Dealing With Reporters

---
name: dealing-with-reporters
description: Drafts and reviews answers to reporter questions, on-the-record statements, crisis-comms responses, and press-inquiry replies. Implements Andrew Ross Sorkin's 11 rules (taught with Kramon at Stanford GSB) plus AP attribution definitions for off-the-record / background / deep background conversations. Use when a journalist is calling, when a story is about to break, when a competitor has just been hacked and you want to get ahead of inquiry, or when a class assignment asks you to play CEO under fire. Triggers on "reporter," "journalist," "press inquiry," "PR statement," "no comment," "on background," "off the record," "crisis comms," "media interview," "quote me."
---

# Dealing with reporters

Source: Andrew Ross Sorkin (NYT *DealBook* / *Squawk Box*) and Glenn Kramon's *Winning Writing* class lecture on press relations. AP attribution definitions baked in.

## Why this skill exists

Most executives wing it with reporters and then spend the next decade in litigation. The 11 rules below come from Sorkin, who has interviewed CEOs through every flavor of crisis since 2007, plus Kramon's three decades editing the *New York Times* business section. The rules are battle-tested. The tradeoffs are real.

## Sorkin's 11 rules

### 1. Never say "no comment"
There's always something better, even if you can't say much. *"I'd love to be able to walk you through this, but the investigation is still active and law enforcement has asked us not to discuss specifics yet"* beats "no comment" every time. The first sentence is a quote the reporter can use without making you look evasive. The second is the actual reason.

### 2. Don't avoid calls
Bad feelings compound. You lose the chance to understand what the reporter is actually after, and you lose the chance to shape your side of the story. Even if you're not ready to comment, take the call and say so.

### 3. Know the journalist
Read their last six pieces before talking to them. Talk to peers they've quoted. Some are more trustworthy than others. You won't always have a choice — but knowing who you're dealing with changes what you say and how.

### 4. Build relationships before you need them
The reporter who knows your business in depth will write a more nuanced story when something goes wrong. That doesn't mean they'll be soft. It means they'll be accurate. *Build the relationship in good times.*

### 5. Address the question, tell the truth, hedge when you must
Say as much as you can confidently say. If you don't know, say so. Don't overpromise: *"It won't happen again"* and *"We assure you our system is safe"* are statements that age badly. *"Based on what we know today"* is the right frame.

### 6. Focus on the positive, the constructive
What you're doing to improve the situation. Not what went wrong, not who's at fault, not what you're sorry for. *"I'm not at liberty to disclose"* sounds defensive and stonewalling. *"Here's what we're doing right now"* sounds proactive.

### 7. Talk in sound bites that make for good quotes
Reporters need 15-second clips. Give them three sentences that stand alone, don't require context, and tell your story. If you don't write the quote, they will — and theirs will be worse.

### 8. Avoid self-incriminating language
*"We should have been more careful."* *"We did not take action early enough."* *"It was our fault."* All sound like character; all read as admissions in court. If you're going to be sued, the plaintiff's lawyer will quote your interview verbatim in the complaint.

**This rule has a counter-school.** See *The Tylenol / Kramon school* below.

### 9. Avoid "as I said" and "as I mentioned"
Sounds impatient and defensive, even when you're being patient. Just answer the question again. If they're asking twice, your first answer wasn't clear enough.

### 10. Be specific, not vague
*"Extremely costly"* unnerves investors more than *"at least $100 million."* A real number is a ceiling. Vague language is the reader's imagination, which is always worse than the truth.

### 11. Never sound angry or defensive
Even when you feel it. Especially when you feel it. The recording will outlast the moment. Take the breath, answer cleanly.

## The Tylenol / Kramon school (counter to rule 8)

Sorkin's rule 8 — *avoid self-incriminating language* — optimizes for the plaintiff's lawyer. The opposite school optimizes for the customer reading the front page. The case for owning it:

- **Johnson & Johnson, 1982.** Tylenol cyanide deaths. CEO James Burke pulled every bottle from every shelf within a week. He spoke directly, owned the lapse, and rebuilt trust in 18 months. The company would not have survived a hedge-and-deny strategy.
- **Kramon's class-wide rule.** *"Say what you like AND what you would like — never only what you don't like."* Constructiveness is mandatory. Honesty without solutions is a complaint; honesty with solutions is leadership.
- **The empirical signal.** Customers forget the breach. They remember how they were treated when it broke.

The case for hedging (Sorkin's rule 8):

- **Equifax, 2017.** Data breach, 147M customers. Executives sold stock before disclosure. CEO resigned. Litigation lasted years. Direct admissions were quoted in nearly every complaint.
- **The empirical signal.** Class-action lawyers read interviews and earnings calls. One careless phrase can cost $50M in settlement leverage.

### How to decide which school applies

Run this triage:

| Situation | Which school |
|---|---|
| Low expected litigation exposure (small private company, no class-action precedent, customers not financially harmed) | **Tylenol/Kramon.** Own it. |
| High exposure (public co., consumer data breach, financial harm provable, plaintiffs' firms circling) | **Sorkin.** Hedge without lying. |
| Mixed and you don't know yet | **Hybrid.** Acknowledge the harm to customers without admitting fault for the cause: *"We are sorry our customers are dealing with this. The investigation will tell us how it happened, and we'll share what we learn."* No "we should have" in the sentence — just sorry-for-the-impact + commitment-to-transparency. |

The hybrid line is the move most CEOs in serious crises actually use. It signals warmth without giving the plaintiff a line.

