Holding a story?

[SixToe]

You know of an event that will be announced soon.

It is not major in the overall scheme of things, but will be a nice story and something nice for your city.

Your source close to the event, who also is a friend, has filled you in but asks the story be held so the mayor can make a splashy announcement.

Do you hold it and score some brownie points that could pay off later with bigger stories, or burst their bubble?

 

[TyWebb]

Depends. Do you have compeition that could beat you to the punch? If so, I'd give thought to running it.

But from the sound of it, this isn't a HUGE deal and won't blow any doors down, so it might not be worth it to burn what sounds like a valuable source. I would probably hold it.

 

[In Cold Blood]

That's a delicate balance... don't want to burn bridges, but you don't want a competitor to run the story first, because then it looks as though they outreported you...

that's a call you'll have to make - what's the potential damage to your source relationship vs. the potential gain from outreporting the competition...

which is more important in this particular case?

 

[write then drink]

run the story

and tell your friend your SE forced you to do it

i've been burned holding stuff when given promises

just go with it

 

[playthrough]

Off your limited details, I say burst it. "Hold for splashy announcement" I'm guessing means wait for TV, and screw dat. If you know it, you know it. You said yourself it's not major, and if the friend's a friend, any sting of releasing it early should wear off eventually.

 

[Freuchen Icepick]

No need to burn your friend, or hold the story -- work the phones, other sources, and get alternative confirmation that the information you already know to be true is... well, true. Then break it. If your friend cares, you might tell him/her that another reporter/editor heard the same thing, otr, and then collectively the news team was able to corroborate that information through multiple other sources (natch, otr).

In the end, this sort of sussing out actually builds rapport with sources because: you get the story first and you get it right; no sources need to be named (though it's always fun to run a denial from an official source); and, most importantly, you've successfully waltzed into potentially sensitive otr territory with said sources whilst holding up your part of the bargain.

 

[SF_Express]

Unless I'm missing something:

If the guy gave you the story with the understanding you hold it, you need to hold it.

I understand the "independent reporting" notion, and not totally against it, but it can be dicey. You get it somewhere else, your friend's going to have to believe that's what happened, or you're going to get a "Yeah right," and the source might be burned anyway.

 

[Some Guy]

I'd keep bugging your source/friend. Explain to him you need to run the story. Explain to him that after the mayor's announcement, this information is basically useless to you. Explain the business to him. Assure him that the world will not end if you break this story first. Tell him you'll keep his name out of it, if it comes down to that.

You might be surprised. With enough begging, he may relent.

And if not, **** 'em.

 

[EE94]

You know of an event that will be announced soon.

It is not major in the overall scheme of things, but will be a nice story and something nice for your city.

Your source close to the event, who also is a friend, has filled you in but asks the story be held so the mayor can make a splashy announcement.

Do you hold it and score some brownie points that could pay off later with bigger stories, or burst their bubble?

The mayor won't be offended if you break the story. Any politician - and trust me, I've known more than a few - would love a two-day news story that is positive, which is what this sounds like.
My guess is your friend is assuming the mayor will be pissed, but that's probably because he doesn't understand politics.
If the sole reason for holding it is to give the mayor the spotlight, screw that and run it.

 

[Ace]

These things always take some judgment, but it has been my experience that:

1. Folks usually aren't that unhappy about a story breaking early (other media outlets may be, though).

2. Those promises/hopes of a scoop sometime in the future rarely pan out. If your buddy is skittish on this, how is he going to act if there is some big news you could break? He gonna be less skittish?

 

[chazp]

Hold it. Keeping relationships alive with contacts is half the battle in this business. Don't run it.

 

[Writer33]

We run into that here from time to time. I usually tell my source that I want to run it the morning the event is planned. I explain how the lazy slobs in local radio either sit around waiting for the fax to ring or just read my stuff during their newscasts. It's crazy. My daughter job shadowed me when she was 11. We had a press release from the local community college. We had he rewrite it and gave her a byline. Mr. Radio read it word for word the next day. Happens all the time with no attribution.

 

[ballscribe]

Assuming you're print, hold it until the morning of the supposed announcement. Call your source late the previous day and say you've heard rumblings that others have it and you really have no choice.

Since you had it first and will get it right, put it out there, tell him. But don't go hard; give it the details you might have been able to find out from other sources, but not everything. A preview, so to speak. Tell your source that more people will end up waiting anxiously for the actual announcement, if they know that morning that it's on the way.

That way you're covered, with everyone

 

[Elliotte Friedman]

I'd go back to the source and tell them: "It's not like this is a negative story, and it gets you a couple extra days of publicity. You sure we can't work something out?"

 

[ArnoldBabar]

I'd go back to the source and tell them: "It's not like this is a negative story, and it gets you a couple extra days of publicity. You sure we can't work something out?"

+1

Assuming it's a positive story, nobody loses by you running it a day early -- except possibly you, if you get beat on it.

 

[KG]

I had a friend tell me recently about someone who was getting fired, as well as who was offered the position but turned it down. It was one of those 'you can't leak this' type of things. Three weeks later it FINALLY came out. But I did tell him not to give me the full scoop if it was something that would jeopardize our friendship if I did a story on it anymore.

 

[spud]

I'd run it.

JFK famously asked the NY Times to hold a story on the Bay of Pigs, which they had a day in advance of the actual invasion, in the name of national security. After the flop, Kennedy said he should have let the story run.

This is likely a much less dramatic sample, but I use that, somewhat, as a guideline. Like I said, knowing you're not going to be making a friend in the process, I'd run it.