Every public sector journalist’s email inbox looks the same: too many pitches, not enough time.
As we logged into the conversation, Federal News Network’s Drew Friedman was filling us in on how she came back from a single week of vacation to roughly a thousand emails. Only a fraction of what lands in an inbox ever becomes a headline.
So what actually separates the story that breaks through from the one that gets passed over? That was the question at the center of REQ‘s recent webinar, What Makes a Public Sector Story Worth Telling?, a roundtable with three award-winning public sector journalists: Amy Kluber, Editor-in-Chief at GovCIO Media & Research, Drew Friedman, reporter at Federal News Network, and Keely Quinlan, staff reporter at StateScoop, moderated by Katie Hanusik, EVP and PR Practice Lead at REQ.
Across the hour, a few clear patterns emerged about what earns a reporter’s attention and what gets lost in the noise.
Answer “So What” and “Why Now” Before They Have To
Every reporter on the panel described some version of the same filter. Kluber said she’s always looking for the “so what”, why her audience should care, and the “why now”. Quinlan put it more bluntly: her outlet has to sell readers in the first four sentences of a story, and pitches get held to the same standard. If she has to dig to the bottom of an email to find the relevance, she’s less inclined to take action. This serves as a reminder that the task of connecting the dots belongs to the pitch, not the reporter.
Come With Sources Ready to Go, and Make Them Worth Calling Back
The single biggest lever for reducing a reporter’s legwork, according to Quinlan, is having a source ready to go. Ideally, there’s more than one. She pointed to a story about GIS mapping in public health that worked because it arrived with two sources already attached, each able to speak to a different application of the technology. Compare that to a pitch full of claims about a product working well with no path to a customer who can confirm it.
Survey and study data can be useful, but only with real transparency. Quinlan pointed to NASCIO’s state CIO surveys as the model: when a vendor’s study discloses exactly who was surveyed, who wasn’t, and why, it earns a place in coverage. When that detail is missing, the data gets treated with far more skepticism, no matter how favorable the findings look.
What kind of source, though, makes the biggest difference? The panel didn’t hesitate: someone willing to say something real. Kluber said overly high-level spokespeople have their place, but she gets far more out of a subject matter expert who can add actual color instead of staying generic. Friedman and Quinlan both said they welcome a source who’s willing to speak their mind, even on something contentious. Those are the sources they keep going back to, which is the real payoff for a B2G organization: it’s not just one story, it’s a standing invitation to be the source they call next time.
Tie the Product to the Mission, Not the Other Way Around
One of the clearest disconnects the panel named is a pitch that leads with the product instead of the government mission it serves. Kluber’s advice was simple: speak the government’s language first, and let the tech solution follow. Friedman echoed the same idea, saying that the pitches that land are the ones that focus more on the impact and change the product creates.
Quinlan’s favorite recent example further emphasized this point. A story about an AI evidence platform for law enforcement had every reason to read as a standard tech pitch, until the founder mentioned his tool hides Easter egg words in case reports that an officer has to catch and remove before filing. That detail got her attention. The substance is what got it published.
Build the Relationship, Not Just the Pitch
When asked for one piece of advice to improve pitching, all three reporters converged on relationships. Friedman said she appreciates outreach that isn’t a pitch at all, just a chance to get to know each other, because it leads to better-targeted pitches down the line. Quinlan agreed, adding that a quick call to ask what a reporter is working on goes further than another cold email.
Follow-ups fall into the same category. All three said a follow-up is genuinely helpful, not annoying, since pitches get buried in their high volume inboxes. Humor works too, within reason: Kluber said a clever subject line is memorable, though Quinlan noted tone still needs to match the subject matter. That same read for tone showed up in how the panel talked about AI-written pitches. Quinlan said the tells are easy to spot after a while, but the bigger issue isn’t detection, it’s quality: put the cause and effect next to each other so the reporter doesn’t have to guess. Kluber’s newsroom rule for AI-assisted writing is the same standard she’d apply to a human draft: edit it down and apply your own unique voice.
Redrawing the Coverage Map
The current administration has changed not just what gets covered, but how fast. Kluber said her outlet takes its cues from the White House and the President’s Management Agenda, with efficiency now a lens for evaluating almost any story. Quinlan sees the same emphasis trickling down to states and cities, pointing to new efficiency offices modeled directly on the federal effort. She expects the bigger story over the next year won’t be whether governments adopt AI, but how they prove it’s working: how CIOs and governors’ cabinets measure ROI and decide what to scale.
Each reporter is watching a different piece of that shift play out. Friedman expects her focus to move from fast-moving policy changes toward implementation: how agencies actually staff and reskill for the tech push, and how the big contracts behind it hold up over time. Kluber is watching critical infrastructure security and quantum move from emerging to essential, alongside a contracting landscape that’s changing how quickly agencies can get new tech in the door. Quinlan is tracking the growing fight over who gets to regulate AI at the federal versus state level, plus whether broadband funding is actually reaching the communities it’s meant for.
Looking Ahead
The advice across the hour kept circling back to the same idea: reporters aren’t looking for polish, they’re looking for proof. A pitch that connects a clear mission, a verifiable source, and a real point of view will beat a well-produced pitch with none of those things almost every time.
For B2G marketers and PR teams, that’s a useful filter to run every pitch through before it goes out the door: does it answer “so what,” does it come with someone who can back it up, and does it speak the language of the mission it’s supporting?
Watch the Full Webinar Recording
Want to hear the full conversation?
Head over to the What Makes a Public Sector Story Worth Telling? webinar page to watch the recording and hear Amy Kluber, Drew Friedman, and Keely Quinlan go deeper on pitching, sourcing, and what earns trust in the public sector press.
Ready to Tell a Story That Breaks Through?
Whether you’re pitching public sector media for the first time or refining a strategy that isn’t landing, REQ’s B2G practice can help you build the narrative, sourcing, and relationships that get government stories told.
Connect with our team to talk through your public sector communications strategy.
