'I switched on the TV,' NEHA first vice president Rob Blake told JEH, 'and I couldn't believe it.'
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Blake, who serves as environmental health director for the Dekalb County Board of Health in Georgia, was on a visit to the United Kingdom and was stunned to discover that a British television series features the work of environmental health officers. The program is called Life of Grime.
Environmental health as fodder for reality TV? Apparently so: Each half-hour installment narrates the adventures of environmental health officers at work on problems ranging from food safety to sewage issues. Readers can find synopses of upcoming episodes on the UKTV Web site (http://www.uktv.co.uk/index.cfm?uktv=tv.series&tvSid=8).
Personality profiles of environmental health officers serve as interludes in the storyline. 'They were breaking up the story within the half hour to show all kinds of different angles around the people who work in environmental health,' Blake said. 'We've got some really neat people.'
Drama, comedy, striking visuals, human interest--when one stops to think about it, environmental health activities have all the ingredients of good television.
And perhaps Life of Grime also has what many environmental health professionals dread about media coverage--a touch of sensationalism? Synopses of some of the episodes, for instance, read as follows:
The entertainingly stomach-churning exploits of environmental health officers in London's East End. Hot temperatures mean hot heads and high emotions as the officers face a bad cockroach epidemic.... .... A tenant's dogs are stinking out a council block, a woman is attracting rats by leaving food out for the pigeons, and a food inspector is cracking down on illegal street traders. It's enough to put you off your TV dinner! Environmental health officers double up as ghostbusters when they help a woman who is being terrorised by ghostly activities in her council home--could an exorcist be the only answer?.... (UKTV, n.d.)
JEH put it to Blake: Was there ever anything on the show that environmental health professionals might not have liked?
'Oh, I'm sure,' he said. 'And I know some of the folks in the U.K. thought--maybe they felt the same way.' But he believes the net effect is beneficial, because it raises the public's consciousness 'that ... hey, we are invisible, but we're doing this every day for every person.'
But could it happen on American TV?
'I don't know, I don't know,' Blake said. He acknowledged that the television market in Great Britain offers limited choices. On the other hand, he's not ready to give up hope: 'This was on one of the major networks that goes out across the country, and it came back by popular demand. It's interesting to people.... It affects their health, every day, and they're interested in what's going on in their community that they might otherwise be oblivious to.'
Could It Happen Here?--A Pep Talk
Before succumbing to the 'realism' of 'can't'--it can't happen on American TV, American viewers can't handle substance, a big market can't innovate the way a smaller market can--JEH thought it might be worth asking a couple of American television professionals whether something like Life of Grime would be possible in the United States.
A producer at a major TV network, who asked to remain anonymous, said.
We like that [accompanying someone on the job]. Especially my documentary guy doing the specials. We love that. I mean, you want to get to know the people who do the work and are passioante about it. We follow doctors all the time; I've followed police detectives, that kind of thing. Somebody who's passionate about their work can show you something. That's always good television.
'The way you've just described it, it sounds like it ought to work in the American context,' said Greg Dobbs, who corresponded for 23 years for ABC and then for National Geographic Television and HDNET Television. He warned, however, that it's hard to know for sure: 'I've long since learned not to trust my own judgment about what the American people are going to be interested in.'
So: maybe.
In fact, something along these lines is being tried in a modest way in Charleston, South Carolina, where the local NBC affiliate has worked with the Trident Public Health District to develop a three-minute segment on public health issues that airs once a month (Pranger, 2005). The first segment described the investigation of a possible foodborne-disease outbreak. Despite its brevity, it gave viewers 'a glimpse of the roles these public health workers play' (Pranger, p. 4).
Part of the challenge is to interest the gate-keepers (editors and news directors), who may have some untested convictions about what will and won't appeal to the American public.
A freelance health reporter writes: 'There is evidence that, contrary to the instincts of many news managers, people are actually more interested in health policy stories than in 'disease of the week' blurbs' (Holtz, 2003, p. 9). He bases this conclusion on an analysis of polls taken by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health and pointedly notes that 'The findings seem to contradict the gut news instincts about what stories draw an audience' (p. 9).
'I think the interest is there,' said David Ropeik, a former television environmental journalist who now teaches risk communication and working with the media at the Harvard School of Public Health. 'I think the interest is there because they realize it's the ... physical world in which they live--the air they breathe, the food they eat, the water they drink. And, specifically, I think, the world in which their children live, breathe, and eat.'
Journalists are always looking for stories that have personal implications for their audience. Michael Hawthorne, environment reporter with the Chicago Tribune, said, 'Personally I like to read about it [environmental health]. I'm biased, obviously, since that's a subset of what I do for a living. But I find that even other people who have nothing to do with journalism ... have questions about it.... Because this is one area in which in many cases there's much closer effect on many people. Or a direct effect.'
The American news media has traditionally seen public health stories as 'dull but important,' but as one reporter notes, there is nothing inherently dull about 'the fascinating personalities who practice it [public health] and the extraordinary stories it reveals' (McKenna, 2003, p. 11). She describes watching 'a scientist empty a refrigerator of a week's worth of groceries to search for clues to a foodborne disease that was causing a rash of miscarriages while she ignored the risk to her own first-trimester pregnancy' (p. 11).
