How I Respond to a Negative News Story Before It Runs

In 2019, I worked for an early education nonprofit that was gaining national traction. Our program helped children learn to read no matter where they lived, no matter their native language, even if they didn't have a brick-and-mortar preschool anywhere near them. We were doing real work in places most early literacy programs couldn't reach. But traction brings attention, and not all of it is the kind you want. Especially in a field that survives on limited funding and public trust.

Anti-screentime groups had started taking aim at us because our program was computer-based. When the New York Times called, the pitch was about the harm screentime does to young children, and our organization was going to be part of that story. Instead of trying to talk the reporter out of writing it, I invited her to come see what we actually did.

What She Found When She Got There

We were recruiting families in the Fresno area at the time, in small farming communities where most parents spoke Spanish and worked in the fields. Our goal was to reach children who had no access to early learning before kindergarten, so they could walk into their first day of school confident and ready to learn. We partnered with the local mayor and the schools to find the families who would benefit from the program most. We gave them computers, WiFi hotspots, and Spanish-speaking coaches who called parents regularly to support the family's progress.

Parent involvement was the key to making the whole thing work. The lessons themselves were only fifteen minutes a day. What made them stick was a parent working with their child afterward, going over what they'd just learned, providing support and encouragement.

New York Times Article Image of Children Graduating

The reporter spent time with those families. She watched how the program actually ran, who it reached, and what it produced: children entering kindergarten reading at nearly a first-grade level.

She did not fold our organization into the negative screentime story. She wrote a separate piece instead, about how our program closed one gap while exposing the lack of early literacy access across the country.

Why the Difference Was Provable

The anti-screentime groups raising alarms in 2019 were not wrong. As a matter of fact, we agreed with them publicly every chance we got. Three hours of YouTube affects a four-year-old differently than fifteen minutes of personalized lessons with an involved parent.

Our program was not the kind of screentime those groups were rightly worried about. We made sure of that in the way the program was designed: the time limit, the parent involvement, the coaching, the results we could measure. We knew that difference long before a reporter called asking us to explain it. That's the reason I knew exactly what to do the moment I heard the pitch.

What This Means If You Ever Have to Respond to a Negative News Story

If you have to respond to negative news, preparation is key. But preparation is more than just talking points.

If you lead a company or organization you should know, in specific and provable terms, what you do, how you do it, and who it actually helps. Know the numbers behind it, and know exactly where your work differs from the worst version of your industry, because eventually, someone is going to lump you into the same category.

By doing that work early, a crisis call becomes just another Tuesday. You're just telling someone the truth about your organization.

---

Frequently Asked Questions About Responding to a Negative Story

What should you do if a reporter contacts you with a negative story about your industry? 

Resist the instinct to go straight into damage control. Ask what the reporter actually needs to see to understand your side, and offer it. In our case, that meant inviting the reporter to watch the program in action instead of trying to argue our case over the phone.

How do you respond to criticism of your industry when your company doesn't fit that criticism? 

Start by acknowledging what the critics get right. The anti-screentime groups were correct that excessive screen use harms young children. We said so ourselves. From there, you can show, specifically, why your work is built differently, and back it up with what you can measure.

What does it mean to know your proof points in communications? 

It means being able to say, in plain terms and with real numbers, what your work produces and for whom. Not a mission statement or tagline. The actual evidence that what you do works, ready before anyone asks for it.

How do you prepare for media scrutiny before it happens? 

Do the audit now, while no one is asking. Gather your data. Get clear on who you serve and how you help them. Know the difference between your work and the version of it a critic might assume you are. When the call comes, and eventually it does, you respond with what is true instead of scrambling to find it.

---

About the Author

Kim Fischer is a strategic communications consultant and Fractional CCO with 16 years of experience in journalism and nearly a decade working with founders, executives, and leadership teams. She helps leaders understand how to talk about what they do, whether that means writing messaging, sharpening a pitch deck, or finding the story that was buried in the one they already had. She is based in Dallas-Fort Worth and works with clients across the country.