Secret, real reasons PR pros “did not respond to a request for comment”

“When they won’t even say ‘no comment.’”

That’s the headline of the thoroughly reported article in the Columbia Journalism Review that tries to figure out why there’s been a drastic increase in the number of “did not respond to a request for comment” situations in recent years.

The journalists quoted seem sincerely bewildered – one says, “It’s the job of spokespeople to tell the best story about the companies they represent. And here they are actively laying down the sword and not engaging in the battle.”

It’s funny to me when journalists tell us what good PR entails . . . because they don’t tolerate well the inverse. Proof: The only person quoted in the story who actually does media relations “asked not to be named so as not to affect business relationships.”

The article offers all the reasons PR people should be responsive, most of which I agree with. But despite the author’s best efforts, he didn’t find anyone who would be real about the cases – in the minority, but obviously increasing in frequency – when not responding is justified. So I’ll add my two cents to this convo.

Here are just a few of the responses PR pros write in their heads, but never send:

1. The last time I hustled and tracked down my spokesperson on vacation to talk with you, you didn’t quote them. I can’t risk that kind of hit to my internal reputation again, and I don’t know how to say that without sounding vengeful, so I’ll just ghost you.
2. We would look like total tools if we talked publicly about that issue (seems like that would be obvious to you), and I don’t trust you enough to keep that off the record if I explained it to you, so I’ll just ignore your request.
3. It’s clear you’ve been researching this story for weeks and you just gave me less than an hour to respond to a volume of questions. If I play along, it validates your ambush tactic. And if I reply and tell you that, you’ll quote me in a way that makes me look defensive and omits your unfair approach.
4. This is the third time you’ve asked for really specific data that takes me hours to assemble. In between your other requests I’ve emailed you great story ideas that you’ve never even acknowledged. It’s 6 p.m. on a Friday – I’ll pretend I didn’t see your email in time.
5. Yep, we messed up royally. That’s why we issued that statement I emailed you earlier. You really think we’re going to give an interview and just make people more mad at us by trying to explain ourselves? And if we did, it would be with YOU?
6. As much as we’d like to reply to every inbound request, we have limited resources and have to be strategic about which ones we respond to. And there is no nice way to say that you are too small.

True, some of the scenarios above result from the lamentable pressures on journalists caused by shrinking newsrooms. But that doesn’t change the impact on the PR pro caught in the middle.

I know, PR people do annoying things to journalists all the time. Never said they didn’t. In fact, journalists have no problem telling us about all those things. I even used to write a monthly column about all those annoying things.

That said, it’s a two-way street.

P.S. I actually had a subscription to the hard-copy CJR back in the day and used to read it cover to cover. I wanted to understand better what made journalists tick. One of the things I learned from reading it was that journalists don’t really get PR pros and likely never will. It’s not their responsibility, and usually they don’t care to. That’s part of why I found this article kind of funny.