The cyber security expert journalists actually want to speak to
Journalists want a cyber security expert who can tell them what has happened, why it matters and what happens next, in words their readers will understand.
That is a surprisingly short list, and many specialists miss it. Technical depth is essential, but it is not what makes someone a go-to voice. What does is the ability to translate that depth for people who are not technical.
The experts journalists return to tend to share a few qualities.
They explain, rather than impress. A journalist writing for a general audience cannot use jargon. An expert who can say what a vulnerability is, who is affected and what they should do in two or three plain sentences is worth far more than one who displays their knowledge.
They give context. Is this attack unusual or routine? Is it serious for a large company, or for the person at home? Context turns a technical fact into a story.
They are independent. Journalists are wary of commentary that is really a sales pitch. Experts who can discuss a problem without steering every answer towards their own product are trusted and remembered.
They are honest about uncertainty. In the first hours of an incident, very little is certain. Saying “we don’t know yet, but here is what to watch for” is credible. Pretending to certainty is not.
They are reachable. A cyber story moves fast. The expert who answers the phone, or replies within the hour, becomes the one a journalist calls again.
It also helps to be the right kind of specialist. Journalists need people who have actually done the work, in analysis, defence, response, policy or capability building, and can speak from experience rather than from a briefing note.
For cyber security founders and specialists, the opportunity is to be that person. It rarely requires a big campaign. It requires a clear subject area, a willingness to be helpful, and someone to make sure journalists know you exist.
That is the combination we help our clients build.