WHEN A LEGAL MATTER BECOMES A MEDIA MATTER
WHEN A LEGAL MATTER BECOMES A MEDIA MATTER
A Litigation Communications Guide for Defense Attorneys
By Andrea Khoury | Founder & Principal, Khoury Public Relations & Media Group
Strategic Communications + Reputation Advisory | Serving Clients Nationwide
[SEND AN EMAIL] | [CONNECT ON LINKEDIN] | [START A CONVERSATION]
When a legal matter attracts media attention, defense attorneys and their clients suddenly find themselves managing two very different environments. The legal case proceeds according to rules of evidence, procedure and due process, while the public narrative can begin taking shape almost immediately through news coverage, social media, court documents and online commentary. Long before a judge or jury reaches a conclusion, an allegation, arrest, indictment, lawsuit or investigation can become permanently associated with a client's name.
This is where litigation communications becomes important. Litigation communications, sometimes referred to as litigation PR or legal public relations, is the strategic management of communications and media issues surrounding an active or anticipated legal matter. For defense counsel, the purpose should never be to try a case in the press. The purpose is to understand what is happening outside the courtroom, anticipate potential reputational consequences and make thoughtful communications decisions that support rather than interfere with the legal strategy.
In many cases, the strongest approach will be restraint. In others, providing factual context, correcting inaccurate reporting or responding to a media inquiry may be appropriate. The important distinction is that these decisions should be strategic rather than reactive, and whenever possible, they should be considered before the first reporter calls.
WHY LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS MATTERS IN HIGH-PROFILE CASES
The courtroom and the public arena operate very differently. A criminal case, civil lawsuit or government investigation may take months or years to resolve, while the initial news coverage can establish a public narrative within hours. Reporters frequently begin with the information immediately available to them, including indictments, complaints, charging documents, court filings, statements from prosecutors or opposing parties and information provided by sources. Those materials may accurately reflect what has been alleged, but they rarely represent everything known by the defense.
Defense counsel may possess substantial additional context while simultaneously having compelling legal reasons not to disclose it. That creates an inherent imbalance. The information most readily available to the public may represent only one side of a complicated matter, while the defense is appropriately constrained in what it can say.
An experienced litigation communications advisor cannot eliminate that tension, nor should communications strategy attempt to circumvent the legal process. What strategic communications counsel can do is help the legal team understand the external environment, anticipate how information may be interpreted and prepare for communications decisions before they become urgent.
LITIGATION PR SHOULD BEGIN BEFORE THE FIRST REPORTER CALLS
One of the worst times to develop a media strategy is when a reporter has already contacted the client and provided a two-hour deadline. At that point, the attorney and client may suddenly be trying to determine who should respond, whether anyone should respond, what information is already public, what can legally and strategically be discussed, whether the reporter has accurate information and whether providing a statement could create additional legal or reputational risk.
When a criminal defense matter, civil lawsuit, investigation or other legal proceeding is reasonably likely to attract attention, litigation PR planning should begin before media coverage starts. That does not mean issuing a press release or proactively contacting journalists. In fact, much of effective litigation communications happens entirely behind the scenes.
Early preparation can include reviewing the existing public record and search results, identifying likely media questions, assessing potential narratives, establishing who will serve as the communications point of contact and creating a clear process for reviewing and approving public statements. Counsel and communications advisors may also prepare a holding statement that is never ultimately used. The purpose is not to create publicity; it is to make sure the legal team and client are not developing communications strategy for the first time under the pressure of a reporter's deadline.
A REPORTER'S DEADLINE SHOULD NOT DETERMINE THE CLIENT'S MEDIA STRATEGY
Media deadlines create legitimate urgency, but urgency should never replace judgment. When a reporter contacts an attorney or client, the immediate question should not automatically be, “What do we say?” The more important question is whether responding serves the client's legal and reputational interests.
There are circumstances where engagement can be valuable. A carefully considered response may provide important factual context, correct a material error or prevent an inaccurate characterization from being repeated in subsequent reporting. There are other circumstances where responding could unnecessarily extend the life of a story, introduce information that was not previously public or create statements that become relevant to the legal proceeding. Sometimes a brief acknowledgment is appropriate while substantive comment is not.
This is why media relations during litigation requires a different mindset from traditional public relations. Silence and engagement are both legitimate strategic options. Neither should be automatic. The decision should be made in coordination with defense counsel after considering the legal posture of the case, the information already in the public record, the credibility and reach of the media outlet, the significance of the issue and the potential consequences of either responding or declining to comment.
