionally a Labour stronghold but which will be a battle to keep. Starmer’s decision to quit on the day Burnham comes back to the Commons was clearly deliberate. Now the Greens are likely to push hard for the seat – with suggestions that leader Zach Polanski may stand. The by-election will be a good electoral test for the new government but will also highlight other issues. Not least, do Londoners resent Burnham’s pro-North agenda enough to not vote for Labour?

Party conference season (September 3 - October 7)

Read more

It’s back-to-school day and class is in session! Consider this your first Off the Record lesson of September: Pictures 101.

My bread and butter is words but I’ve always appreciated the symbiotic relationship between my words and colleagues’ pictures. I work at a tabloid newspaper, so pictures are especially important to my title. And the saying really is true: pictures are worth a thousand words.

I want to share something I wrote a few months ago, when I had the joy of hosting the UK Picture Editors’ Guild Awards.

Speaking to a room with some of the country’s top snappers, I said: “As a reporter, I know that we often get the bylines and the attention, but the truth is that many of our stories would never have the same impact without the photographers behind them.

“Sometimes a single photograph tells a story better than any words ever could. It’s often the pictures that stay with people long after the words have been forgotten.”

So, please take your seats, get your notebooks out and welcome today’s guest teacher: Joe Sené, PA Media’s head of pictures.

PA is the agency that distributes news to major national and regional outlets, digital media brands, businesses and public sector organisations. The company has an army of photographers and reporters who supply words and pictures through a “wire”, which are then picked up by journalists across the industry.

Joe, a former colleague of mine, is brilliant at his job. He knows pictures inside out. He’s also incredibly generous with his time and advice. Joe’s always happy to talk through an idea, point you in the right direction and explain what will (and won’t) work.

Joe is one of the best in the business. So, pens at the ready. Over to Mr Sené…

What gets a picture desk interested in a story? It’s all about having a great image, something that makes you stop in your tracks and pay attention. Every once in a while, a picture comes in that’s out of the ordinary. If you can get a picture editor’s attention in this way, that’s somebody who looks at thousands of pictures every day, then you’re definitely onto something, especially if there’s an obvious hook. Encapsulating everything in one image is the ideal. Rarely will newspapers publish more than one “standalone” picture. Picture editors are visual people, it has to be the picture that stands out - not the press release.

What do you think PRs and comms people misunderstand about picture desks? I think most comms people don’t understand the need for a strong peg to hang something from because, when you have that, your messaging can really fly. Also, as the saying goes, it’s good to talk. Personally, I am always happy to chat to people about their ideas and to see where/how I can help them. I suspect many comms professionals see news and features desks as a way in, but they should never underestimate the importance of a picture editor when pitching a great visual package. Sending a huge attachment on an email and hoping for the best is, in most cases, not going to see you hit the jackpot.

If a comms team has a good story but no obvious picture, how should they find a visual hook? As above, pick up the phone and talk to experienced picture editors/photographers. I appreciate it can be difficult managing expectations from all sides, but if you start heading down the wrong path with a picture idea, you’re wasting time and money.

What’s the best way to send pictures to a news wire? What format, resolution and information do you need? Send jpegs by email. Ideally the compressed images are no more than 2mb each and clearly don’t attach more than three. Include a link to download the hi-res versions. Always attach the press release and include all copyright information. At PA, if we issue a PR picture on our wire, we will want to credit the photographer who took it along with the provider. Give us that information on your initial submission so we don’t have to come back to you. Time spent chasing those important details may result in us moving on and the picture not going out.

How important are detailed captions and metadata? What information is absolutely vital? The more detail the better. It’s a bugbear of mine seeing “MANDATORY CAPTION…” and the like being sent in to us. PA, like every other wire agency, has its own caption style. You can trust us to include all of the most vital information, but don’t try to force us to do it differently to the way that works for us. Any restrictions are vital, eg: if you have a 12-month licence with the photographer, make that clear. We don’t want to help you by issuing a picture in good faith and then two years later a claim for unauthorised usage lands on my desk!