The visuals are often good: 'We look for pictures,' the anonymous television producer told JEH, and 'luckily [with] environmental stories often you're out in nature, in beautiful spots or disgusting chemical spills, all of which are very good.'
Mel Knight, director of the Sacramento County Environmental Management Department in California, pointed out that other kinds of environmental health stories--'tattoos, piercing, that kind of thing'--also offer good visuals.
The first step in capturing the interest of media gatekeepers is to be convinced oneself that environmental health activities make good material for journalists. Many members of the profession may also need to get past a reflexive fear of sensationalism. For one thing, sensationalism may sometimes be a price worth paying. For another, it is not the only way to a journalist's heart: 'The media tells stories that are of interest to the public,' said June Livingston, communications and media officer for the Sacramento County Environmental Management Department. 'People are very interested in food--people eat out a lot, people go to grocery stores.'
'The public seems to have a sustained interest in restaurant inspections,' Knight added.
The Rising Interest in Environmental Health--Challenge and Opportunity
Indeed, some environmental health professionals see public interest in their work increasing. 'These environmental issues have been the hot topics,' said Emily Gresham, health communication specialist for the Northern Kentucky Health Department. 'You've got your West Nile virus, you've got your lead in soil, and those have really been things that are out there in our local media.'
Mark Robson, of the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) School of Public Health, said, 'I think it [environmental health] is becoming less invisible. I think--it's terrible to say this, but--since the 9/11 issue, everybody has kind of understood now about environmental health.'
The result is increasing interest on the part of the media. That circumstance presents another important challenge for professionals in the field.
'The first thing is that the media are calling more,' Robson observed. 'They expect you to be crisp.... The second thing is that the media are more savvy than they used to be. Large papers are more specialized. Unless it's a really tiny outlet, you don't have people who are covering everything from the social pages to the business section. They really are environmental professionals.'
Tracy Regan a reporter for the Times of Trenton, does not believe that all health departments have risen to the challenge yet. 'I think these folks are getting up to speed.... There are increasing numbers of articles about health issues. And so I think they're kind of under fire now.'
A Culture of Caution
'Most environmental health professionals would avoid the media like the plague if given a choice,' believes Robert Emery, associate professor of occupational health at the University of Texas School of Public Health.
'We tend to be, as a group, in the aggregate, afraid of the media,' said Robert Harrington, director of the Casper-Natrona County Health Department in Wyoming. 'Because they might expose us in some of our shortcomings,... we just don't reach out to the media. If I don't see the TV truck in front of my office, phew! It's a good day.'
Denzil Inman, a former FDA regional food specialist, sees this phenomenon as a function of personality types: After studying the Myers-Briggs system (often used in career counseling), Inman has concluded that the following traits are predominant among environmental health professionals: hardworking, honest, dependable, modest, cautious, and introverted. The trend is self-perpetuating because people tend to hire people like themselves. He believes the profession could benefit by consciously broadening its hiring practices.
But reticence and distaste for the media may also have structural causes related to the medical and regulatory implications of the work. 'From Day 1, you're taught not to discuss things that you're working on,' said Laura Strevels of the Northern Kentucky Health Department. 'I think we've tended to say, 'Don't answer it--or don't give too much information--because you don't want to hold yourself open to liability for ruining a business.''
'And [another] thing that's occurred,' Emery of the University of Texas pointed out, 'is that many of us maybe have endured some sort of media training in preparation for the 60 Minutes sort of ambush tactic.'
As a result, many of the media tactics environmental health professionals have adopted are defensive in nature. Barry Drucker, environmental health supervisor for the St. Charles County Department of Community Health and the Environment in Missouri, said he was once told that ''the thing to do is be as boring as possible.'' This method, he believes, doesn't favor the interests of the profession in the long term.
Blake thinks that 'we as a profession, if we are in a personality type--whatever is going on--we just need to be able to get out of that comfort zone.'
Environmental health professionals have traditionally worried that a sensationalized story will give the public distorted ideas about health threats and--in a worst-case scenario--create panic. But several people pointed out that even sensationalistic or negative stories can be helpful in the long run.
'I'll give you [a] very applied example,' said Knight of Sacramento County:
The San Jose Mercury did an article in which they actually took inspectors and compared the differences among them. And they would say [Inspector A] seems to always find temperature violations. But Inspector C never finds temperature violations. And what they showed was inconsistency or other things, which helped I think highlight to program managers and others that these were important things that ought to be dealt with. And I think it also made it easier for professionals in the field to realize that the work they were doing was both appreciated and being looked at.
So it helps, I think, on everything from grammar to handwriting to whatever it is. Knowing that people are going to look at your work.
'The general public and policy makers don't read the Journal of Environmental Health,' pointed out Lori Dorfman, director of the Berkeley Media Studies Group at the University of California-Berkeley School of Public Health. 'Neither do most reporters. Policy makers, in particular, need to know the implications of the research and practice in environmental health--news attention is one of the most effective ways to get the issues on their agendas.'
In recent years, many environmental health departments have engaged media consultants and have adopted tactics that--to put it bluntly--have been so long in use elsewhere that much of the public has developed immunity to them. That is not to say that these traditional methods of dealing with the media have no value. (For more on the advantages and pitfalls of some familiar media-handling tactics, see the sidebars on pages 38, 40, 41, and 42.)