## Sorkin's three "do these even more than the others"

If you're under time pressure and can only remember three:

1. **Be specific, not vague** (rule 10). One real number is worth ten cautious phrases.
2. **Focus on what you're doing** (rule 6). Future tense. Action verbs. What's happening now.
3. **Don't avoid the call** (rule 2). Take it. Even if all you say is *"I want to give you a real answer, can I call you back at 4?"*

## AP attribution definitions (the *"may I quote you"* question)

Before any interview where any anonymity is on the table, **set the ground rules explicitly.** Don't assume your understanding matches theirs.

| Term | What it means |
|---|---|
| **On the record** | Information can be used with no caveats. Source quoted by name. The default unless you negotiate otherwise. |
| **Off the record** | Information cannot be used for publication at all. Not even with a disguised attribution. Useful only for steering the reporter's broader understanding. |
| **Background** | Can be published, but with conditions you negotiate first. Typically: not by name, but with a description of the source's role (*"a senior executive familiar with the matter"*). Negotiate the description before you talk. |
| **Deep background** | Can be used but with NO attribution at all. The reader gets no indication the info came from a source. The reporter can pursue it elsewhere to put it on the record. |

**Reporters' rule:** information obtained under any of these can be pursued with *other* sources and placed on the record. You're protecting your name, not the information itself.

**Heidi's add (Roizen):** if a reporter wants to do a background briefing with multiple reporters at once, an AP reporter will object — and so should you. Background isn't a press conference. If you're talking to a group, do it on the record.

## How to use this skill

### Mode 1 — Drafting answers to reporter questions
Use when you have the questions in advance (class exercise, written interview, statement for a story being written). Read the situation. Run each question through:

1. **What's the BLUF?** First sentence is the answer.
2. **Which school applies?** Trust-first (Tylenol) or litigation-first (Sorkin)?
3. **Sorkin checks:** specific not vague (rule 10), focus on what you're doing (rule 6), no "as I said" / "no comment" / "we will assure you" (rules 5, 9, 1).
4. **Quote-ability:** would the reporter pull a sentence out of this and use it cleanly?
5. **Litigation read:** would a plaintiff's lawyer quote this against me?

### Mode 2 — Real-time on a call
Use when a reporter calls and you have minutes, not hours. The frame:
- *"I want to give you a real answer. Can I take 30 minutes and call you back?"* (Rule 2 — take the call, but buy time.)
- Write the answer. Run it through Sorkin.
- Call back.

If you cannot delay: stick to the three core rules (specific not vague, focus on action, no defensiveness) and refuse to speculate on anything you don't know.

### Mode 3 — Crisis playbook
Use when a story is breaking. The order:
1. Confirm what you know.
2. Get the GC on the phone (not in the room — out of the room, so you can still be honest).
3. Draft the customer-facing statement first. That's the one that sets the tone.
4. Brief reporters second.
5. Brief employees in parallel — they will be asked, and what they say will reach reporters.

## Output format

When critiquing draft answers:

```
## For each question

**Question N:** [the reporter's question]
**Original answer:** [the draft]

**Sorkin checks:**
- Rule 10 (specific): pass / fail — [note]
- Rule 6 (positive): pass / fail — [note]
- Rule 8 (self-incrimination): pass / fail — [note + which school applies]
- Rule 9 ("as I said"): pass / fail
- Rule 1 ("no comment"): pass / fail
- Rule 5 (truth + hedge): pass / fail

**Quote-ability:** [the sentence a reporter would pull, if any]
**Litigation read:** [what a plaintiff's lawyer would do with this]

**Rewrite:** [the cleaner version]
```

When drafting from scratch:

```
## Answer to question N

[Under 150 words. BLUF in sentence 1. One sentence per Sorkin tip applied.]

**The quote in this answer:** [the reporter's pull-quote]
**School applied:** Tylenol / Sorkin / Hybrid
**Risk flagged:** [anything for the user to verify or weigh before going on the record]
```

## When NOT to use this skill

- **Internal Slack / email to employees.** Different rules — be human, be plain, drop the press training.
- **Investor calls and earnings.** Use a financial-comms playbook (Reg FD, disclosure timing). Sorkin's rules apply but the SEC adds rails.
- **Casual press relationships** (a reporter you've known for ten years asks an off-the-cuff question). Don't over-engineer. Be a person.

## Companion skills

- `winning-writing-critic` — runs after you draft, for the rubric pass
- `vividness --mode noun-level` — Sorkin's rule 10 is the be-specific rule applied to journalism
- `style-tells --target jargon` — sound bites die under jargon
- `bluf-rewriter` — Sorkin's rule 7 is BLUF applied to spoken sound bites

## The litmus test

For every drafted answer, ask yourself two questions before going on the record:

1. **Would I be okay with this on the front page of the NYT, transcribed verbatim?** (Kramon's master rule.)
2. **Would I be okay with this in a deposition next year, transcribed verbatim?** (Sorkin's question.)

If both answers are yes, you're done. If only one is yes, you've picked a school — that's a decision, name it as one.

## The Kramon quote

> *"You can't un-say a quote. Write the answer first. Read it twice. Then say it."*