How have social media and AI changed the picture landscape? How is AI affecting trust? There is no doubt AI is changing the picture landscape. With the ever-wider proliferation of AI generated images and AI edited images, I think, generally, people are less and less immune to it. If you use AI in a picture, you must make that clear. At PA, we are rightly proud that all our original content is generated by us, not AI. Trust in our content is fundamental to everything we do. All of our customers know that if we say something, they can go with that and trust it to be verified and true.

Quick fire time…

What is one thing PRs do with pictures that drives you mad? With regards to the actual content, it’s being too heavily branded. We simply won’t issue a picture that screams branding. I get the need and importance, but achieving this in a more subtle way will yield greater results.

Most underrated type of picture? It’s a curious truth that so often, what one person sees as an uninteresting picture someone else sees as brilliant. The love of a picture is completely subjective.

Can a great picture rescue a bad story? Of course - a picture is worth a thousand words after all!

One thing every PR should know about picture desks? We don’t bite!

Joe can be contacted on LinkedIn or via email at joe.sene@pa.media

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X

  Share

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

I have spent the last few days very much in two minds about today’s opinion piece.

I want to address the death of Jason Arday, the Cambridge University professor who appears to have taken his own life after resigning his post amid extensive publicity and allegations.

I know tempers are running high – a look on social media shows the strength of feeling on all sides of the argument.

And I know you too will have views on the events of the last few weeks.

So, I’m a little hesitant to enter into the field – but I think I would be failing you if I didn’t pass on some thoughts and maybe a little context. I hope, whether you agree with me or not, you will take this in the spirit it is intended.

The extent of the coverage

I talked last week about silly season in August and the lack of serious news stories in the absence of courts and Parliament sitting. The Jason Arday tragedy shows the dark side of silly season, when stories can be all-consuming for the media. There are mixed interpretations of how many stories were done on Arday before his death – sometimes it can be hard to tell from cuttings services which are the same story in different editions of a paper or which are online stories that make their way into print in a very similar form.

But whatever the number, there is no doubting the very extensive and wide-ranging coverage of the allegations of plagiarism and deceits. I think if this story had broken at any other time of year, it would have seen far less coverage and for a shorter time span.

I suspect one of the other issues is that the story took a number of new twists, including allegations from people who knew him, his eventual resignation and claims about the validity of what Arday said in his autobiography.

Why have publishers been interested?

If you look at the publications that have given the story most coverage – The Times, The Telegraph, the Guardian, The Independent and The Mail – it is fair to say that in general terms issues around the governance and standards of higher education are of keen interest to their editors and their readers.

But this is also a significant cultural wars issue as well. Universities, perhaps more than any other institution, are dedicated to diversity, equality and inclusivity policies. And that is a political hot potato. You will have your own views on DEI policies, about their success and merits. But for many on the political right, it is one of the key battlegrounds.

Is there a genuine public interest here?

If someone is in a high-profile public role (and Cambridge University certainly made sure it was), is receiving taxpayer funded money, is teaching young people who are paying fees, is publishing a book about their life and times, all while facing various allegations of deceit and plagiarism, I think that is a genuine public interest.

It’s not as high a public interest as for a cabinet minister or someone involved in serious criminal activity, but there is a public interest in investigating those allegations.

Critics have argued that others who have falsified their CV or committed plagiarism have not had the same scrutiny. That may be so with academics, albeit they may have a lower profile (although a look through cuts will show The Times have done several stories about ropey professors). However, I think it is fair to say Rachel Reeves, who was accused of overstating her achievements in her CV, was given a long and very rough ride about those claims throughout her time as Chancellor.

It’s notable that left-wing publications, including the Guardian, Independent, the New York Times and Atlantic have also felt justified in addressing the claims.

Where the public interest in continuing stories specifically about Arday becomes harder to justify is after he resigned. By all means continue to question Cambridge’s recruitment policy and the DEI agenda – but it feels once he has stepped away, the public interest specifically around him lessens considerably.

Is the media racist?