NEGATIVE COVERAGE AND INACCURATE COVERAGE ARE NOT THE SAME THING
One of the most important distinctions in reputation management during litigation is the difference between unfavorable reporting and factually inaccurate reporting. A news story can be damaging to a client's reputation while still accurately describing allegations, court proceedings or other information contained in the public record. Challenging every unfavorable characterization can quickly undermine credibility with journalists and distract from factual errors that genuinely matter.
Material inaccuracies deserve a different analysis. If coverage incorrectly identifies a criminal charge, attributes conduct to the wrong individual, misstates a court ruling or contains another demonstrably incorrect fact, defense counsel and communications advisors should consider whether requesting a correction or clarification is appropriate.
When corrections are warranted, the approach should be factual, precise and professional. The goal is not to pressure a journalist into producing favorable coverage. It is to help ensure that the public record is accurate. That distinction can become especially important because news articles and search results may continue appearing under a client's name years after the legal matter itself has concluded.
CLIENTS SHOULD BE PREPARED BEFORE ANY MEDIA INTERACTION
Clients facing significant legal pressure are rarely in the best position to improvise a conversation with a reporter. Even executives who regularly speak publicly can underestimate how different an interview feels when the questions involve their own reputation, business, family or potential legal consequences.
If there is any possibility that the client, an executive or another spokesperson will interact with the media, preparation should happen in advance. Media training for litigation is not about teaching someone to evade questions or repeat scripted talking points regardless of what is asked. It is about helping the person understand the interview environment, anticipate difficult questions, communicate accurately and recognize subjects that should be referred to legal counsel.
In many legal matters, defense counsel may determine that the client should not speak publicly at all. That is not an absence of communications strategy. It is a communications strategy, and the client should understand why that decision has been made and what to do if approached unexpectedly by a journalist.
COMMUNICATIONS COUNSEL SHOULD WORK WITH DEFENSE COUNSEL, NOT AROUND THEM
Effective litigation communications depends on a clear relationship between legal counsel and communications counsel. The attorney determines the legal strategy, advises the client on the law and makes decisions regarding the client's legal interests. The communications advisor evaluates the media, public and reputational environment and provides recommendations regarding communications strategy. Those functions should complement one another rather than compete.
A communications professional working on active litigation needs to recognize that even a compelling public statement has little value if it creates problems for the client's defense. At the same time, attorneys handling high-profile cases can benefit from understanding how court filings, public statements and other developments may be interpreted by reporters, stakeholders and the broader public.
Coordination becomes particularly important when a matter is moving quickly. An arrest, indictment, new filing, hearing, ruling, statement from another party or unexpected news report can change the communications environment within hours. Having established protocols allows legal and communications counsel to evaluate developments together rather than creating two separate strategies under pressure.
NOT EVERY LEGAL MATTER NEEDS A PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN
Hiring litigation communications counsel does not mean launching a publicity campaign. In fact, many matters should remain as quiet as possible. Some cases require media monitoring and preparation but no proactive engagement. Others may require only a designated media contact, an approved holding statement and a plan for handling inquiries. A smaller number of cases may justify a more active strategy because of widespread misinformation, substantial media attention, the client's public profile or significant business and reputational consequences.
The level of engagement should always be driven by the circumstances of the matter. Legal PR should not be measured by the amount of press generated. In some cases, successful litigation communications means very little happens publicly because the legal team anticipated the communications risks, established a process and avoided unnecessary escalation.
This is one of the reasons experienced crisis communications counsel can be valuable even when the public never sees most of the work. Monitoring, preparation, message development and strategic rest
raint can be every bit as important as issuing a public statement.
REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE CAN CONTINUE AFTER THE CASE ENDS
Legal proceedings eventually reach a resolution, but the internet does not necessarily give that resolution the same prominence it gave the original allegations. An arrest, indictment or lawsuit may generate substantial coverage when it occurs. A dismissal, acquittal, favorable ruling or later clarification may receive far less attention, leaving outdated or incomplete information prominently associated with the client's name in search results.
For executives, professionals, business owners and companies, those lingering results can affect employment, business relationships, investment opportunities, customers and professional reputation long after the underlying legal matter has concluded.
For that reason, post-litigation reputation management should sometimes be considered as part of the broader communications strategy. Depending on the circumstances, that may involve ensuring the resolution is accurately reflected in the public record, providing appropriate updates to journalists who previously covered the matter, communicating with important stakeholders or gradually rebuilding the client's broader public profile through credible and substantive information.
