The Media Blackout Tactic

Let’s dis­cuss the media black­out tac­tic and its effects.

What com­pels organ­isa­tions to decline media inter­view requests, and what implic­a­tions does this have for the future of invest­ig­at­ive journalism? 

Moreover, how do these tac­tics reflect the chan­ging nature of trust, trans­par­ency, and truth for journ­al­ism in the long term? 

Here we go:

The Media Blackout Tactic

Refusing to answer journ­al­ist­ic ques­tions used to be a big no-no in pub­lic rela­tions. However, this pro­fes­sion­al eth­os is under­go­ing some changes.

More and more organ­isa­tions are delib­er­ately avoid­ing any inter­ac­tion with tra­di­tion­al news media:

Media black­out = when an organ­isa­tion refuses to engage with journ­al­ists to pro­tect busi­ness interests and mit­ig­ate dam­age. Journalists cri­ti­cise this prac­tice as it obstructs invest­ig­at­ive report­ing and under­mines soci­et­al transparency.

According to some organ­isa­tions, media black­outs are a reas­on­able out­come of unfair rules of engage­ment in a post-truth media landscape:

Media mine­field = the post-truth media land­scape where inter­ac­tions with leg­acy news media often res­ult in delib­er­ate mis­rep­res­ent­a­tion. Organisations nav­ig­ate this ter­rain cau­tiously to avoid dam­aging their repu­ta­tion and pub­lic image.

The Media Analysis

To resolve the situ­ation, we face two main challenges:

However, as a PR pro­fes­sion­al with 18+ years of exper­i­ence, I believe we will fall short on both these challenges.

Traditional news media will con­tin­ue to fall apart, and the erosion of trust in organ­isa­tions will be one of the many con­trib­ut­ing factors. Organisations will likely opt for post-truth strategies, lead­ing to organ­isa­tion­al cor­ro­sion from the inside out.

“Post-truth is a soci­et­al phe­nomen­on, influ­enced by the expect­a­tion that hon­esty is the default pos­i­tion, and the pub­lic tol­er­ance of inac­cur­ate and undefen­ded alleg­a­tions in polit­ics.”
Source: Nature ¹Higgins, K. (2016). Post-truth: a guide for the per­plexed. Nature, 540, 9 – 9. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​3​8​/​5​4​0​0​09a

Instead, new “soci­et­al pil­lars” must emerge from the rubble: a new form of inde­pend­ent news media based on trust (not clicks or ideo­logy) and a new form of suc­cess­ful organ­isa­tions based on trans­par­ency (not avoid­ance or exploitation).

Learn more: The Media Blackout Tactic

The Media Polarisation Model

We often hear how the media cli­mate is “polar­ised” — a known and reas­on­ably well-under­stood effect of clas­sic media logic.

It also seems true that social media logic has amp­li­fied the effects of polar­isa­tion by group­ing people into echo cham­bers where con­firm­a­tion bias, con­ver­sion the­ory, and the hos­tile media effect are allowed to roam freely without any checks and balances.

“Political elites, par­tis­an media, and social media con­trib­ute to soci­et­al-level polit­ic­al polar­iz­a­tion, lead­ing to mis­per­cep­tions of divi­sion among the elect­or­ate and fuel­ing anim­os­ity and actu­al ideo­lo­gic­al polar­iz­a­tion over time.”
Source: Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences ²Wilson, A., Parker, V., & Feinberg, M. (2020). Polarization in the con­tem­por­ary polit­ic­al and media land­scape. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 223 – 228. … Continue read­ing

More pro­foundly, media polar­isa­tion is prob­lem­at­ic because it draws false lines between extremes that aren’t neces­sar­ily per­pen­dic­u­lar. These “false lines” will force oth­er­wise bal­anced media con­sumers to place them­selves between the media-sug­ges­ted extremes.

At the extremes, sheltered by the social safety of a like-minded peer group (i.e. echo cham­ber), it’s pos­sible to dis­reg­ard oppos­ing evid­ence as “attacks” on their pos­i­tion. As the amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is states, any such attacks will only strengthen the pos­i­tion of the extremes.