You will not be surprised to know I would say it’s not. Claims that have been made along the lines that newsrooms are determined to attack everyone of colour, I would reject. But they do cover controversial areas (not least immigration in recent years) and mistakes are made. Too many mistakes? Yes probably and I’ve made my share in the past. And are newsrooms diverse and varied enough? Absolutely not.
At least there is now an effort to bring in people from communities who are often not part of the media, including working class families and underrepresented communities.
I also think it is important to state that it is perfectly legitimate to question DEI policy and not be racist.

Are there lessons to be learnt?

We have been here before. Caroline Flack’s suicide after being subject to extensive coverage ahead of a court case for assaulting her boyfriend. And I remember Ministry of Defence scientist David Kelly killing himself after being thrown into the public arena over claims that Iraq had chemical weapons which could be deployed within 45 minutes. He told a journalist that the claims were exaggerated and were put into a dossier at the insistence of the government. He died two days after giving evidence to a parliamentary intelligence committee.

Both are terribly tragic. Both have an element of public interest justification. Both saw mass coverage.

Being at the centre of that publicity storm, particularly when a social media pile on adds to the pain, can put intolerable pressure on people.

So yes, the media could do better. There should be an awareness of the volume of coverage and its suitability. And maybe a better way to determine someone’s vulnerability in the circumstances. It will be also interesting to see how the press regulator IPSO rules on the thousands of complaints that have been filed already (even if some are AI generated).

And in many areas the media is more responsible than it has been in the 35 plus years I have worked in it. For instance on suicide, the code of conduct states excessive detail of a method should not be reported. All publishers also reference the Samaritans helpline on self-harm and suicide stories.

But I think it is a fair question to ask, where do you draw the line? The Royal family are reportedly worried about the risk of the former Prince Andrew taking his own life because of the Epstein allegations. There is clearly a public interest in investigating those claims, although Andrew has never been convicted of any crime and denies any wrongdoing.

And regularly, defendants facing trial for a range of offences make the decision that suicide is better than the shame and publicity surrounding a conviction. There clearly is a public interest in the reporting of criminal cases but it is not without a human cost (interestingly in some countries, Germany being one, defendants are only identified by their first name and an initial).

Even if all the allegations against Arday are true, clearly he is very much at the lower end of the public interest spectrum. And whatever the rights and wrongs, and however blame is apportioned, his death is a tragedy.

Leave a comment

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X.

  Share

Press officers are some of my favourite people.

Sure, we butt heads sometimes but they’re doing their job and I’m doing mine.

A weeks-long saga with one particular press office (when it comes to right of replies) has, unusually, crept under my skin.

So, in the spirit of keeping my blood pressure down, this edition is dedicated to the five things I think press officers might find helpful, particularly when dealing with right of reply requests from reporters.

1. Avoid asking journaists about prominence in newspapers or on websites. I get asked this surprisingly often by press officers but I think it’s a fairly fruitless inquiry. I could tell you at 1pm that the story I’m working on is going to be splashed across the front of tomorrow’s newspaper. Then something else could happen at 6pm and suddenly it’s been bumped down the running order and is, at best, the biggest story on page 10. Newsrooms are fluid places. What looks like a huge story at lunchtime can be completely eclipsed by something else a few hours later.

   Sometimes I’m told that busy press offices will dedicate more time to responding to stories they know are going to be more prominent. I understand why you might want to prioritise your resources but asking a journalist to predict exactly where their story will end up is not a particularly reliable way of doing it. I think that prominence shouldn’t be the deciding factor in whether a journalist gets a useful response.

2. Don’t make me chase you to tell me you’re not going to respond. If you’ve chosen not to give a reply, just let the journalist know. I approached a well-known firm for a right of reply last week. A spokesman called me soon after saying they would not be responding. I made it clear that it would mean I’m writing “XXX declined to comment” and he had no problem with that so it is what we printed. I appreciated the directness.

Read more

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

There is no doubt, we are in the long grass of silly season.

The courts have wound down, politicians are on holiday, half the country is away with the family and the other half is struggling with yet another heatwave.

Basically, not much is going on so journalists dub it silly season – when stories, often lighter and a bit dafter, that might not normally see the light of day, make the papers and the websites.

I always remember my first summer at the Daily Mail in 1998 and thinking how quiet it was apart from the 1998 World Cup. “What would we put on these pages if it wasn’t for David Beckham?” I remember asking. To be honest it seems like a struggle every year.

