Don't mess with the press
Getting a press release right is the first concern of any media officer. The media has specific codes and habits and these vary from country-to-country, impacted by both the writing tradition of the country and its language.
Although Anglo-Saxon style press releases have become the norm for most international organisations, particularly in and around the EU institutions, having an impact on national media outlets remains a perilous tightrope exercise. It is hard not to slip when toeing the international tightrope.
As far as international organisations go, the European Parliament finds itself in a particularly tricky situation when it comes to the media. Not only must it juggle the diverse media culture across Europe, it also communicates on complex negotiations often referring to tedious technical issues in a non-partisan way. All the while competing with individual parliamentarians’ and political groups’ media efforts.
On 23 October, the European Parliament issued a press release on a vote on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The reform of the CAP is widely discussed across Europe and regularly makes headlines. There is, therefore, media anticipation for the outcome of the Parliament’s vote. What lessons can be learnt from the release “A greener, fairer, and more robust EU farm policy”?
Share something newsworthy
Half of journalists say that publishing accurate content is more important than revenue or being the first to publish. Cision’s global survey further emphasises that the pandemic has made it more challenging to cut trhough the media clutter. Journalists receive 300-500 press releases per day, which means yours has to be relevant and credible.
A figure says more than a thousand words! Putting figures forward is an excellent way to illustrate the key points you are trying to make. Figures will focus the reader’s attention and give the release a scientific and authoritative validation.
This works best when figures are used parsimoniously and to highlight the main point one is trying to get across. The Parliament’s press release has twelve different percentages in one and a half pages of writing. Too many figures will throw the release off balance causing the journalist to slip off the tightrope.
Summarise early
At the very top the Parliament’s press release puts forward four bullet points summarising the main issues. In this case, policy positions voted on by the Members of Parliament. This is generally a good way to attract attention to the release – among the myriads of other releases on the same topic that a journalist will inevitably receive – and focus the media’s attention on what you want them to write about.
The body of the release is then sub-divided under headings. This is an excellent way of ensuring journalists can quickly find the information they are interested in.
The reader expects the sub-headings to echo the summary bullet points. Allowing them to extract the content of interest to them. Unfortunately, here, it is not the case. Readers are left to jump backwards and forwards from the main issues in the bullet points and the headings to find their own links.
Write for your readers
Who is the European Parliament’s press office pitching to? This should really be the first question a media officer should ask themselves. Is the objective of a press release to reach the mainstream national media in the various EU countries, or is only for the Brussels-focused media corps who are, in any case, in the know?
The press release does not just make reference to technical terms and concepts from the negotiations and legal texts, it is entirely structured around them. Concepts such as “strategic plans pursued in line with the Paris Agreement”, “crisis reserve”, “entitlements”, “ad hoc complaints mechanism” and farmers operating railways and airports are the key issues of the press release. Whereas these are, indeed, important matters that the Parliament voted on, they are presented with no context or explanation. Journalists that are not based in Brussels and that have not been avidly following every step of the negotiations will not be able to make use of any of these points when writing for their lay audience.
There is a multitude of communication around any given EU issue and the media has a propensity to report on EU legislation from a national point of view and referring to their national political actors. It is – possibly - unrealistic to expect, therefore, that the European Parliament’s press office can be a powerful voice in and of itself.
It seems, therefore, that the European Parliament’s media work is firstly and foremost geared towards summarising parliamentarians’ debates for the “Brussels-bubble’ and Brussels based EU correspondents. As a non-partisan institution, it leaves political comment, controversy and vulgarisation to others, including the individual parliamentarians.
If this is the case, it’s choice of style is not incongruous, although the link between the summary and the sub-headings in the text would benefit from being strengthened.
Incongruity comes when the writing switches from lay terms to jargon and a bureaucratic writing style. One could argue that given “who they are writing for”, they may as well stick to the Brussels jargon throughout.
Language
Language is the hardest nail to hit on the head in this type of international press release. Most journalists will not be reading in their native language, and they must be able to lift text out of the release and re-hash it to their readers that are not necessarily versed with the subject or willing to sift through legal language and jargon.
The Parliament’s media office makes an effort to reduce the amount of “Brussels jargon”. Referring, for instance, to “farm policy” rather than CAP or discussions with the Council as “talks with EU ministers”.
The technocratic demon is a difficult beast to kill. It was mentioned above how sub-headings help the reader and make it easier to lift salient information from the press release. This is true only in as much as the paragraphs explaining the heading are also easy to read.
The entirety of the press release is, however, dense. It uses the legal language of the texts that parliamentarians voted on. Consequently, the reader is left to navigate the seas of bureaucratic jargon and the troubled waters of “would”, “should”, “could” and “shall”.
Anyone who has followed EU law-making knows just how important it is to get the latter words right, and how many hours can be spent by officials, national delegations and parliamentarians negotiating over the appropriate term. As fundamental as these are, however, they do not make for a fascinating read.
Avoid catch-all terms. The EU bubble is plagued by catch-all terms, “Implement” being their undisputed sovereign. Whereas the term has a meaning and a role in the world of EU legislation, it has become the go-to word for everything and anything.
An excessive use of catch-all terms has a three-fold effect on a piece of writing:
makes it boring and look bureaucratic;
makes it vague rather than precise;
makes the author sound lazy.
The verb “to implement” in particular has over two-dozen synonyms or words and turn of phrases with a similar meaning. According to the context, many of these will better express the message one is trying to convey. Consequently “… how to implement EU objectives on the ground” might make better reading (and more sense) if it were phrased differently. One alternative phrasing – among many others – would be “… how to accomplish EU objectives in each country”.
Dealing with the media is never an easy affair; dealing with a disparate and multilingual media corps is a perilous tightrope walking exercise. Very few make it to the other side.
Three lessons for communicators
Share newsworthy messages that are not self-promotional but relevant and accurate.
Summarise your main points early and ensure that sub-headings clearly link back.
Avoid catch-all terms. Use precise and concise language.
- written by Jacopo Moccia, jacopo[at]thedandeliongroup.eu
Learn the techniques. Boost your confidence. Make your point.
Click here for training opportunities.