During my time at CNBC, part of my daily brief was to sift through scores of press releases. Most of them went nowhere.

Why?

They were written to satisfy the organisation sending them, not to help the journalist receiving them. The company wanted positive visibility. The newsroom wanted a story that mattered to its audience. A release could be polished, approved by every department and still fail that basic test.

This mismatch continues to frustrate corporate communication teams. It should not. The journalist and the communicator are doing different jobs.

A release is raw material

The Associated Press states the newsroom position without ambiguity: it does not publish news releases in their original form. Information and quotes from a release may be used, but journalists must judge the material's credibility, add reporting from other sources and prepare their own story.

That is a useful starting point for anybody writing a release. Do not ask whether the document sounds impressive. Ask what a reporter can independently use.

The answer may be a number, a decision, a consequence, a new category, an investment, an original finding or access to a person who can explain what has happened. The rest is supporting material.

Lead with the change

A journalist needs to understand quickly what is new. “Company X today announced” is not the news. What changed today?

If the business is entering a new product category, say which category and why the move matters. If a plant is opening, give the location, investment, capacity, expected operating date and basis for any employment figure. If research has been conducted, provide the method, sample size, dates and underlying report.

Give data a source and a shape

Journalists look for fresh data because data can support a new story. They also look for the weakness in it.

Attach or link the full report. Name the source beside each major figure. Make a knowledgeable person available to explain the method. Reuters advises its journalists to cross-check information, prefer named sources and be explicit about what is not known. A communicator who makes those checks easier improves the chance of a serious conversation.

People make the consequence visible

Corporate releases often quote only the chief executive. The quotation then repeats the headline and praises the organisation.

A better release identifies who is affected. An employee can explain how a change works. A customer can describe a real result. An independent academic, analyst or regulator may add context, provided the person has genuine knowledge and is not presented as independent while being paid by the company.

Do not manufacture enthusiasm. Give the reporter access and allow the reporter to ask questions.

Bad news needs facts, not cosmetics

Communicators sometimes try to reframe layoffs, closures or failures so completely that the event disappears from the release. The newsroom will find it. Employees and investors may already know it.

State what happened. Give the number and location if confirmed. Explain timing, support for affected people and the business reason in plain language. If a fact is not final, say so. Do not place the most important information in the last paragraph and expect the reporter to miss it.

Credibility is accumulated. A candid release during a difficult event may protect it. A misleading release spends it very quickly.

Send it to somebody who covers the subject

A blanket mailing list feels efficient from the sender's side and looks careless from the receiver's side. The reporter covering banking does not need every consumer-product launch. The local reporter needs to know why an announcement matters in that city.

Read the journalist's recent work. Send the release to the relevant beat. Add a short note explaining the connection. Do not pretend to have read the work if you have not.

Timing matters, but there is no universal magic hour or weekday. The right timing depends on the beat, the news cycle, an embargo that the newsroom has accepted and whether somebody is available to answer follow-up questions.

The newsroom test

Before sending a release, try this test:

  • State the news in one sentence without an adjective.
  • Mark every factual claim that needs evidence.
  • Identify the person outside the communications team who can answer questions.
  • Remove quotations that merely praise the company.
  • Check whether the headline names a consequence for anybody beyond the brand.
  • Put contact details where a busy reporter can find them.

Then ask the hardest question: if the company name were removed, would the release still contain a story?

Corporate communicators and journalists do not need to have the same objective. They do need to deal in facts. The release that respects that difference has a chance of being read, checked and used.

The one that asks for publicity without supplying news will go where most of those releases on my CNBC desk went.

Nowhere.

Sources