The usual tactics tend to be tailored to 'getting the message out' (i.e., educating the public on some specific health or safety issue) or 'putting the fires out' (i.e., 'handling' the media when controversy erupts). But as the British Life of Grime series suggests, other relations with the media are possible. The rest of this paper will consider some ways the profession can step outside the usual games.
Be a Media Resource (And Be Flexible About It)
'You get some odd questions every once in a while,' observed Gresham of the Northern Kentucky Health Department. The questions may not relate to everyday environmental health work. Or they may be questions a reporter could easily answer for him- or herself by visiting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Web site. But the point, said Gresham, is that 'they basically just want a person they can ask those questions to--basically stand there and give them back the information in an interview.' She considers meeting the media's needs in this way to be 'a public service, a health service.'
'It's just a matter,' added Strevels, 'of 'Can we come out, put some trees behind you? We're putting you once again on TV, in the public's eye, so that they know if they have questions to call you.' I know a couple of times, it was like: 'Man, that's not what we do.' But you do it anyway. Because they'll build on that relationship.'
Gresham said journalists also call her because they know the health department has contacts in the community--even if the issue has nothing to do with public health.
The right answer, in cases like that, is never 'not my area, sorry.' Gresham makes sure to provide a referral. 'I think that we have to be willing to go the extra step,' added Strevels. 'I know we're all busy, but ... [it's good to] do a little legwork so that we are more visible.'
Steve Jenkins, health director of Summit County Public Health in Utah, told JEH, 'We've had them call us about different things: 'Do you think bicycle safety in Summit County is a concern?' We said, 'Well, we're not sure, but let us research it out.' We researched it out and sent him two or three articles we got off the Internet and stuff from the state health department. He said, 'Thanks for the information. I think we're going to be able to put together a pretty good article about that.''
Emery told a story about boning up on fireworks safety, then laughed: 'I can't tell you the number of items I've been considered to be an expert in....'
Be an 'Expert'
To become known to journalists as an 'expert' is to ensure that your voice will be heard over and over. Because of the way journalists conduct their research, one's influence can grow exponentially.
Reporters generally start work on a story by going to secondary sources. They search Google, LexisNexis, or other databases to find out who the 'players' are, said Len Ackland, who teaches journalism at the University of Colorado-Boulder. 'You're trying to understand the issues, and you're writing down names of people.'
So, he said, 'There is a mechanism that people who get quoted once may get quoted again.'
Richard Maas, co-founder of the Environmental Quality Institute, is one of those people who gets interviewed repeatedly. 'My experience has been that ... one place would publish it, and then it would get picked up by the AP and Knight-Ridder, and then there'd be another hundred newspapers calling me.'
Being a neutral--and forthright--expert can earn lavish gratitude from journalists: 'I love Mark Robson [of the UMDNJ School of Public Health]' reporter Regan told JEH. 'Were I to hold someone up as someone who really is a scientist and really is interested in simply, you know, telling the truth and not shying away because it's controversial, I would point him out.... When I speak to him, I know I'm going to get the honest truth and what he knows--and the limits of what he knows.... It's very refreshing.'
Unfortunately (or fortunately for environmental health professionals looking to be heard), there seems to be a shortage of neutral experts. Traditionally, reporters have looked to university professors to fill this role. 'But I don't think they're as neutral today as they were when I was a journalist--because of the grants,' said Ackland. Also, said Maas, 'Most of them [academics] are doing very theoretical research inside the ivory tower. They actually don't have practical information that you need if you're a media person.'
One reporter JEH spoke with was skeptical that employees of health departments could step into this role. Todd Bates of the Asbury Park Press draws a distinction between 'neutral,' which he does not think academics necessarily are, and 'independent.' When he calls university professors, he is 'looking for independent sources of information.... But if you're calling up the state health department, they're not an independent source; they're the state health department.'
Ackland, however, thinks that 'a lot of people' at the health department could qualify as knowledgeable but neutral. 'It depends on the issue,' he said. 'If somebody at the health department is called on the phone about a story, and the story comes out well, and this person responds well to the questions and really clarifies what's going on, then a good reporter will try to get to know that person. I tell my students: 'Befriend an epidemiologist.''
Blake pointed out that in the United Kingdom, NEHA's sister organization, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH), is often quoted in the national media. He would like to see a network of experts that the media could access through NEHA. 'For the national papers, for CNN, for some of the national TV stories.'
Found an Independent Institute
The Environmental Quality Institute (EQI), which Maas and colleague Steven C. Patch cofounded at the University of North Carolina--Asheville, is specifically designed to 'conduct technically rigorous and unbiased research to help interested parties gain accurate technical understanding of complex environmental issues,' according to EQI's Web site (http://orgs.unca.edu/eqi/mission.htm). Because of its reputation for independence, the institute attracts proposals for research projects--funded proposals--from entities ranging from Greenpeace (on mercury exposure) to a jewelry-piercing association (on lead in jewelry) to news organizations (on issues like surface-water quality).
Maas said EQI has so many ongoing research projects that media coverage and appeals to his expertise are now 'almost continuous.' The Greenpeace project allows anyone in North America to send in a hair sample for mercury-exposure testing. 'Greenpeace offers the test,' he explained, 'and then we do it as a research project where they [participants] have to fill out a questionnaire.'