So, while the media does carry on churning, I’d suggest the bar for what gets published is lower than at any other time of the year.

And the other effect is that stories that might in the other 11 months of the year make a page in a paper, or a couple of hits online, suddenly become spreads and are deemed worth coverage for days on end.

Let me give you a small sample. And I’m not saying any of these stories are without merit, just not worth the endless coverage they have received.

Exhibit A – Westminster Council might ban stand up drinking in pubs in Soho. A claim that Westminster denies and says has been deliberately twisted but one Andy Burnham as a good northerner who likes a pint has taken up the cudgels over.

Exhibit B - The Jason Arday row. Professor at Cambridge may have “sexed up” his portfolio and exaggerated his life story. And I know there’s a bigger issue around diversity and equality here. But even so, the wall-to-wall coverage I’m suspecting is going largely unread.

Exhibit C – The weather. Just the weather. And I know us Brits are obsessed but the same pictures of frazzled grass and youngsters jumping into fountains. And it’s not like anything new is happening – it’s just staying hot. (And I know lots of you will be keenly involved in climate and environmental issues. But I suspect the coverage is not addressing your concerns).

Maybe it is the heat that’s making me a bit angsty.

Anyhow, for those still working in August, a few thoughts on what you can do the next few weeks

• If you can’t beat them, join them. The stories that get inflated coverage are probably going to stick around. If you can find that new angle or provide that new analysis, then you have a better than normal chance to hit the mark.

• In the absence of some of the heavier news, including politics, don’t be afraid of a bit of lightness. The bar is lower and news desks are more accepting of the fluffier news stories. If you have a bit of consumer data or similar in the bottom drawer, it’s a good time to brush it off and get it published.

Read more

It brings me great pleasure to hand the reins of today’s edition to Molly Clayton, influencer editor at the Daily Mail, Mail Online and Mail on Sunday.

Molly, who is the first person to have such a title at any of the UK’s national papers, has a front-row seat to the rapidly changing world of digital fame.

So, Molly, what does your role allow you to cover that traditional showbiz reporting perhaps didn’t? My role as influencer editor is the first of its kind at a national newspaper, which is incredibly exciting. I recognised that the entertainment landscape has changed dramatically, and this role reflects that shift. Having spent three years as a Showbiz Correspondent, I saw first-hand how premieres, fashion events and red carpets evolved. Increasingly, the guest lists weren’t made up solely of actors, musicians and TV stars – they were filled with influencers who were drawing just as much attention, if not more. These creators have built hugely loyal audiences across platforms like TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. Millions of people follow their lives every day, take their recommendations seriously and are genuinely invested in what they do. Traditional showbiz reporting understandably focused on established celebrities such as Kate Moss or Brad Pitt. My role allows us to tell the stories of today’s digital stars, whose influence on culture, fashion, beauty and consumer behaviour is just as significant, while also holding them to the same level of scrutiny and journalistic standards as any other public figure.

Subscribe now

What are the biggest mistakes brands and PRs make when trying to get influencer coverage? One of the biggest misconceptions is that simply attaching a well-known influencer to a campaign is enough to make it newsworthy. While having recognisable talent certainly helps, readers are looking for something they can’t already see on Instagram or TikTok. We need a genuine story, whether that’s an exclusive announcement, an interesting angle or behind-the-scenes access that adds value. Another mistake is treating influencer coverage as if it’s just a press release. Journalists still need the same access we’d expect for any other interview or feature. That means high-quality photography, time with the talent and the opportunity to ask our own questions rather than relying on pre-approved quotes. The more exclusive the access, the stronger the story. Brands and PRs who understand that collaboration tends to result in much better coverage, because it allows us to produce original journalism rather than simply republishing promotional material.

