content-haro-reply

# Content HARO Reply - The 90-Second Quotability Stack

> *"A journalist reading HARO replies has 90 seconds and 50+ responses. You're not competing with bad answers - you're competing with decent answers. The only way to win is to be so specific, so credentialed, and so quotable that using you is the path of least resistance."* - Sean Donahoe

HARO (now merged into Connectively), Qwoted, and SourceBottle exist because journalists need expert sources fast. A reporter on deadline with 60 replies in their inbox is not looking for the most comprehensive answer - they are looking for the answer they can drop into their article in 90 seconds without rewriting.

Most replies fail not because the expertise is wrong, but because:
- The credential is generic ("I'm a marketing expert with 15 years of experience")
- The answer is too long (journalists don't read walls of text from strangers)
- There's no pull quote (the journalist has to write the quote themselves)
- The reply answers a different question than the one asked

The 90-Second Quotability Stack fixes all four.

## When to Use

Trigger phrases: "HARO reply", "HARO pitch", "journalist query", "expert source reply", "get quoted in press", "respond to journalist query", "Qwoted reply".

Use when:
- You have received a HARO / Qwoted / SourceBottle query that matches your actual expertise
- The deadline is within 2-4 hours (most journalist queries have same-day or next-day deadlines)
- You can provide specific numbers, named experiences, or a genuinely contrarian take - not general advice anyone could give
- You want to build a press citation record for your media kit or `content-media-kit`

Do NOT use for:
- Cold-pitching journalists who didn't post a query - use press outreach adapted from `content-press-release`
- Responding to queries outside your actual expertise - journalists verify sources; misrepresentation destroys relationships
- Writing a long-form editorial or byline - use `content-blog` instead

## The Query Audit (Required Before Writing)

Before writing a single word, answer three questions:

1. **Am I actually qualified?** Not "adjacent to" or "interested in" - actually qualified. A journalist who quotes you and later learns your credentials were stretched will never use you again and may note it publicly.
2. **Do I have something specific to say?** "It depends on the situation" is not quotable. "In 23 of the 40 client engagements I've run, the specific failure point was X" is quotable.
3. **Am I answering the question they asked?** Read the query again. Many responses answer a nearby question. If the journalist asks "what's the biggest mistake founders make in year one," don't answer "here's my framework for founding a startup." Answer the question asked.

If any answer is no, skip this query. Sending a mediocre reply wastes the journalist's time and your reputation.

## The 90-Second Quotability Stack

### Component 1 - The Credentialed One-Liner (line 1)

Not a bio. Not a paragraph. One sentence that answers: "why should this journalist trust me on this specific query?"

Formula: `[Specific role] with [specific evidence of experience], [specific relevant credential for THIS query].`

Weak: "I'm a marketing expert with 15 years of experience in the industry."
Strong: "I'm a fractional CFO who has reviewed the financial statements of 40 bootstrapped e-commerce brands doing $1M-$10M in annual revenue - this exact cashflow question is the most common failure point I see."

The one-liner must pass the substitution test: could any other person in your field say this sentence? If yes, it's too generic. Add one more specific.

### Component 2 - The Direct Answer (1-2 sentences)

Answer the journalist's question in the first two sentences. Not background. Not context. The answer.

This is Ogilvy's principle applied to expert sourcing: the journalist (like the reader) decides in the first sentence whether to keep reading. If sentence one is setup, they're already skimming for the next reply.

Direct: "The single biggest mistake is [X]."
Then: "Here's why that matters specifically: [one sentence of stakes or mechanism]."

### Component 3 - The 3-5 Bullet Evidence Stack

Support the direct answer with 3-5 bullets - each one a specific piece of evidence. Specificity is credibility (Schwartz's rule: the more specific the claim, the more believable it is).

Each bullet format: **[Specific claim or finding]** - [one sentence of context or mechanism]

Rules:
- Every bullet must have at least one specific: a number, a named situation, a date, a named company (with permission), or a measurable result
- No bullet should be general advice that any Google search would return
- At least one bullet should be contrarian - the thing most sources won't say, or the finding that surprises people
- Total bullets: 3 minimum (substance), 5 maximum (journalist's time limit)

### Component 4 - The Pull Quote

Write one sentence, in quotation marks, designed to be lifted verbatim into the article.

This is the single highest-leverage thing most HARO sources don't do. A journalist on deadline needs:
1. A quote
2. Attribution

If you provide the quote pre-written, you remove two steps from their workflow. They can edit it, but they'll often use it close to verbatim if it's good.

Pull quote criteria:
- 1-2 sentences max (25-40 words is the sweet spot for article quotes)
- Written in first person, present tense, natural spoken cadence
- Contains either a surprising specific, a strong claim, or a memorable frame
- Does not start with "I think" or "In my opinion" - opens with the point, then attributes

Example: "Most founders think they're running out of money - they're actually running out of time to make the right decision before they run out of money. Those are two very different problems with two very different solutions."

### Component 5 - Credentials + Contact Block

Three lines maximum:

```
[Full name], [title/role]
[Company or website]
[Phone or email