This kind of work accomplishes two things at once: 'We're helping the public understand the dynamics of the problem, but we're also providing specific information for each family that enables them to protect themselves from the hazard.' In other words, EQI's work helps make the connection between public health issues and personal health concrete.
The only problem, said Maas, is that 'we are absolutely so overwhelmed right now. I'm trying to do my thing of raising public awareness, but it's actually scary to think about more samples coming to the lab.'
So there is room for more entities like EQI. Maas acknowledged that setting up a research institute is 'easier said than done,' but he believes that doing so could significantly raise the public profile of environmental health. EQI was established under the umbrella of a university, which is one model of independence, especially practical since some of the infrastructure and equipment would be in place. Another possibility might be for a trade association like NEHA or a NEHA affiliate to sponsor such an institute.
Have Coffee with a Reporter
Once the media is working on a story related to environmental health--especially if controversy is involved--environmental health staff in many jurisdictions may be prohibited from speaking to reporters. The battle lines are drawn--PIOs and attorneys take over, and it's too late for the personal touch. Getting beyond the defensive stance involves foresight.
'It involves personal relationships with the media in your locality,' said Michele Morrone, who teaches environmental health science at Ohio State University, 'so that you can call the reporter and say, 'Here's what's going on today.''
'If you work with the media well ahead of time,' said Tom Bennett, bioterrorism coordinator for the Clayton Health District in Georgia, 'the slant can be very good for environmental health. If you don't work with them ahead of time, then you get caught--kind of blindsided by it; normally the slant is going to be whatever they want.' He told JEH that this kind of preparation served his department well on the issue of recreational-water safety. The issue suddenly rose to the fore when an E. coli outbreak was traced to a sick child who'd had an accident at a water park. Many illnesses resulted from the outbreak, a death was involved, and the media covered the issue intensively.
'The incident changed a lot of things in the pool industry,' Bennett noted. 'It changed things from the government regulatory end, and it changed the way people handled themselves in pools both private and public. And it changed the way a lot of pools are being managed.'
Thus, in what could have been a public relations disaster ('Why isn't the health department doing its job?') media coverage helped the health department achieve some policy objectives.
One way to establish rapport with journalists is to invite them to observe departmental activities. Jenkins of Summit County, Utah, told JEH that when his jurisdiction held tabletop terrorism preparedness exercises, it invited the media, 'and they loved that.' Bennett thinks 'the biggest thing environmentalists can do is to probably start with their little local newspaper reporter and say: 'How about coming in and doing this story on the environmental health part of the health department and what we do?'... Talk to them over a beer.'
Everyone--not just PIOs--'can be proactive.'
'But you have to be proactive before there's an incident,' Bennett warned. '[Otherwise] you'll be tightened down on so that you may not be able to say anything. You can talk to people casually. They can't stop me from talking to my next door neighbor who happens to be a reporter.'
The idea here is not to release sensitive information, just to pitch ideas; if the reporter decides to follow up, Bennett said, he goes back to his PIO and gets permission for an official interview.
Pitch Stories
'I wish they [health departments] were more proactive about getting information--and possible news tips--to me,' said Matthew Leingang, formerly of the Cincinnati Enquirer and now an Associated Press writer. 'I find that environmental health officers and public health officials are very happy to have reporters paying attention to the work they do. But I don't think these officials are very media savvy. They don't always think to call me when they have something that could be news.'
Like every other reporter JEH spoke with for this story, Leingang said that he often finds things out 'by going through back doors--tips from readers, tips from other sources.'
What kinds of stories should one pitch to journalists? More kinds than one might think.
'Sensation' isn't the only criteria for running stories,' said Dorfman of the Berkeley Media Studies Group. 'There are news values as well. After all, many reporters ... went into the business for the same reason I went into public health: They wanted to make the world a better place. They get constrained by their institution just like we in public health get constrained by ours.'
'We want to have people watching,' said a producer at a major TV network who asked to remain anonymous, 'but we also think we're doing our job if it maybe wasn't the highest-rated show but it really sparked some debate among policy makers and lawmakers.'
Press Releases--Tips and Pitfalls
When journalists say they want to hear from health departments, they don't necessarily mean mass distribution of routine press releases.
'Something that people quite often do, especially in health departments,' complained John Ferrugia of Channel 7 News in Denver, 'is send me an e-mail with statistics in it and references to Web pages or Web sites ... Well, I don't have time to go through [that].'
On some occasions, however, there's no getting around the use of a press release. The following tips emerged from conversations with journalists:
* 'Personally?' said the anonymous TV producer, 'a press release? Should-be-short. You don't want to give someone 10 options. Here's what's important. And then let them ask questions.'
* Dobbs, formerly of ABC, suggests being selective about what you put out. 'Don't flood them--I mean, I used to get hundreds. Every day. Hundreds of news releases. I mean: A new photocopy secretary has taken a job at such and such--and they'd put out a press release. I learned to just about ignore them.'
* Ferrugia of Denver Channel 7 said press releases should tell a story: 'Put it in narrative form.'
* 'Personalize it,' he added. One way is to 'find a family' that's been affected by the issue or has benefited from the program being discussed. 'Dig into your great resources and find a family that's willing to come forward.'
* Or write a headline that invites participation: 'If You Go to a Restaurant and You Get Sick, We Want to Know About It. And We're Setting Up a Hotline.'
