mal agreement not to disclose information, but in decades of dealing with the media, I can remember only one instance in which a reporter violated such a verbal agreement, and even then it was through a mis- understanding. To be sure, this will work only with journalists who have an ongo- ing relationship with you. Buttressing their own integrity is the knowl- edge that they will have to continue to deal with you when today's newspapers are lining the floor of birdcages. Of course, many journal- ists don't like background briefings, particularly if they are sharing the information with others. They know that they are being used and, to some extent, manipulated. And although they want to get the story right, their primary goal is to break news. Background briefings are as interesting to many reporters as fore- play that leads to a kiss on the forehead and a hearty handshake. For that reason, the briefing should be scheduled as close to the release date as practical. It should involve all the principals. And it is abso- lutely critical that you do not embellish your story or hold back nega- tive information. If you can't give all the details, say SO and explain why. It also helps if you can explain why you are conducting the back- ground briefing in advance of the official release. For example, if the Tough Calls story is particularly complex or subject to misinterpretation, most re- porters will understand the need for an advance briefing. They will also understand if the final decision depends on factors beyond your control, such as government approval or a shareowner vote, although they will expect you to be forthright in assessing all the contingencies affecting your decision. But all this is tactical. The bigger challenge in situations like the Mandl resignation is to see around the next corner, understanding the larger issues that are at play and anticipating their ultimate impact. This requires a level of strategic analysis that is often difficult to ac- complish under fire. Embrace the Inevitable With 20/20