The objective should never be to rewrite history or obscure legitimate reporting. It is to make sure the complete and accurate history is available, including how the matter ultimately ended.
WHEN SHOULD A DEFENSE ATTORNEY BRING IN LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS COUNSEL?
Ideally, communications counsel becomes involved before media attention reaches the client. Defense attorneys should consider litigation communications support when a matter involves a recognizable individual or organization, serious allegations, significant business or professional consequences, substantial public interest, anticipated national or regional media attention, complicated technical facts, organized public commentary or a reasonable likelihood that reporters will begin contacting the client.
Early involvement does not require a public response. It simply gives the legal team time to understand the communications environment and establish a plan. Who handles the first media inquiry? What information is already publicly available? What narratives are likely to develop? Which factual inaccuracies would justify correction? Who has authority to approve a statement? What happens if the client is approached outside the courthouse? How will the team respond after a significant hearing, filing or ruling?
Those questions do not require a publicity campaign. They require preparation.
When legal strategy and communications strategy are coordinated early, defense attorneys and their clients have more options, more time to evaluate those options and less pressure to make consequential decisions in the middle of a rapidly developing news cycle.
Ultimately, effective litigation communications has a straightforward purpose: protect the integrity of the legal strategy while ensuring the attorney and client are prepared for the media and reputational environment surrounding the case.
LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS & LEGAL MEDIA ADVISORY
Andrea Khoury is Founder & Principal of Khoury Public Relations & Media Group and a strategic communications and reputation advisor. She works with defense attorneys, law firms, executives, companies and their clients on litigation communications, crisis communications, media strategy, reputation management and other high-stakes matters involving significant public attention.
Khoury Public Relations & Media Group provides litigation communications, legal PR, crisis communications and media advisory services for defense attorneys and their clients nationwide. Andrea works directly with legal counsel to help manage media inquiries, monitor developing narratives, prepare clients and spokespersons, develop communications strategy and address reputational issues while respecting the legal process and the direction of counsel.
A Litigation Communications Guide for Defense Attorneys
By Andrea Khoury | Founder & Principal, Khoury Public Relations & Media Group
Strategic Communications + Reputation Advisory | Serving Clients Nationwide
[SEND AN EMAIL] | [CONNECT ON LINKEDIN] | [START A CONVERSATION]
When a legal matter attracts media attention, defense attorneys and their clients suddenly find themselves managing two very different environments. The legal case proceeds according to rules of evidence, procedure and due process, while the public narrative can begin taking shape almost immediately through news coverage, social media, court documents and online commentary. Long before a judge or jury reaches a conclusion, an allegation, arrest, indictment, lawsuit or investigation can become permanently associated with a client's name.
This is where litigation communications becomes important. Litigation communications, sometimes referred to as litigation PR or legal public relations, is the strategic management of communications and media issues surrounding an active or anticipated legal matter. For defense counsel, the purpose should never be to try a case in the press. The purpose is to understand what is happening outside the courtroom, anticipate potential reputational consequences and make thoughtful communications decisions that support rather than interfere with the legal strategy.
In many cases, the strongest approach will be restraint. In others, providing factual context, correcting inaccurate reporting or responding to a media inquiry may be appropriate. The important distinction is that these decisions should be strategic rather than reactive, and whenever possible, they should be considered before the first reporter calls.
WHY LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS MATTERS IN HIGH-PROFILE CASES
The courtroom and the public arena operate very differently. A criminal case, civil lawsuit or government investigation may take months or years to resolve, while the initial news coverage can establish a public narrative within hours. Reporters frequently begin with the information immediately available to them, including indictments, complaints, charging documents, court filings, statements from prosecutors or opposing parties and information provided by sources. Those materials may accurately reflect what has been alleged, but they rarely represent everything known by the defense.
Defense counsel may possess substantial additional context while simultaneously having compelling legal reasons not to disclose it. That creates an inherent imbalance. The information most readily available to the public may represent only one side of a complicated matter, while the defense is appropriately constrained in what it can say.
An experienced litigation communications advisor cannot eliminate that tension, nor should communications strategy attempt to circumvent the legal process. What strategic communications counsel can do is help the legal team understand the external environment, anticipate how information may be interpreted and prepare for communications decisions before they become urgent.
LITIGATION PR SHOULD BEGIN BEFORE THE FIRST REPORTER CALLS
One of the worst times to develop a media strategy is when a reporter has already contacted the client and provided a two-hour deadline. At that point, the attorney and client may suddenly be trying to determine who should respond, whether anyone should respond, what information is already public, what can legally and strategically be discussed, whether the reporter has accurate information and whether providing a statement could create additional legal or reputational risk.
