CorpComms Magazine

It was the summer of 1999, and a battle royal was being waged in the brewing sector. Whitbread had agreed to buy Allied Domecq's pub estate but Punch Taverns had gatecrashed the party, attempting to win control by going over the heads of the pub group's management and appealing directly to investors.

Punch's strategy was logical, but it required some ingenuity from the company's PR advisers. They were led by Andy Cornelius, now a partner at Gainsborough Communications and a former journalist, who appreciates the news value of a good stunt.

'Whitbread was holding its AGM in The Brewery, Chiswell Street, and the chairman was due to speak at midday. We put out an announcement raising our offer just as he was about to stand up,' recalls Cornelius. 'We organised a fleet of cabs to wait outside The Brewery and take journalists to our press conference, and we provided them with press releases en route. We also alerted the broadcast media that something might be about to happen, so there were camera crews waiting in Chiswell Street.'

This is known as 'hijacking the agenda' in the trade, and it was an instance where a press conference served a real purpose. Punch knew exactly what the Whitbread board would be doing and at what time, and was able to marshal its offences in advance and use the press to full advantage.

Changing times

This type of dramatic scenario is becoming rare in an era where bids tend to be either agreed or run on a virtual basis by private equity firms who cannot afford to go fully hostile. Technology has also developed so rapidly over the past few years that PRs and their clients are faced with a number of options when they have a story to communicate. '

We often use webcasts for both analysts and journalists,' says Hugh Morrison, director of M: Communications. 'I tend to deal with big, cross-border bids, and webcasts are an effective way of getting the same message to everyone, particularly as the regulatory environment becomes more stringent.'

Gone are the days when every UK newspaper was based in or around Fleet Street, and this has created a challenging logistical problem for journalists trying to attend a press conference and write three or four stories in one day.

'Most of the Mittal press conferences were at hotels along Park Lane, and that was no good for anyone,' says Angela Jameson, industrial correspondent at the Wapping-based Times.

Mike Harrison, business editor at the Independent, agrees. 'I remember one particular press conference from hell,' he says. 'It was the inaugural press conference of Tube Lines, just after they had won the London Underground franchise. It was held on the concourse of Southwark tube station during the rush hour. There were no microphones or PA systems, the seating was virtually nonexistent and nobody could hear what anybody was saying. For a company facing an uphill struggle from the outset trying to get favourable press coverage, it was the worst possible start.'

Opinions vary hugely on whether press conferences now serve any useful purpose, but some executives still have a strong belief in them. 'If you have a major announcement to make and you want to make it to a lot of people at the same time, a press conference is the best way to go about it,' asserts Tim Spratt, director of Financial Dynamics. 'It enables you to communicate your message succinctly and is an effective use of the client's time.' Mixed messages The separation of TV and print raises an interesting point. 'You never want to mix TV and print if you can help it, because TV tends to be interested in different issues and the line of questioning is different,' says Spratt.

Jameson agrees. 'The most annoying thing is to go to a press conference where the broadcast pool stands in front of the main platform so you can't see the company and they can't see you. At the Airbus conference in Farnborough, it was virtually impossible to ask a question because the head of communications could not see any of the print journalists behind the wall of cameras.'

Some companies feel far more comfortable with press conferences than individual briefings. For large conglomerates, for instance, they can be a way of simultaneously putting the heads of a number of businesses in front of the media.

Many chief executives also prefer giving press conferences because it means they only have to deliver their story once, rather than answering a string of similar questions in a series of one-on-one meetings with hacks throughout the day.

Others prefer smaller gatherings. They are nervous in front of large audiences and they believe they can tailor their message more effectively in individual briefings.

There is also the fear, in press conferences, of journalists egging each other on. 'The retail correspondents used to be particularly bad,' one PR remembers. 'They all knew the sector really well, they knew each other and sometimes it seemed as if they were playing to the crowd. It was entertaining, but very difficult to manage and not great for the client.'

Although it can sometimes seem as if journalists are ganging up on the client, hacks tend to take a different perspective. 'I find press conferences very useful because you can see where your rivals are coming from,' says Fiona Walsh, a journalist at the Guardian. 'For a company, I would have thought this was quite handy because they will have a good idea of the sort of coverage they will be getting the following day.'

'The best press conferences are the ones that devote minimum time to lengthy and generally boring presentations, leaving maximum time for Q&A,' adds Harrison.

'Sunday journalists tend to avoid press conferences,' says John Waples, business editor of the Sunday Times. 'While they provide a good opportunity to grab five minutes with a CEO after the event, there is little point wasting our time on a story that is going to be covered in detail the following day. And if we have a good question to ask, why waste it in front of 30 or so daily and online reporters?'

No surprises

PRs and journalists agree that if you are going to organise a press conference, preparation is key. 'You have to make sure that the client knows what they are going to say and knows the questions they are likely to be asked. You cannot allow them to wing it,' says Spratt.

This is particularly true during a merger or agreed bid, when both sides have to sing from the same hymn sheet. Such preparation can be time-consuming and difficult to fit into a busy calendar, but it is crucial. Ultimately, press conferences can be more lethal than one-on-one briefings.

'If the client goes off-message with one journalist, that is containable. If he screws up in a press conference, it is almost impossible to do anything about it,' says Tom Wyatt of Reputation Inc.

For this reason and others, many PRs shy away from press conferences altogether. 'I never do them. You get more value from one-on-ones, from the journalists' and the client's perspective,' says Deborah Saw, managing director of Citigate Dewe Rogerson.

'Don't do them unless you really have to. It is better to see journalists individually or in small groups,' says Spratt.

Many journalists prefer the individual approach and, even if they do attend a press conference, will often ask their 'best' questions after the event. Logistically, however, there can be advantages to gathering everyone together at the same time. 'At least if there is an 11.30 am press conference, you know it will be over by 12.30 or 1.00 pm, and you can get on with writing the story. In one-on-ones, you may not get the briefing until midafternoon, which can be disastrous,' says one journalist.

Ultimately, the decision on whether to run a press conference is an art, not a science - and, preparation aside, there are few fixed rules to guarantee success. Rupert Younger, partner at Finsbury Communications, sums up the problem: 'It depends on the client, it depends on the message and it depends on the sector of the journalist community that you are appealing to,' he says.

share me: del.icio.us | digg | reddit | Tweet