Is this an example of how not to get tough with the press or how to antagonize it? Investment News' deputy editor recounts in an editorial about how reporters at the publication were denied an interview with a top executive for one of the big wirehouses. The firm's spokesman wrote that he would "need to be convinced" why it would be in the firm's best interest to make a senior executive available, given what the spokesman termed hostile coverage of the wirehouses.

The editor denied any hostile intent but did make a few points. "In general, I believe many wirehouse brokers do a great job for their clients. My chief negatives, however, are two: The quality of service providers at the wirehouses is very uneven and clients often don't know whether they're getting impartial advice or sales talk." He goes on to elaborate. But the publication also allowed people to post comments, some of which basically accused the publication of an anti-wirehouse bias.

Firms, in general, would be better off defining themselves for the media, even if the media is biased. At least you're in there fighting for your point of view.

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Wirehouse brokerages vs. independents, war continues
Reporter hears hedge fund manager confess to priest
PR problems hurting Goldman Sachs' business
A novel PR ploy
Brokers staying with traditional wirehouses?