When a criminal defense matter, civil lawsuit, investigation or other legal proceeding is reasonably likely to attract attention, litigation PR planning should begin before media coverage starts. That does not mean issuing a press release or proactively contacting journalists. In fact, much of effective litigation communications happens entirely behind the scenes.
Early preparation can include reviewing the existing public record and search results, identifying likely media questions, assessing potential narratives, establishing who will serve as the communications point of contact and creating a clear process for reviewing and approving public statements. Counsel and communications advisors may also prepare a holding statement that is never ultimately used. The purpose is not to create publicity; it is to make sure the legal team and client are not developing communications strategy for the first time under the pressure of a reporter's deadline.
A REPORTER'S DEADLINE SHOULD NOT DETERMINE THE CLIENT'S MEDIA STRATEGY
Media deadlines create legitimate urgency, but urgency should never replace judgment. When a reporter contacts an attorney or client, the immediate question should not automatically be, “What do we say?” The more important question is whether responding serves the client's legal and reputational interests.
There are circumstances where engagement can be valuable. A carefully considered response may provide important factual context, correct a material error or prevent an inaccurate characterization from being repeated in subsequent reporting. There are other circumstances where responding could unnecessarily extend the life of a story, introduce information that was not previously public or create statements that become relevant to the legal proceeding. Sometimes a brief acknowledgment is appropriate while substantive comment is not.
This is why media relations during litigation requires a different mindset from traditional public relations. Silence and engagement are both legitimate strategic options. Neither should be automatic. The decision should be made in coordination with defense counsel after considering the legal posture of the case, the information already in the public record, the credibility and reach of the media outlet, the significance of the issue and the potential consequences of either responding or declining to comment.
NEGATIVE COVERAGE AND INACCURATE COVERAGE ARE NOT THE SAME THING
One of the most important distinctions in reputation management during litigation is the difference between unfavorable reporting and factually inaccurate reporting. A news story can be damaging to a client's reputation while still accurately describing allegations, court proceedings or other information contained in the public record. Challenging every unfavorable characterization can quickly undermine credibility with journalists and distract from factual errors that genuinely matter.
Material inaccuracies deserve a different analysis. If coverage incorrectly identifies a criminal charge, attributes conduct to the wrong individual, misstates a court ruling or contains another demonstrably incorrect fact, defense counsel and communications advisors should consider whether requesting a correction or clarification is appropriate.
When corrections are warranted, the approach should be factual, precise and professional. The goal is not to pressure a journalist into producing favorable coverage. It is to help ensure that the public record is accurate. That distinction can become especially important because news articles and search results may continue appearing under a client's name years after the legal matter itself has concluded.
CLIENTS SHOULD BE PREPARED BEFORE ANY MEDIA INTERACTION
Clients facing significant legal pressure are rarely in the best position to improvise a conversation with a reporter. Even executives who regularly speak publicly can underestimate how different an interview feels when the questions involve their own reputation, business, family or potential legal consequences.
If there is any possibility that the client, an executive or another spokesperson will interact with the media, preparation should happen in advance. Media training for litigation is not about teaching someone to evade questions or repeat scripted talking points regardless of what is asked. It is about helping the person understand the interview environment, anticipate difficult questions, communicate accurately and recognize subjects that should be referred to legal counsel.
In many legal matters, defense counsel may determine that the client should not speak publicly at all. That is not an absence of communications strategy. It is a communications strategy, and the client should understand why that decision has been made and what to do if approached unexpectedly by a journalist.
COMMUNICATIONS COUNSEL SHOULD WORK WITH DEFENSE COUNSEL, NOT AROUND THEM
Effective litigation communications depends on a clear relationship between legal counsel and communications counsel. The attorney determines the legal strategy, advises the client on the law and makes decisions regarding the client's legal interests. The communications advisor evaluates the media, public and reputational environment and provides recommendations regarding communications strategy. Those functions should complement one another rather than compete.
A communications professional working on active litigation needs to recognize that even a compelling public statement has little value if it creates problems for the client's defense. At the same time, attorneys handling high-profile cases can benefit from understanding how court filings, public statements and other developments may be interpreted by reporters, stakeholders and the broader public.
Coordination becomes particularly important when a matter is moving quickly. An arrest, indictment, new filing, hearing, ruling, statement from another party or unexpected news report can change the communications environment within hours. Having established protocols allows legal and communications counsel to evaluate developments together rather than creating two separate strategies under pressure.