The harder you attack someone verbally, the more you con­vince them of their belief, not yours.

The Post-Truth Zone

The amp­li­fic­a­tion hypo­thes­is sus­tains a post-truth zone at the extremes through media polar­isa­tion. If a) the zone is wide enough and b) the extremes are suf­fi­ciently close to each oth­er, the forced “bal­anced” pos­i­tion between them will also res­ult in the post-truth zone.

“Post-truth is a soci­et­al phe­nomen­on, influ­enced by the expect­a­tion that hon­esty is the default pos­i­tion, and the pub­lic tol­er­ance of inac­cur­ate and undefen­ded alleg­a­tions in polit­ics.”
Source: Nature ³Higgins, K. (2016). Post-truth: a guide for the per­plexed. Nature, 540, 9 – 9. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​3​8​/​5​4​0​0​09a

Since the forced “bal­anced” pos­i­tion will have a hard time shel­ter­ing any­one from our fear of social isol­a­tion, the spir­al of silence par­tially explains why extremes are so effect­ive in silen­cing the major­ity of oth­er­wise bal­anced media con­sumers. ⁴Silfwer, J. (2020, June 4). The Spiral of Silence. Doctor Spin | The PR Blog. https://​doc​tor​spin​.net/​s​p​i​r​a​l​-​o​f​-​s​i​l​e​n​ce/

Why Media Polarisation is Disturbing

Like every­one else, I have opin­ions. However, as a PR pro­fes­sion­al with 18+ years of exper­i­ence, I can ana­lyse media issues without sid­ing with any of the extremes.

But no mat­ter how pro­fes­sion­al my ana­lys­is of a cur­rent media issue is, I risk blow­back from left and right extremes — with no back­ing from the silent majority. 

Many feel com­pelled by the news media to choose between out­land­ish extremes — or settle for an equally out­land­ish middle ground.

Media trends tend to be cyc­lic­al, and I estim­ate that the post-truth era peaked in 2019. My hope, how­ever, is that the pan­dem­ic, fol­lowed by glob­al infla­tion and AI pro­gress, will dampen the media’s interest in extreme pos­i­tions and shrink the width of the post-truth zone.

“Post-truth com­mu­nic­a­tion has shaped our under­stand­ing of truth, polit­ics, and the media, with its impact on pub­lic policy, his­tory, and social media.”
Source: Social Studies of Science ⁵Sismondo, S. (2017). Post-truth? Social Studies of Science, 47, 3 — 6. https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​1​7​7​/​0​3​0​6​3​1​2​7​1​7​6​9​2​076

Still, it’s dis­turb­ing that the ration­al busi­ness decision for many aca­dem­ics, pro­fes­sion­als, and organ­isa­tions is to stra­tegic­ally steer clear of top­ics taken “host­age” by left and right extrem­ists — or for organ­isa­tions to opt for the media black­out tac­tic.

Normalise Not Having an Opinion

More often than not, in a post-truth soci­ety, hav­ing no opin­ion sud­denly seems like the only ration­al escape.

My opin­ion?
Let’s nor­m­al­ise not hav­ing one.

The iron pre­scrip­tion (men­tal mod­el). Senior advisor Charlie Munger argued: “I have what I call an ‘iron pre­scrip­tion’ that helps me keep sane when I nat­ur­ally drift toward pre­fer­ring one ideo­logy over anoth­er. I feel that I’m not entitled to have an opin­ion unless I can state the argu­ments against my pos­i­tion bet­ter than the people who are in oppos­i­tion. I think that I am qual­i­fied to speak only when I’ve reached that state” (Knodell, 2016). ⁶Knodell, P. A. (2016). All I want to know is where I’m going to die so I’ll nev­er go there: Buffett & Munger – A study in sim­pli­city and uncom­mon, com­mon sense. PAK Publishing.

Learn more: The Media Polarisation Model

THANKS FOR READING.
Need PR help? Hire me here.