You don’t just write. You also create videos on platforms like TikTok. Talk me through the process of a story and how you decide what platforms to share it on? Creating content for social media has become a huge part of my role. Wherever possible, I produce a video to accompany the stories I write because it’s one of the most effective ways of reaching the audience I’m reporting on. That said, it can be challenging to balance both. Breaking and writing an exclusive is already a high-pressure process, and once the story is live, I then have to script, film, edit and publish a video, often within a very short timeframe. There are definitely days when it’s exhausting, particularly as putting yourself on camera can open you up to criticism online. However, the results make it worthwhile. I’ve seen countless examples where a TikTok or Instagram video has significantly increased page views, subscriptions and engagement with a story. If a story is trending on TikTok, for example, it’s a chance to join that discussion by adding original reporting, context and exclusive information that audiences won’t have seen elsewhere.

What’s the best pitch you’ve received recently, and what made it so good? The pitches that always stand out are those offering genuine access to influencers who rarely give interviews or address the topics everyone is talking about. Too often, creators can build enormous audiences without ever answering the difficult questions their followers are asking. So when a PR offers an interview with the understanding that nothing meaningful is off limits, it immediately grabs my attention. The best pitches aren’t just promoting a product or campaign, they’re offering the chance to tell a compelling story.

Leave a comment

As influencer editor, what’s something PRs might think matters more than it actually does? One common misconception is that an influencer has to be a household name before they’ll interest a national newspaper. That’s simply not the case. Some of the stories that perform best are about creators many people in traditional media have never heard of. What matters is whether they have an engaged audience, an interesting story and genuine influence within their community. I’m still learning every day because the creator economy evolves so quickly. But whether someone has 5,000 followers or 500,000, those are thousands of people who actively choose to watch, trust and engage with their content. That’s incredibly valuable.

Are you still interested in traditional celebrity stories? When does an influencer become a celebrity? Is that then no longer your beat? Absolutely. I still love traditional celebrity reporting and always will. I sit within the amazing Showbiz team, so I continue to cover actors, musicians and TV personalities alongside my work as influencer editor. The difference is that my role has expanded to reflect how entertainment and fame have evolved. The line between influencer and celebrity is becoming increasingly blurred. Creators like Molly-Mae Hague, Olivia Attwood and Maura Higgins all built huge audiences online before becoming household names through television, presenting roles, brand partnerships and mainstream media appearances. Once someone reaches that level, they’re often both an influencer and a celebrity rather than one or the other. Fame looks very different today than it did a decade ago, and my role allows me to follow that evolution wherever it leads.

Quick fire time...

Are you interested in influencers before they become household names? Yes I am, always. Any influencer can be a household name, just depends on the household.

One influencer you’d swap jobs with for a day? Great question. Grace Beverley, I love her, her businesses and brands - she is the ultimate Girl Boss.

Best thing about being an influencer editor? Shaping a brand new beat and being at the forefront of the media landscape changing.

First thing you check in the morning out of these two: TikTok or Instagram?

Instagram. I am an older Gen Z, nearly a millennial, so Instagram has always been my go to.

How can people contact you? Email – molly.clayton@dailymail.co.uk, on Instagram and TikTok.

Remember folks, keep this just between us! We’re off the record.

Thank you for reading Off the Record! We want to make our newsletter as helpful as we can, so please get in contact if there’s anything specific you want to see.

We offer media masterclasses for brands/PRs/organisations looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please email us at info@offtherecordmedia.co.uk

• You can follow Off the Record on Instagram and TikTok.

• You can follow Steph Spyro on Instagram, TikTok and Twitter/X

  Share

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

There are two stories from either side of the Atlantic, and from very different publishers, which illustrate the growing importance of YouTube in a modern media portfolio.

First the rather remarkable story of Time magazine throwing off its iconic past to work with content creators – a move which has seen its views on YouTube up nearly 800% in a month and a significant rise in revenue from its social platforms.

Those collaborations have included travel bloggers, sports experts, pop stars and a Love Island starlet hosting a live red-carpet event. Time’s own staff are also getting on board with creating output for YouTube and other platforms.

Share

Second, amid the difficult set of half year results from Reach, some good news from the Daily Express and its YouTube chat show the Daily Expresso. Deputy Editor Sam Lister described the news chat show as a “shot in the dark” but it is beating all its UK rivals, with 3.4 million views in June alone (beating the Telegraph’s Daily T, The Rest is Politics and the News Agents).

