5 Media Traps CEOs Really Need To Avoid

Politicians, celebrities and even entrepreneurs often crave attention at all costs. As T. Barnum once said, “There’s no such thing as bad publicity… I don’t care what they say about me as long as they spell my name right.” Oscar Wilde put it like this: “There’s only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”

Yet, most CEOs do not court the spotlight and hope to target any recognition they do get around achieving business milestones. Journalists, however, have different objectives. While often eager to accurately trumpet triumphs, they are also obligated to surface setbacks investors and the public are entitled to have revealed. But every now and then, a reporter—often young and eager for a reputation-making story—may be driven to present standard personnel issues as scandalous drama, lull CEOs into making comments that seem inconsistent with their prior statements or into revealing privileged information. In fact, here are five common reporter devices to avoid.

The search and destroy mission: Iconic firms like Goldman Sachs, Walt Disney, McKinsey, Harvard, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Johnson & Johnson are compelling, in fact, irresistible targets for journalists prone to launching oedipal-like battles against authority and institutional pillars. Strategic repositioning, structural adjustments and backstage staffing decisions are often inaccurately portrayed as evidence of malfeasance.

The classic ambush call: As private cell phone numbers, text contacts and email addresses slip out more often due to event lists, ecommerce demands and security credentialing, reporters obtain and abuse contact information in attempts to catch CEOs unprepared and unguarded for candid, reflexive and often regrettable replies.

The bait and switch invitation: Jocular, engaging inquiries may imply a friendly exchange on a safe, if not flattering topic, only to be used as an opportunity for an ambush once the CEO is on the line and unable to escape seamlessly. Expecting to ask about a new product or service, reporters often shift into surprise interrogation mode on complex legal conflicts or governance challenges. In 2000, Jeff Bezos reported enduring this during a three-hour TV cohosting gig featuring a video tour through the company’s Seattle headquarters. The anchors were ready, however, to grill him on the misleading use of “pro forma” profits, and he was caught twisting in the wind.

The fill-in-the-blank: Editors often dispatch reporters to fill in the blanks of an already-written story by rounding up attributed quotes. Interviewees think they’re participating in legitimate research when, in fact, their responses will be distorted to fit a preconceived storyline.

The disguised debate: GE’s Tom Vanderslice, the much-favored rival of Jack Welch to succeed Reginald Jones as CEO, was dropped as a candidate after he appeared in a prominent front-page article. Similarly, a front-page piece quoting Corning Glass’ new CEO Jamie Houghton criticizing the clubby culture he inherited was presented as criticism of his predecessor—also his brother Amory Houghton—damaging their relationship forever afterward.

The lessons? Never take a cold-call interview. Ask the direction of the piece and whom else has been interviewed before responding. Call others who were interviewed to learn the reporter’s perspective. Vet the reporter’s prior articles for signs of ideological bias rather than an open mind. Be prepared to demur when conversations veer into sensitive legal, financial, technological or market quicksand. Be leery of cheery introductions. As working press, reporters should not be presumed to be friends.

Irish writer Brendan Behan once advised: “There is no such thing as bad press—except your obituary.” Be sure you don’t help write your own premature obit through naivety.