* 'Tell me why I care,' said Shauna Bales assistant news director of KCWY, an NBC affiliate in Casper, Wyoming. 'Tell me how it's going to affect me.'
Even if your press release is brilliant, however, it's important to remember that competition for journalists' attention can be intense. Dorfman describes it this way:
All you have to do is walk into a newsroom to see that reporters, producers, and editors are completely inundated by news. They have TVs on their desks tuned to news; the assignment desk is listening to all- news radio and police and ambulance scanners simultaneously; there are TVs mounted to the ceilings or walls that can be seen from every vantage point in the newsroom; on each person's desk computers are hooked up to wire services that beep every few minutes to alert them of a new story; phones are ringing with people pitching stories; and they are talking to each other about the news.... In this environment, it's no surprise that it takes something extraordinary to get reporters' attention.
Beyond the Press Release
'You can e-mail things to reporters,' observed Livingston of Sacramento County Environmental Management, 'but sometimes they won't pick up your story. Sometimes what they want is for you to pitch a story and have one person tell that story.'
It's a question not only of pitching the right story, but also of finding the right person to pitch it to. 'I've found out,' Livingston added, 'that sometimes they [reporters] get a little annoyed when you pitch stories to the wrong people. They expect for you to do a little bit of background work yourself to know who to pitch the story to.'
What kind of material are journalists looking for?
* Todd Bates of the Asbury Park Press said, 'Whatever seems most timely is what I try to focus on--an issue that's in the news or [conversely!] an issue that nobody else has written about.'
* He's also, as a reporter for a local paper, interested in stories that have a local or regional angle. 'If we're writing about national issues, we'll try to focus on what the local impact is.'
* Michael Hawthorne, a reporter for the Chicago Tribune, said he's looking for 'some kind of pending decision being made.... A new finding. If it's explaining something differently than has been explained before. If it's something that we took for granted and actually it's still a problem....' In other words, he's interested in something that wasn't foreseen. 'Or the questions just weren't asked. Scientists didn't ask the questions. Journalists didn't ask the questions. The government didn't ask the questions.'
* A producer at a major television network is looking for material that makes him say, ''Huh, I didn't know that' or 'Gee, that's a lot of people.''
* 'Certain things are going to make people's ears perk up,' observed Livingston. 'If it's something that's going to have to do with [them] or if it's something that's in an unregulated industry. People are very interested in that.'
Also, Livingston pointed out, 'sometimes when you get in on one story, and they're writing it, you pitch them another one.'
Beyond the News
Not everything that appears in the media is news. Dorfman recommends the use of letters to the editor and op-ed pieces. Of course, contributions of this sort are more likely to run if they 'piggyback' on issues currently in the news.
But environmental health could also have a presence in a style section or a food section. The Sacramento County Environmental Management Department, for instance, has worked with the food and wine editor of the Sacramento Bee.
In fact, the example this article began with, the British Life of Grime series, is not really news. It's a human-interest documentary, with a touch of comedy thrown in. And that raises a tantalizing thought: environmental health as fodder for the American entertainment industry? Sitcoms and dramas have been set in law firms, police departments, high schools, and 'neighborhood' bars. Why not in an environmental health department?
Making it happen would mean pitching like crazy. It would mean a lot of work and a lot of creative thinking. Above all, it would mean relinquishing some dignity--accepting that on occasion one might be seen in a melodramatic or comical light. Script writers are likely to emphasize different issues and different aspects of the work than environmental health professionals might want to see. But the point of getting beyond the news in this way would not be to offer up a perfect rendition. It would be to make viewers familiar with the profession, to bring the concept of environmental health into the everyday vocabulary of the American public.
Conclusion--Media Relations Is a Lot of Work
Pranger of Trident Public Health District provides significant help to the Charleston television station running the Disease Detectives series. 'Be ready to coordinate locations for filming and line up people to be interviewed,' she writes. 'Our goal at Trident Public Health District is to make the Disease Detectives segments as easy as possible for the television station to produce' (Pranger, 2005, p.4).
'A lot of people, when they talk about marketing environmental health, they talk about it like it's an event: 'We're going to have a campaign,'' said Peter Thornton, environmental administrator for the Volusia County Health Department in Florida. 'It's not an event. It's a way of life.'
The work is endless: Pitching stories that turn environmental health statistics into 'narratives.' 'Personalizing' the stories. Finding people who are willing to come forward and talk publicly about their experiences. Doing legwork for reporters. Figuring out which journalists to pitch to (which means reading their articles). It's simply too much to do as an aside to other duties.
And so, for the department that wants to transcend the get-the-message-out/put-the fires-out dynamic, the first step is inescapable. You have to have a PIO--a good one, a real creative thinker.
Acknowledgements: JEH is grateful to the journalists and environmental health professionals who were interviewed for this story, all of whom were extremely generous about taking time out of busy schedules. Special thanks are due to Alicia Green, Journal project specialist, who shared her contacts among journalists. As always, discussions with NEHA Executive Director Nelson Fabian provided background, direction, and intellectual focus for the inquiry.
Visit www.neha.org
** Job Center
** Students Section
** Research and Development
** Credentialing
** Continuing Education
** AEC & Exhibition
** Regional Workshops
** Awards and Scholarships
** National Radon Proficiency
** Terrorism and All-Hazards Preparedness Resources
** Online Training and much, much more!!
REFERENCES
Hartz, J., & Chappell, R. (1997). Worlds apart: How the distance between science and journalism threatens America's future. Nashville, TN: First Amendment Center.