More than ever, it feels the tide is turning as major publishers and sole content creators alike monetise social platforms and reach vast audiences.

So, what role do PRs and comms pros have in all this?

Well one way is to get your clients on to their own YouTube channel. But if that feels ambitious, at least at the moment, here are some thoughts on how to YouTube-proof your customers, charities and companies.

It’s all about the personalities

YouTube works when personalities can engage with an audience because of their expertise, knowledge, ability to explain and coming across in a natural manner.

Think who, in the organisations you represent, can explain difficult topics well, who has first-hand experience or insight, who disagrees with conventional wisdom.

It’s very different to getting quotes into a newspaper article – but also hugely rewarding and in today’s media landscape much more important, I would suggest.

Think who can speak conversationally but with confidence, who can explain clearly and tell engaging stories. Can they get away from the jargon and language of business or the charity sector to make what they are saying more accessible. Are they comfortable with longer discussions and when the conversation moves on or they get asked a tricky question can react naturally rather than delivering rehearsed soundbites.

It might be you don’t have a ready-made YouTuber to hand but think who might have potential to become a media presence with some training and encouragement.

Read more

Should you send a quote for a piece that’s already been published? When should you send journalists reaction to a news story? Those are the question I want to tackle in today’s edition.

A few sentences landing in my inbox from a charity, campaign group or business boss can sometimes be the most helpful thing in the world. It could give me the intro to a story, a whole new angle or some analysis for readers.

Frankly, sometimes reaction landing in my inbox could actually give me the heads up to a story I may have completely missed. In all those instances, a quote is very much welcome. News is a 24/7 beast with live blogs, newsletters, videos, print articles and online web stories. It’s an animal that constantly needs feeding.

But I will sometimes get reactions that are instantly ignored… and it sometimes has absolutely nothing to do with its content but more its (poor) timing.

You’d be surprised how often I get sent a request asking me to slot a reactionary quote into a story DAYS after an announcement or the release of official statistics (and long after my article on the matter has been published). You won’t be surprised to hear the answer is always no.

Share

So, today I wanted to do a thorough guide on when to send journalists reactions to news stories (and when not to). I give lots of examples to try to help comms pros get into the minds of journalists on what can be a tricky issue to navigate.

Before I get into it, the one thing I would say is make it really obvious what you’re sending a response to. You would hope that based on the quote and person or organisation sending it, we would immediately be able to tell what you’re reacting to but it’s always worth making that crystal clear in the subject line or in the first line of an email. It could look something like this: CEO reacts to Labour’s “perfect storm” announcement on XYZ.

If you’re sending a quote and it is linked to an embargoed announcement, ALWAYS include the embargo time in your email too.

Right, now, onto the fun stuff… When should you send journalists reactions to stories after they’ve been published?

Read more

The media landscape is changing at pace – and keeping up with the latest developments and moves will give every comms expert an advantage over their rivals. Every week take a look at the media business from mainstream and ‘legacy’ media to cutting edge tech and the latest trends and developments – and how you can use that know-how.

Two weeks in and we are starting to see what an Andy Burnham premiership might look like, at least in terms of its priorities.

And it is fair to say that although he plans to work inside the 2024 manifesto, there are some significant divergences between PM Burnham and Keir Starmer, in both substance and style.

Share

So, here are some of my thoughts and insight on the direction of travel of this government. What is going to be important and what is not? Let’s talk abou how Burnham seems set to be significantly changing the traditional political media model and what it all might mean to PR and comms teams.

And as a former special adviser in government, I must warn you it does come with a chunky health warning – after all, he wouldn’t be the first Prime Minister to be blown off course by events and political reality.

Media policy: Burnham’s approach to comms has been distinctive to say the least. The plan has clearly been to concentrate on appealing to a younger audience on social media and other platforms rather than engaging as much with mainstream media. One key adviser is Abby Tomlinson who set up the Milifandom movement on Tumblr and Twitter to defend Ed Miliband while others are also very much children of social media. This is partly an effort to ward off the threat of strong social media performers like Nigel Farage.

I think there are a couple of issues at play here.

Read more