I am a retired diplomat who recently attended the Center of Excellence's annual CHART course in Hawaii. I found the course a highly professional and comprehensive effort to prepare humanitarian cadre for the enormous challenges they likely will face in almost any imaginable deployment.

That said, I was struck by the lack of a full discussion of the need for a public affairs strategy in dealing with disaster relief and complex humanitarian emergencies. Perhaps, it might be thought, this is a topic reserved for "higher ups" who command and coordinate operations, not a suitable matter for the rank and file, the likes of you and me.

My view is different. Public relations are a key component of any operation in this day of instant communications and rightly inquisitive citizens. It can, and should, involve us all. A good public affairs strategy, and its skillful execution, can go far toward building and maintaining political support from Congress and civic organizations, from politicians of all parties, from governments that are allied with the mission, from among the people of the nation in which you are working, and from the ultimate judges of success or failure of a US mission, the American voters and taxpayers.

From my years in the Foreign Service of the United States and several tours as Ambassador, I am convinced that dealing intelligently with the press is of the greatest importance to the success and effectiveness of a humanitarian mission. In this regard, humanitarian missions are little different from any other public enterprise, diplomacy included, which is susceptible of misinterpretation by the public, hence ultimately of failure.

Unfortunately, the attitude of many towards the press, humanitarians included and especially government workers, is often one of suspicion, if not outright fear. This attitude may stem from the few instances where press coverage, perhaps aided by unwitting sources, has compromised the safety of operations, not to mention the security of specific individuals. As well, an arm's length attitude towards the press may reflect a sense that you just can't win in dealings with it. Curious in a country which prides itself on freedom of the press, for which, among other freedoms, we have shed much blood.

I am here to argue that you can make of the press a significant ally, if you bring the right attitude to this work and follow a few simple ground rules. You can also save yourself much headache.

Dealing with the press and media is no great mystery. There are ways to encourage the kind of coverage you want and to identify likely problems. There are definite "dos and don'ts." To increase your chances of a positive experience with journalists, not to mention your ability to exploit your contact to mutual advantage, you might want to keep in mind these points:

•  Like it or not, the press is here to stay. With or without your involvement, the stories will be filed, written or aired. Without your input, they probably will get it wrong. Which is the last thing you should want.

•  Not all members of the press are the same. Some report for television, some for the newspapers and press agencies. Some are experienced professionals, knowledgeable about your area - and some are not. Some are resident or regulars keen on maintaining good sources, such as yourself; others "parachute" in for a one-time feature, with no interest in a continuing relationship, no matter how off the mark is the product.

•  In my experience, problems most frequently arise from those who report for television, with little field experience in your area but an insatiable appetite for a sound bite. Worse still are the parachute feature writers who are in and out after a quick hit. The experienced print journalist, by most accounts, is more likely to take the time to get it right and to understand the consequences if he/she does not.

•  That said, there are plenty of exceptions to these views. There are many excellent and experienced television correspondents and poor print journalists. The safest bet is for you to check on the street for the reputation of those who want to interview you. Their product is, after all, in the public domain. There is likely to be someone accessible who can fill you in.

•  The fact that a journalist, experienced and even resident, is known to be critical of your work is no reason not to have contact. Having made enquiries about the journalist's reputation/views, you should not be surprised by hostile or negative questioning or reporting. The best tactic in dealing with a hostile but serious journalist is through indisputable fact and the earnest effort you make to persuade that person of the merits of your work.

•  My point? You need to know the person who interviews you. You can only blame yourself if you talk to someone whose background you don't know and they get it wrong, or don't even care if they get it right. In the final analysis, you don't need to talk to the certifiable dummies.

•  Appreciate the power of rumor, often malicious, no matter how preposterous, within the local populations you are seeking to help. The most innocuous activity may lend itself to misinterpretation and, in so doing, seriously upset your plans. Think ahead and put yourself in the shoes of the people around you. Ask the questions they might ask and find a way to answer them through the most accessible media available, often radio.

•  Be clear in speaking with the press/media about the ground rules of your conversation. Is this "off the record" and "not for attribution"? Are you speaking "on background" where quotes can be taken with your permission and referenced to a mutually agreeable source (e.g. "a western relief worker")? Or are you speaking "on the record" where there are no limits on what can be quoted from your conversation and on reporting your identity?

•  Know that in today's age of instantaneous and round-the-clock communications, what you tell a journalist may well be carried on local news programs within hours. Ask yourself: do you have reason to believe that such coverage might put you or your operation at risk? In the CHART course, we were briefed about several instances where well- meaning relief workers spoke too candidly of corruption among local officials. To their great regret, as at least in one instance, the worker was killed by local bosses as a likely result of his indiscreet remarks.

•  If you have a chain of command, which has adopted a press policy/public affairs strategy, and if time permits, consider advising your "higher ups" that you have been approached by the press and would like to speak to it. This provides an opportunity for your organization to input their views into what you say.

•  Be candid. Whatever you say must be truthful, as you can best determine, even if it is not the whole truth. "What goes around, comes around." Enough said. Also, you don't need to answer every question, nor every question fully. Especially if you don't know the answer. Just say so.

•  Appreciate that your press/media contact is an opportunity for you or your outfit to tell a story. What is it that needs to be said? Try to work out what it is you want to see reported and make an effort to stick to the 'script,' if you will.

•  Understand that the press is even less well informed than you, if they are honest about themselves, which many are. You hold the cards, which is information they would like to write about. Don't be intimidated by the aura of whatever publication or media the interviewing journalist represents.

•  Avoid the worst of sins: the love of hearing your own voice and the sight of someone taking notes of what YOU say. Hubris of this kind brought down many an immortal of the classic world - and even more celebrated leaders of the modern age.

•  Finally, understand that the press is just doing its job. Like you. And that you both have need of each other, to do it well.

Good Luck.

Up to top