Holtz, A. (2003). Frustrations on the frontlines of the health beat: News organizations need to find spaces to be homes for stories that are now often orphaned. Nieman Reports, 57(1), 7-9.
McKenna, M.A.J. (2003). The public health beat: What is it? Why is it important? Nieman Reports, 57(1), 10-11.
Pranger, L. (2005). 'Disease detectives' spread the news. NACCHO Exchange, 4(2), 1,4.
UKTV. (n.d.). What's on. Retrieved October 13, 2005, from http://www.uktv.co.uk/index.cfm?uktv=tv.series&tvSid=8.
Wallack, L., Woodruff, K., Dorfman, L., & Diaz, I. (1999). News for a change: An advocate's guide to working with the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Editor's note: NEHA is committed to providing its members with information specific to the profession of environmental health. The Journal of Environmental Health has taken a major new step in this direction by employing a staff reporter. Rebecca Berg, who has long copy edited the Journal, will be writing in-depth reports on trends and events in the field. Her reports will provide Journal readers with important insights into the profession. They will also be designed to encourage discussion of controversies, challenges, and big-picture issues facing the profession. Readers are invited to participate in these discussions through letters to the editor: Please send your responses, opinions, or comments to Joanne Scigliano, Content Editor, jscigliano@neha.org.
Rebecca Berg, Ph.D.
RELATED ARTICLE: Get a PIO
JEH heard a combined sense of discovery and relief from department managers who have hired public information officers (PIOs).
'Most of that stuff [writing articles or press releases for the media]--it'd take me all day,' said Steve Jenkins, health director of Summit County Public Health in Utah. 'It takes her like 30 minutes.'
There are, however, disagreements about just how far one should lean on the PIO. Some departments use the PIO as their primary spokesperson. Certainly, for environmental health professionals who might be very busy--or a little shy--it is tempting to let someone else do the talking. Others believe this approach can be counterproductive.
'The face of the media has changed,' said Robert Emery of the University of Texas School of Public Health. 'When they put the public affairs person on TV, the immediate assumption is that they're hiding something.... [The public] doesn't want to see the tagline 'Joe Blow, public affairs person.' They want to see 'Joe Blow, environmental health director.''
'If you're the PIO and you're out there talking instead of the director of the health department or the director of environmental health,' observed Peter Thornton, environmental administrator of the Volusia County Health Department in Florida, 'that becomes a problem. Because everybody knows that the information has now been filtered, reviewed with attorneys, etc.' He added: 'If the public perceives--and this does happen a lot--that the PIO is setting policy for the department, that's a very negative reaction.'
Comments from media professionals confirm that a reaction has set in: 'Flakism is rampant,' said Len Ackland, who teaches journalism at the University of Colorado-Boulder. He believes it is a problem 'when the institutions try to funnel everything through a spokesperson and don't let journalists talk to their sources. That ... does a disservice to everybody.'
Indeed, the bottleneck approach to controlling one's message can backfire, since reporters will be looking for ways around the PIO. 'I work in the investigative unit,' John Ferrugia of Channel 7 News in Denver told JEH. 'So if I want to know something, I'm not going to go to the PR person. Every good reporter is going to have sources in every department.'
David Ropeik, who teaches risk communication and working with the media at the Harvard School of Public Health, thinks 'it's a bad idea that anybody but the expert does the interview directly.'
So some departments prefer not to use the PIO as a primary spokesperson. The PIO may be seen as a facilitator, arranging interviews and drafting press releases. Sometimes the PIO does sit in on these interviews. 'We just help facilitate things,' said Emily Gresham, health communication specialist for the Northern Kentucky Health Department. 'If there is a question that maybe the reporter hasn't asked, we might say, 'Hey, this is something else that you might want to know about.''
Some reporters may perceive the PIO who sits in as a 'minder,' which is why, said Ropeik, 'the press officer needs to make clear at the beginning and throughout that he or she is there to facilitate,' not to 'rein in' the interviewee.
Not take over?
'Not speak,' he said, unless the reporter tries to take the conversation outside the interviewee's area of expertise, in which case, the PIO can intercede 'as a facilitator: 'I'm sorry to interrupt. The scientist ... is not an expert in that.' What that says is: 'Journalist, the stuff you'll be getting after this isn't from an expert....' It's facilitating for the journalist.'
Ropeik also thinks PIOs can serve as coaches:
In general, the press officer's job should be to prepare the scientist. First of all, it should be to convince the scientist to do the interview in almost all cases. Say yes.... And having a press officer around can help you do that. A scientist--or a policy person-- can be more reassured that it will go better since he's got this person to help him. Then [the PIO's role is] to prepare the scientist or policy person for that interaction.
Richard Sanchez, director of environmental health in Sacramento County, confirmed that the presence of a 'coach' can be tremendously helpful, especially for environmental health professionals who might feel shy or nervous in front of reporters. 'I always speak to June [June Livingston, communications and media officer] before I go on the media,' he said. 'She gives me the mantra. Get your message across. Keep in mind that you know more than they do. And you know what? That one was a key one for me. Just realizing that I know more about this than they do. That gave me a little boost of confidence to speak to them more effectively.'
