COMMUNICATING WITH THE MEDIA

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Fri, 13/02/2009 - 10:16
  • The DAG is now getting more high profile coverage in the Media. There will be agents who will seek to discredit us, so we need to be handling our output very carefully.

  • It is very important that we project the DAG as a group of intelligent, responsible people with a genuine grievance. We need the media on our side & we want the public to support us.

  • Comments in public that make us sound like we are a cageload of angry gibbering monkeys will seriously damage our credibility in the eyes of the media & the public

  • Don't forget that the MAIN 'official' thrust of the DAG's PR is undertaken by the London Team which issues the DAG's Press Releases

Tips

  1. ALWAYS check out the Press releases on our Public site before making comments (access tab is top left of menu bar at tp of this page), & if relevant use the material therein to reinforce what you have to say

  2. Be familiar with the DAG story -- read the Position Paper on the Public site http://www.ksfiomdepositors.org/public-page/questions-answers

  3. make sure that if you state something to be factual that it is indeed fact !

  4. make your point(s) in plain English

  5. engage brain before opening mouth. Mud-slinging doesn't earn Brownie points

  6. don't use bad language - anger, disgust,, outrage can be expressed powerfully
    without resorting to 4 letter words.

  7. be very careful not to say anything that could risk you ending up in court for libel / slander. Familiarise yourself with the Terms & Conditions for using this site

  8. don't say that you speak for the DAG unless you do! By all means say that you belong to the DAG & refer to it. Post the URL of the DAG's Public site at the end of any comment: http://www.ksfiomdepositors.org/

4.076925
Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (13 votes)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

LJ's Comments are reasonable.

  • BustedFlat
  • 20/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 15:49

From reading LJ's comments I think he's just asking that people avoid spouting misinformed abuse like angry school children. Despite being extremely angry at the injustice of our situation I agree with his comments. Coherant and preferably indisputable points need to be made and made to the right parties to be effective. We don't want to give anyone an excuse to dismiss us. That said, in the end everyone is free to do as they wish.


LJ I would be interested to

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 12:07

LJ I would be interested to know who has the right to speak for the DAG? I am someone who has constantly pressed for the DAG to become a legal entity with a transparent structure until this happens I don't see why you or anybody else should presume to tell other DAG members how to behave. At this instant in time, either any member has the right to speak on behalf of the DAG or, none do.


Who speaks for the DAG ?

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 12:53

We are members of the DAG but we speak for ourselves & in support of the DAG's Mission.

The other issue you raise is addressed in this Consultation Paper
http://chat.ksfiomdepositors.org/journal/consultation-paper-role-managem...

Presently the London Team 'fronts' the DAG & is the DAG's 'official' representation to the media. By consensus it has the task of consulting with the legal team & preparing the DAG's Affidavit for the Court on 19 February. It is also responsible with the IT group for the content of the Public site & Press Releases.


LJ followed your link and

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 13:34

LJ followed your link and from reading it you are obviously not a person who is lacking in a sense of self worth. I did however note that said posting produced a stream of rather unhelpful comment. As for the second part of your reply apart from the fact that you are stating the obvious it does not address the issue; the team is self appointed, anonymous to the majority of the DAG and without any democratic legitimacy. As to the idea of consensus I think you would have to run a poll demanding support for this self appointed and anonymous team and achieve a positive vote of in excess of 1217 before you could legitimately claim any such thing.


Media Communications

  • bobwin
  • 23/12/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 10:33

Lucky--you are clearly intelligent, eloquent and responsible as you said you are only involved by "proxy' since you are helping a friend who still has cash in KSF IOM.

Insofaras contact with the media is concerned, I do not understand why you try to impose your views on other people--some of the points you make are obvious but do not believe that the press are not used to less than controlled input--the public at large, which includes many depositors, may not be so refined and educated--like what you are---so all inputs are acceptable in my book---I apologise that I have forgotten most of my Grammar skule latin --- I will just use English---success is 5 % inspiration and 95% perspiration---do not feign arrogance--it intimidates many people but puts you in poor regard.

I hope you take this as objective critique and not criticism per se.

veni vidi vici--is the message for brown,aspden & co---no capitals--they don't deserve it.

Bob in Davao


Hi bobwin --I do not take

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Fri, 13/02/2009 - 11:20

Hi bobwin --

I do not take your comments as being the least bit offensive & thank you for your thoughts.

Please be assured that I am not seeking to impose my views on anyone. I have offred some TIPS, not directives ( :

I made this Post partly because someone today said that they thought their comments were being censored. Most folk here are not used to communicating with the media as indeed they are not used to participating in a forum. I have had considerable experience in both and have had professional training in PR.

The media are our window on the world. there are a few simple rules about communicating effectively with the media & getting its empathy & open support. I feel it is important at this juncture that we handle our PR responsibly & thoughtfully and not go and muck it up through our inexperience. We simply can't afford to be discredited in any way by the media.

We have to help each other in the DAG. We have a huge repository of knowledge, training and professional / life experience. The Forum is just the place where we can share anything which we feel is for the commong good to promote our cause. If someone said: "Hey! I am a retired journalist... I could offer some tips here on how to write to get your message across & to get it published!" Would we not welcome that? ( :

Finally I would hate to see one of us finding themselves in the dock for libel. It's not us that should be in the dock but 'them' ! ( :