Journalists' resource or special interest group?
(Or, how one group can be many things to many people on the internet)
(Copyright Public Relations Management Ltd.)
(Original posting: March 2000)
Contact: rsirvine@epublicrelations.ca
For an investment of a few bucks and a little time, a special interest group can set up a internet site and bill itself as an authority on any subject it chooses. With a little planning and careful consideration, it can even build an image of being an unbiased and credible source of information, just the type of source journalists want and respect. The internet also allows that same group to develop an entirely different image on another part of the worldwide web. Here it can be depicted as highly partisan and driven by ideology, the type of source many journalists would view with extreme skepticism. One group which depicts this split personality is Washington-based Environmental Media Services (EMS).
On its website (www.ems.org), EMS describes itself as “a resource for journalists.” The site states: “EMS is a nonprofit communications clearinghouse dedicated to expanding media coverage of critical environmental and public health issues.” For journalists, this appears to be an almost perfect resource. As a non-profit organization, EMS is not tarnished by the crass profit motive. As a communications clearinghouse, it simply sorts and distributes information without passing judgment on it. And, EMS wants to expand coverage of critical issues, a heartfelt motivation of many journalists.
The EMS goes on to say: “We build relationships with top scientists, physicians, and other experts to bring journalists the latest and most credible information … EMS regularly bring together experts from academic, government, business, science, medical and public interest communities for extended briefings with journalists on controversial and/or emerging environmental and public health issues … EMS offers journalists cutting-edge information and direct access to the sources who know the issues best … Our media guides and newsletters have been widely praised by journalists, government officials and scientific leaders … If we don’t know the answer, we will track it down or point you to someone else who can.” All of this makes EMS appear as a solid, unbiased, credible source of information for journalists who are looking for a complete and thorough understanding of an issue.
Now for a different EMS
EMS like most organizations is multifaceted and complex. A 1999 job posting for two media directors paints a different picture of EMS.
The posting for a media director to work in the area of international trade and the environment states: “This program works to increase public understanding of the threats (emphasis added) from irresponsible trade agreements and spark public demand for changes to ensure that the environment is included in responsible trade agreements.”
The posting for a media director to work in the area of international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, states: “Media and public education is focused on the negative (emphasis added) environmental and social impacts or these institutions’ projects, programs and austerity programs.”
According to the ad, both media directors will work with environmental leaders to “solidify a campaign strategy.” The media directors will “establish and maintain contact with journalists to pitch news and stories” but it’s clear from the ad that those news and story ideas must support campaigns which promote specific and defined views. From this perspective, the role of the EMS media director is no different from the media and public relations staffers and consultants who work in the money-making corporate sector.
Follow the environmental greenbacks
Environmentalist are fond of encouraging journalists to follow the money trail to find out who’s calling the shots in communications, advertising, lobbying, or public relations campaigns. After all, “He who has the gold makes the rules.” A quick look at some of the sources which pay the EMS bills is instructive.
According its website, “EMS is a nonprofit funded by foundations and individuals working to improve public understanding of environmental and public health issues.”
Here are some of the foundations which have supported EMS:
Rockefeller Family Fund (source: www.rffund.org):
1998 - $25,000
• “Second installment of a two-year grant totaling $55,000 for media services to environmental groups, including staging press briefings, talk show appearances, and formal press conferences. “
1996 - $45,000
• “General support to transmit and amplify the environmental community’s message to policymakers and the general public; and for a special initiative, the EMS Environmental Economics Project, to attack the myth that environmental progress costs jobs and hurts the economy.”
1995 - $25,000
• “General support for this highly professional communications service organization which transmits and amplifies the environmental community’s message to policymakers and the general public.”
The Brainerd Foundation (source: www.brainerd.org):
1999 - $30,000
- “Program area: Communications Strategies. Description: To support EMS’s work in the Pacific Northwest to improve and expand media coverage of environmental issues, while building the capacity for conservation organizations to develop effective media campaigns.”
1999 - $2,000
- “Program area: Toxic Polution. Description: To educate reporters about mining issues and the battle in Congress over the recent millsite decision.”
1999 - $2,000
• “Program area: Communications Strategies. Description: For Environmental Media Services to create a high-impact media plan using the 10th anniversary of the Exxon Valdez disaster to emphasize the continuing threat of oil spills to the Puget Sound region and to influence public opinion in support of immediate action on oil spill prevention.”
1998 - $15,000
• “Program area: Communications Strategies. Description: For seed funding to launch the Western office of Environmental Media Services to raise media awareness of environmental issues, and to empower conservation organizations with their own media outreach.”
Wilburforce Foundation (source: www.wilburforce.org):
1999 - $25,000
- “for the Wild Washington Media Campaign”
W. Alton Jones Foundation (source: www.wajones.org):
1996 - $100,000 (grant recipient identified as Environmental Media Services, A project of the Tides Center)
• “To mobilize a network of scientists to counter misinformation related to envinronmental threats to children’s health, and to encourage responsible media coverage.”
Bullitt Foundation (source: www.bullitt.org):
1999 - $75,000
1998 - $40,000
Grant recipient identified as Tides Center (Environment Media Services)
• “The Tides Center actively promotes change toward a healthy society—one founded on principles of social justice, broadly shared economic opportunity, a robust democratic process, and sustainable environmental practices. Tides Center is the fiscal sponsor for Environmental Media Services, a national organization that offers media skills services to environmental activists and organizations. The 1998 grant supported a project to develop a regional headquarters in Seattle. Three grants were awarded in 1999: a $5,000 grant supports a project to provide media training to activists in Ferry County, Washington; a $10,000 grant supports a project to provide regional media support on environmental issues as part of the World Trade Organization ministerial; and a $60,000 grant supports the overall work of the regional office of Environmental Media Services focused on Northwest issues and organizations. (1998: $40,000 Other Environmental Concerns; 1999: $10,000 Growth Management and Transportation; $15,000 Other Environmental Concerns; $40,000 Public Outreach, Education, and Capacity Building; $10,000 Toxic Substances, Mining, and Radioactive Waste).”
From these few examples, it’s clear that some foundations give to EMS to support specific views on specific topics. Yet, these connections are not obvious on the EMS homepage. Searches of the EMS website failed to find any mention of the grants listed above.
ePublic Relations™ and the power of the internet
Should journalists, and their audiences, be made aware of the motivations and ideology of the funders who put up the money for groups such as EMS? Or, should those agendas and that information remain unspoken? Do groups which battle the corporate sector in the environmental arena have a responsibility to practice the openness and transparency which they demand from their corporate opponents?
While it’s taken for grant now, the internet is amazing and powerful. It gives individuals and groups the ability to exchange vast amounts of information. It gives groups the ability to project different images on different part of the worldwide web. It gives journalists and others the power to look beyond the obvious and see what’s happening behind the scenes.
While ecommerce, the buying and selling of goods and services on the internet, receives extensive media attention, the impact of the net on how people interact is largely overlooked and underestimated. That’s the focus of ePublic Relations™.
-----30-----