RELATED ARTICLE: Stay on Message--Sometimes!
For years now, environmental health professionals have been hearing 'stay on message' from media consultants. This tactic is one way of coping with, say, a reporter who's looking to manufacture trouble. Wallack and co-authors suggest using 'pivot phrases' as 'quick transitions away from your problem questions' (1999, p. 100). They also advocate an approach they call 'reframing.' For an example of appropriate and effective reframing, see the sidebar on page 41.
But it's important to note that 'stay on message' is now old advice. It has been implemented so insistently by politicians and corporate media relations offices--and often so cynically--that journalists and the public have learned to be skeptical.
'I hate it,' said Michele Morrone, who teaches environmental health science and risk communication at Ohio State University. 'I think it's probably effective in some situations. But it goes against sound risk communication principles.'
'Yes, when appropriate, reiterate your main point,' said David Ropeik, who teaches risk communication and working with the media at the Harvard School of Public Health. 'But only when appropriate. Because to do so when out of context is to be defensive and manipulative--and waves a red flag at the reporter that we are now in battle.... It's terrible advice. It's inflammatory. It's disrespectful. It's defensive, it's hostile.'
Greg Dobbs, who corresponded for 23 years for ABC, told JEH that in the case of a potentially negative story, 'If the reporter's brought it up, that's because the reporter knows there's an issue. And if you just try to put that happy face on it, then the reporter's going to go to somebody who's going to paint an even darker picture than you might be willing candidly to paint.'
'To me, 'staying on message is code for 'spin,'' said Matt Leingang, who was a reporter for the Cincinnati Enquirer at the time and now writes for the Associated Press.
Staff who 'stay on message' come across as robots who can't think for themselves.... [They] use this technique to deflect questions.... They essentially talk in circles. This is pathetic. Weak reporters will let these people get away with that, but I won't. If someone won't answer a question, I will say so in my story. I won't regurgitate their spin.
'One of the key things you have to do to be an effective communicator is to be honest, frank, and open,' Morrone said. 'And be responsive, too. And if you are creating a message and not being responsive and honest, it might work short term, but if it turns out that people do some more digging and they discover you weren't honest, frank, and open, there goes everything. It's all about building trust.'
Still, said June Livingston, communications and media officer for the Environmental Management Department in Sacramento County, California, 'We're knowledgeable, and we have information to share. It's my obligation to turn to [the reporter] and say: 'That may be an interesting question when it comes up, but what the public needs to know is this....'
'I'm not talking about spin,' she added, 'which I think is the negative part of staying on message. I'm talking about what--if you are a responsible public health official--what is it that the public needs to know.'
Emily Gresham, health communication specialist for the Northern Kentucky Health Department, offered the following advice: 'Answer their question as best you can, but then try to tie it back into your message.... You can't just have your one message and keep saying that over and over again.'
So effective communicators do not necessarily throw 'stay on message' out the window, but they do apply it in a nuanced and context-sensitive way.
RELATED ARTICLE: Reframing--Advice from Some Public Health Advocates
If an interviewer seems to be digging a trap, how do you keep from falling in? Wallack and co-authors suggest the use of 'pivot phrases' as 'quick transitions away from your problem questions' (1999, p. 100).
They offer the following example:
Q: ''Are our schools failing to prepare students for work, or are young people just not trying hard enough to find good jobs?''
A: ''Neither of those is what's most important. Let me tell you what is'' (p. 100).
Especially with television, the pivot and the subsequent reframing have to be fast and succinct.
RELATED ARTICLE: How to Be Interviewed
Scientists often complain about how frustrating it is to be interviewed by journalists who are not prepared, have not read their articles, and know nothing about the field. But preparation is equally important for the interviewee.
'Don't do it ad lib!' said David Ropeik, who teaches risk communication and working with the media at the Harvard School of Public Health. 'Even if you have been interviewed on the same topic before.... Think through whom you'll be talking to, what they want to know, how you say it.' In other words, either the interviewee or the PIO should research the journalist, read the journalist's previous articles, and find out, as Robert Emery of the University of Texas School of Public Health put it, 'What's the angle for the story?'
'Ask the deadline and respect it, but say you cannot do it immediately,' advised Ropeik. '[Say] 'I'll call you back in five minutes, three minutes, ten minutes.' Take time to prepare.'
Hartz and Chappell (1997) recommend engaging the journalist 'in dialogue.' Although media consultants often urge interviewees never to forget that an interview is not a conversation, taking this advice too literally can lead to defensive behavior. Hartz and Chappell think one should 'avoid if possible the 'ping-pong' interview--question/answer, question/answer....'
A more rewarding method is to draw the reporter into a genuine conversation, much as one might a colleague. Find out how much background he/she has in your area, how much of the literature, if any, has been digested, who else the reporter has spoken to, opinions he or she might hold. (p. 94)
The give and take is important because, Ropeik said, 'an interview with a senior newspaper reporter is different from an interview with a local radio station reporter on the same topic. You would use different words. You would use different levels of detail.'
June Livingston of the Environmental Management Department in Sacramento County, California, has found that journalists can be surprisingly forthcoming: 'A lot of times they will tell you whom they've talked to. They may not tell you exactly what the whole story is, but mostly they do answer your questions. Some of them are very surprised that you asked.'
