PR

On the term 'flack' *

| 14 Comments

Last month, you might remember, Daily News op-ed columnist Mariel Garza vowed to no longer call Fleishman-Hillard because of the cost to taxpayers when the PR giant bills official clients for answering media questions. Her use of the term flacks got her featured this week in a PR industry newsletter called the Bulldog Reporter. (* Update: As Chuck points out in the comments, Garza responds on her blog.) From the Bulldog Reporter:

Surprised to see such a seemingly juvenile jab in a major daily? Don’t be. Countless journalists — newbies and vets alike — still see PR as a profession packed with shills, gatekeepers and, yes, even “flacks.” “Some of it is deserved,” Garza said when Journalists Speak Out questioned her regarding her use of such a tired phrase. Here’s how our Q&A shaped up — as well how Garza thinks PR pros can avoid having such pejoratives bandied about so freely by peeved journalists:

What does the word “flack” mean to reporters?

Garza: “It’s a commonly used term for PR representatives,” Garza concedes, shrugging it off. “It’s a colloquialism — slang, that’s all. I don’t think it’s to be taken so seriously.”

What does the word mean to you?

Garza: “I think it means basically the same thing to me as it does to everybody else,” she replies. “It’s a ‘person who takes flak’ from someone else — you know, a hired gun or shield? At least, that’s how I use it.”

That sounds almost complimentary, but isn’t “flack” really a derogatory term?

Garza: “It can be used that way,” she concedes. “But I hear a lot of PR people using the term themselves. It’s like other slang that got picked up by [the people] it was originally used [against].”

So your usage of the word in the story wasn’t negative?

Garza: “First, my story was a column — not an article. It was an opinion piece. The point of the story was to focus on the useless expenditures of public funds — not PR people. I don’t really have a lot of experience with PR people, unless they represent public officials,” she clarifies. “But I do know plenty of journalists who have left my offices here and gone to work for Fleishman Hillard — and they’re making a lot of money,” Garza says. “If they don’t like the word flack, I think they’re [being] paid well enough not to let it bother them.”

What do journalists think of being called “hacks” — isn’t it the same thing?

Garza: “The difference is that the word ‘hack’ is actually derogatory,” she believes. “It’s not the same. ‘Hack’ implies that you’re a non-perceptive, bad journalist. It also applies to old-timey journalists who are sensationalists.”

How can PR people avoid being called “flacks” by journalists?

Garza: “They can’t. Again, it’s just the slang for PR. You’d have to revise the American lexicon or make up another word if you didn’t want it used. It’s just a term — it doesn’t define a particular type of PR person, good or bad.”


More by Kevin Roderick:
Standing up to Harvey Weinstein
The Media
LA Times gets a top editor with nothing but questions
LA Observed Notes: Harvey Weinstein stripped bare
LA Observed Notes: Photos of the homeless, photos that found homes
Recent PR stories on LA Observed:
Ron Rogers, 72, public relations executive
Pulitzer winner Rob Kuznia explains his move to USC
LA Times brings on new chief flack from Obama White House
Henry Waxman joins son's PR firm in Washington
LA Times spokeswoman leaving for 'new adventures'
Doug Dowie tries to rebuild career after prison
Ex-KPCC VP Stanton lands in crisis PR
New ex-journalist PIOs in the District Attorney's office


 

LA Observed on Twitter