NOT EVERY LEGAL MATTER NEEDS A PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN
Hiring litigation communications counsel does not mean launching a publicity campaign. In fact, many matters should remain as quiet as possible. Some cases require media monitoring and preparation but no proactive engagement. Others may require only a designated media contact, an approved holding statement and a plan for handling inquiries. A smaller number of cases may justify a more active strategy because of widespread misinformation, substantial media attention, the client's public profile or significant business and reputational consequences.
The level of engagement should always be driven by the circumstances of the matter. Legal PR should not be measured by the amount of press generated. In some cases, successful litigation communications means very little happens publicly because the legal team anticipated the communications risks, established a process and avoided unnecessary escalation.
This is one of the reasons experienced crisis communications counsel can be valuable even when the public never sees most of the work. Monitoring, preparation, message development and strategic rest
raint can be every bit as important as issuing a public statement.
REPUTATIONAL DAMAGE CAN CONTINUE AFTER THE CASE ENDS
Legal proceedings eventually reach a resolution, but the internet does not necessarily give that resolution the same prominence it gave the original allegations. An arrest, indictment or lawsuit may generate substantial coverage when it occurs. A dismissal, acquittal, favorable ruling or later clarification may receive far less attention, leaving outdated or incomplete information prominently associated with the client's name in search results.
For executives, professionals, business owners and companies, those lingering results can affect employment, business relationships, investment opportunities, customers and professional reputation long after the underlying legal matter has concluded.
For that reason, post-litigation reputation management should sometimes be considered as part of the broader communications strategy. Depending on the circumstances, that may involve ensuring the resolution is accurately reflected in the public record, providing appropriate updates to journalists who previously covered the matter, communicating with important stakeholders or gradually rebuilding the client's broader public profile through credible and substantive information.
The objective should never be to rewrite history or obscure legitimate reporting. It is to make sure the complete and accurate history is available, including how the matter ultimately ended.
WHEN SHOULD A DEFENSE ATTORNEY BRING IN LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS COUNSEL?
Ideally, communications counsel becomes involved before media attention reaches the client. Defense attorneys should consider litigation communications support when a matter involves a recognizable individual or organization, serious allegations, significant business or professional consequences, substantial public interest, anticipated national or regional media attention, complicated technical facts, organized public commentary or a reasonable likelihood that reporters will begin contacting the client.
Early involvement does not require a public response. It simply gives the legal team time to understand the communications environment and establish a plan. Who handles the first media inquiry? What information is already publicly available? What narratives are likely to develop? Which factual inaccuracies would justify correction? Who has authority to approve a statement? What happens if the client is approached outside the courthouse? How will the team respond after a significant hearing, filing or ruling?
Those questions do not require a publicity campaign. They require preparation.
When legal strategy and communications strategy are coordinated early, defense attorneys and their clients have more options, more time to evaluate those options and less pressure to make consequential decisions in the middle of a rapidly developing news cycle.
Ultimately, effective litigation communications has a straightforward purpose: protect the integrity of the legal strategy while ensuring the attorney and client are prepared for the media and reputational environment surrounding the case.
LITIGATION COMMUNICATIONS & LEGAL MEDIA ADVISORY
Andrea Khoury is Founder & Principal of Khoury Public Relations & Media Group and a strategic communications and reputation advisor. She works with defense attorneys, law firms, executives, companies and their clients on litigation communications, crisis communications, media strategy, reputation management and other high-stakes matters involving significant public attention.
Khoury Public Relations & Media Group provides litigation communications, legal PR, crisis communications and media advisory services for defense attorneys and their clients nationwide. Andrea works directly with legal counsel to help manage media inquiries, monitor developing narratives, prepare clients and spokespersons, develop communications strategy and address reputational issues while respecting the legal process and the direction of counsel.
For confidential litigation communications inquiries:
ANDREA KHOURY
Founder & Principal | Chief Communications Officer, Khoury Public Relations & Media Group
Strategic Communications + Reputation Advisory | Serving Clients Nationwide
[SEND AN EMAIL] | [CONNECT ON LINKEDIN] | [START A CONVERSATION]
ANDREA KHOURY
Founder & Principal | Chief Communications Officer, Khoury Public Relations & Media Group
Strategic Communications + Reputation Advisory | Serving Clients Nationwide
[SEND AN EMAIL] | [CONNECT ON LINKEDIN] | [START A CONVERSATION]