After researching the interviewer, the next step is to write down one's main points.
Robert Blake, environmental health director for the Dekalb County Board of Health in Georgia, keeps files on various issues. Each file contains a sheet spelling out his 'single overriding communication objective' for a given issue. 'When a media person comes, I pull that out, and I tweak it and adapt it to the slant of the story. And then I usually pull a couple of staff people in to fire the usual questions at me. And then I say, 'Fire a couple of off-the-wall questions to keep me on my toes.''
'Figure out what else they're likely to ask you,' said Ropeik.
'Think about what's the worst possible way this story can be portrayed,' suggested Michele Morrone, who teaches environmental health science at Ohio University. 'And then have a plan for how you're going to respond.'
Once the interview is under way, the following tips may be helpful:
* Start with your conclusions--this is especially important in TV interviews.
* Repeat important points (but see the cautions in the sidebar on page 40).
* Avoid jargon and acronyms.
* Don't answer questions you're not qualified to answer.
* Pick a location where you're comfortable. 'Don't be bullied into--for example--a TV interview outdoors,' said Bob Harrington, director of the Casper-Natrona County Health Department. 'Don't do it! It never looks good. The wind's always blowing, there's always noise.'
* Make sure the reporter will not be quoting you from memory. 'If a reporter comes here and they're not taking notes [or running a recorder], that's pretty much the end of the interview,' said Peter Thornton, environmental administrator for the Volusia County Health Department in Florida.
* Emery recommends giving reporters a 'media brief': a one-page summary of the issues, with the important facts at the top and a summary of one's comments below.
* If a reporter presses you for information you can't give (confidential medical information, for instance), be polite and explain why you can't give it.
* 'We're frank and honest, but we're cautious.' Harrington said. 'We consider how our statements might be misinterpreted.'
* Never say 'no comment'! 'It's like taking the Fifth,' observed Barry Drucker, environmental health supervisor for the St. Charles County Department of Community Health in Missouri.
RELATED ARTICLE: The Elephant in the Room: Nerves
The interviewing tactics and the cautions outlined in the sidebar on the facing page might seem like a lot to keep in mind on the spot. JEH asked several environmental health professionals if they felt nervous the first time they spoke with the media.
'Oh yeah,' said Robert Emery, who teaches occupational health at the University of Texas School of Public Health. 'You just don't [anticipate] things like the camera only being two inches from your nose.'
Tom Bennett, bioterrorism coordinator for the Clayton Health District in Georgia, told JEH that during his first interview, he was 'so nervous that it was almost like it was canned--responses with no emotion, just monotone.'
So finally they told me they were just turning the [recording equipment] off and were just talking to me about what they were going to ask me. And I didn't realize they were actually recording it. And the difference it made.... What they did was play it back and say, 'Now, can we go with this?'
Few people are born knowing how to be interviewed. And ultimately, Emery thinks, 'you can't tell someone how to ride a bicycle. They've got to go out and ride the bike and crash.'
Bennett thinks that for some people who might not be comfortable with the media, 'the biggest thing you can do is say. 'No, I can't do that.' Instead of getting in front of the camera and acting like a bundle of nerves. You'd be better off to say, 'No, let my PIO do that.''
Ropeik, however, believes that 'in almost all cases the answer should be yes. With caveats, but yes.' He acknowledges that there are exceptions. 'There were a couple of scientists at my center who were really lousy at being interviewed. And it was mutually agreed that they were so poor at it that I ought to do it.' But in this case it was made clear to the reporter why the PIO was speaking in place of the expert.
June Livingston, communications and media officer for the Environmental Management Department in Sacramento, California, believes that most people can do interviews, even those who think they're not cut out for it. 'Sometimes people don't realize: When a reporter comes to you for information, it's because they need information from you.... It's a powerful feeling, once you realize that. Once you get over the initial fear.'
Livingston's colleague Richard Sanchez, the department's environmental health director, added:
I come from a science background. Most of the staff in our field come from a science background. It's not necessarily in our nature to be effusive or be ready to jump up when it comes to being in front of a camera.... [But] I have actually come to almost a 180 on these things, where June can attest to the fact that I'm almost kind of the mouthpiece now for all these environmental health issues.
RELATED ARTICLE: Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself
Assuming that journalists are out to get you can result in a defensiveness that hurts your cause. It's hard to speak freely, intelligently, and flexibly when you're afraid that every word will be snatched up and twisted. To elucidate what can happen when an interviewee sounds wary or unforthcoming, Michele Morrone of Ohio University turned the conversation and began to interview the journalist:
Morrone: You smell blood, right, Rebecca?
JEH: I don't have that reaction, actually. I suspect that there are reporters who do. But I just get a little frustrated. It just makes my job a little harder.
Morrone: And how does that affect what you write?
JEH: It does color my perception of the trustworthiness of what the person's saying. I do suspect that there may be more to the story than what they're saying. Or that they're somehow censoring themselves a little. I'm not necessarily going to write something just based on that hunch, but it might affect how I conduct an interview with somebody else who's involved with the issue in some way. I might think of asking them questions that I might not otherwise ask.
Morrone: There you go.
JEH: It's a subtle effect, and it really varies by the situation, but there's no doubt that it has some kind of effect.
Morrone: You know, this is the thing: I think we have to stop thinking that reporters are out to get us.
