On Sept. 2, Parliament returned from its summer break. With that comes more opportunities for legal public relations professionals to engage with political topics as the legislative agenda resumes.

At the same time, setting new laws aside, it would seem politics is permeating an increasing number of topics in the legal world, from financial services regulation and the future of the City to the use of artificial intelligence, diversity of lateral hires, and environmental, social, and governance efforts. Indeed, everything is politics, as argued by the writer Thomas Mann.

Barristers can make a name for themselves when instructed on high-profile cases with a political angle, but corporate law firms are known for their conservative approach to most issues. Public relations is no exception, traditionally preferring to steer clear of the political arena altogether.

However, faced with an increasingly politicized U.K. news agenda, some are choosing to reverse this trend and enter the conversation on topics with a political element. Should law firms be following suit?

Advantages of Commenting

Commentary on politics, or topics with a political angle, is often some of the most sought after by journalists. Nationwide news involving high-profile personalities such as politicians or topics that divide opinion can dominate the news agenda, particularly during an election year.

Therefore, those willing to engage with such topics or news items have the potential for widespread media coverage with national and international print and broadcast media — although competition is tough, with numerous former special advisers, serving ministers and 650 members of Parliament also vying for media attention.

What sets the professional services industry apart is that in a world of political spin and points scoring, informed, credible and reliable sources are increasingly valued by traditional media.

As alternative media sources gain prominence, traditional media outlets, bound by rigorous standards of accuracy and objectivity, are striving to differentiate themselves by presenting a broader range of views, while remaining committed to their core values of impartial reporting.
In addition, as law firms have tended to shy away from engaging with topics considered too political, those firms willing or able to provide insight have a greater chance of picking up media attention.

This can sometimes be a helpful avenue for smaller or less well known firms that are new to media, and are looking to break through a journalist’s overflowing Rolodex as newsrooms shrink.

Furthermore, by assisting journalists and producers with topics where on-the-record commentary from the legal or corporate world is hard to secure, firms are more likely to have their commentary included and be offered further opportunities to collaborate.

To note, while journalists and producers alike understand that law firms would not provide sensationalist or overtly biased commentary that could affect client relationships and future business, legal PR professionals will need to consider what unique insight or astute observation that adds value to the conversation can be offered before approaching established media outlets.

Another key attribute law firms bring to the table is a unique take on issues, derived from daily conversations with key stakeholders and insights on the state of play in newsworthy sectors. Naturally, client confidentiality is paramount, but the offer of a broader take with anonymized anecdotes is highly valued.

Furthermore, by focusing on the tangible impact of policy, legal PR professionals can help elevate interviews beyond partisan lines. They can steer the conversation toward an area where spokespersons feel more comfortable and are willing to engage, with a reduced risk of their published comments negatively affecting themselves or the firm.

Approaching a topic from the client’s perspective, rather than being seen to take one side of the political spectrum over another, can help direct commentary and keep it succinct. Likewise, considering potential — or actual — client questions.

Disadvantages of Commenting

On the flip side, the risks from commenting are often clearer to legal PR professionals and their stakeholders. There have been a number of reported examples where commenting on a topic, even if not in itself overtly political, has resulted in a firm clarification, apology, or in some cases, partner dismissal.

This would seem to be evidence of the increasing politicization of the news agenda. In recent years, this has extended to comments supposedly made off the record or on background.

The Chatham House Rule, whereby participants are free to use the information received, but not to reveal the identity or name the firm of the speaker, has been rendered effectively obsolete by the smartphone, social media and citizen journalism.

As a result, legal PR professionals are increasingly preparing spokespersons to treat all speaking opportunities as if they were on record.

Broadcasts are a particular challenge for legal PR professionals, and present potential for commentary to backfire, whether live from a studio, party conference floor or an office.

Specific questions to be covered during an interview are rarely provided in advance, and although talking points may have been shared and agreed upon ahead of time, there is nothing to stop the anchor from going off-topic or pushing a spokesperson live on air for the comment they are really looking for, often in the last question.

Live news can also be interrupted by real-time events for which a spokesperson may not have prepared an answer. Even prerecorded interviews can be cut or edited, perhaps inadvertently, to make it appear as though a firm’s spokesperson is making an appearance simply to make a particular comment.

Another potential pitfall concerns the conflict-checking process. Legal PR professionals will know that comments on particular companies or legal matters must first pass conflict checks, which can take time.

Designed to identify and assess possible conflicts of interest before a firm takes on new business, the process is regularly utilized by legal PR professionals to prevent firms from commenting on such matters.

However, while extensive, legal PR professionals should be conscious of being drawn into a false sense of security. Conflict checks do not necessarily account for future business, working relationships with regulators or all client conversations, and therefore commentary could still negatively affect the spokesperson and firm.

This is particularly pertinent for firms with global operations. While legal PR professionals cannot be expected to know everything that is happening across a firm, they should be aware of and anticipate key sensitives for their firm and make a judgment call accordingly.

Cost of Doing Nothing

When confronted with these possible scenarios, legal PR professionals may believe the easiest, and crucially least risky, option is to simply do nothing at all. To stay out of the political conversation and spare the firm any potential negative impact from an off-the-cuff comment or unexpected question from an interviewer. They would be right.

However, as I mentioned, everything is politics.

In today’s world, politics appears to be present to varying degrees in all aspects of society, and legal-related topics are not exempt. From the post-Brexit regulatory environment and planning reforms to generational differences in the approach to work and M&A activity involving national assets, most topics have a political angle.

If legal PR professionals outright refuse to engage with a topic because it is potentially political or may encounter opposition, then opportunities for comment will diminish. It also means that legal PR professionals may find some journalists or producers less willing to listen or engage.

Playing it safe could result in no share of voice at all. That is not to say that legal PR professionals should look to comment on any and all political topics. There are some best left alone. Nor should they look to ambulance chase or push a sensationalist viewpoint merely for the sake of coverage.

There is a balance to be found. When dealing with political topics, or topics with a political element, it is important to decide whether it is worth entering the conversation, and to advise the spokesperson on how best to convey a message in a way that is informative, neutral and, ultimately, engaging.

This article was first published in Law360 which can be found here: https://www.law360.co.uk/articles/1871793