Live interviews with celebrities or important officials appear so often on television that students may think them typical of all journalistic interviews. Live interviews, however, are proba1 worst model for journalistic interviewing. Even the few people who do them well-ABC Koppel is one-recognize their limitations. The live interview usually lasts just a few II and allows little chance to ask challenging questions. Taped interviews, such as those on I “60 Minutes” and ABC’s “Prime Time Live,” are better examples of journalistic inter Even with those shows, viewers see only a few minutes of interviews that might have hours. The profiles of noted individuals in The New Yorker magazine are excellent examples of stories based on long interviews.
Reporters should start an interview with a clear statement of its purpose, if that’s I ready understood. For brief news inter- views, reporters usually try to get right to the main questions. For longer interviews, reporters often begin with a few minutes of small talk to source at ease.
Once the serious questioning begins, reporters should take charge of the conversation, decide what questions to ask, keep the interview on track and make sure the source has fully answered every question. If a source wanders or tries to evade questions, reporters should the conversation back to the central topic and politely but firmly ask the source to respond questions.
Successful interviewers are good listeners. They must make sure a source is answering questions fully and clearly. The principle of good listening means a reporter does not interrupt, argue with or lecture the source. Sources do not want to be badgered, and reporters who are likely to find their sources become reluctant to speak. Reporters also need to give sources time to develop their thoughts. Usually, the reason for interviewing sources is them tell a story in their own words.
Reporters should ask for clarification when they do not understand things source: Sometimes that means asking a question that might appear naive or silly. Reporters should not be afraid to ask those questions, however. Reporters who assume they understand what a source said or who fail to ask a critical question out of fear of appearing naive or ignorant may make land embarrassing mistakes when they write their stories.
Reporters also need to be alert to unexpected but newsworthy developments in an inter-view. Well-prepared reporters enter an in-depth interview with a list of questions and a central point they wish to develop. But sometimes sources reveal information or ideas reporters do not expect. When that happens, reporters must abandon their plans and pursue new angles.
Most sources cooperate with reporters because they welcome the opportunity to tell their side of a story; however, a few are hostile and refuse to talk to reporters. They may fear that a topic is too complex for reporters to understand; they may have been embarrassed by reporters in earlier interviews; or they may fear that the resulting story may portray them in a bad light. Reporters who encounter a hostile source should try to learn why the source is hesitant to speak to them. After learning the reason, they may be able to overcome that specific objection. Or reporters -may argue that sources will appear ashamed or evasive if they refuse to comment about an issue whereas if sources explain their side, a story may be less damaging. In another technique reporters obtain as much information as possible from other people, including a source’s critics. Then they confront the source and ask for a comment on the information. Alternatively, reporters may pretend that they have already obtained all the information they need for a story. If reporters possess or appear to possess enough facts to prepare a story, the reluctant source may talk in the hope of portraying those facts in as favorable a light as possible.
Reporters should never try to bully or intimidate hostile sources or try to deceive them about the purpose of an interview. Information obtained from a source who has been intimidated may be unreliable. And sources who have been led to believe an interview will be about one topic when, in fact, the reporters want information about something else will feel unprepared to respond fully.
At the end of an interview, reporters should always ask sources if they have anything to add. Sometimes the most surprising and newsworthy information emerges in response to that question. Reporters should also ask sources for the names of other people to interview or for documents that might provide additional information or verification. They also should ask the best time to call sources back if they have follow-up questions. Finally, reporters should thank sources for granting the interview.
Taking Notes
Reporters conducting interviews must balance the tasks of note taking and questioning. Unless reporters take detailed notes, they probably will forget much of what is said. Most interviewers take copious notes, writing down much more information than they can possibly use. During an interview, reporters may not know which facts they will need or want to emphasize in their stories. If -they record as much as possible, they are less likely to forget an important point or to make a factual error. They can discard later the unimportant and irrelevant items.
Few reporters know shorthand, but most develop their own shortcuts for taking notes. They leave out some words, abbreviate others, and jot down names, numbers, good quotations and key ideas and fill in the details soon after an interview. When sources speak too rapidly, re-porters can ask them to slow down or repeat important statements. Note taking makes some sources nervous. Reporters should explain that the notes will help them write more accurate and thorough stories.
After completing interviews, reporters should review their notes immediately, while everything is- fresh in their minds. They may want to fill in some gaps or be certain that they under-stand everything a source said. Reporters should write their stories as soon as possible after interviews. The longer they wait, the more likely they are to forget some facts or distort others.
Tape recording interviews frees reporters to concentrate on the questions they want to ask and sources’ responses to those questions. Tapes also provide verbatim and permanent records, so reporters make fewer factual errors, and sources are less likely to claim that they were misquoted. And when reporters replay the tapes, they often find important statements they failed to notice during the interviews.
Tape recording has drawbacks, too. After recording a one-hour interview, reporters may have to replay the entire tape at least once, and perhaps two or three times, before writing the story. It also might be difficult to locate a particular fact or quotation on the tape. By comparison, reporters may need a minute or less to find a piece of information in their handwritten notes from a one-hour interview.
As a final alternative, reporters may record major interviews but augment tapes with written notes. The reporters can consult their notes to write the stories, and then use the tape recordings to verify the accuracy of important facts and quotations. If a tape recorder has a counter that indicates how much tape has played, reporters can use that to note the location of important or interesting quotations.
Although tape recorders have become commonplace, some sources still refuse to be taped, Recorders are small enough now that reporters can easily hide them in their pockets or handbags, but taping a conversation without the other party’s consent is unethical and sometimes illegal. In 13 states (California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington), it is illegal tc record a conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. Linda Tripp, for example, was prosecuted in Maryland for surreptitiously recording her conversations with Monica Lewinsky in violation of that state’s law. In all other states, one may record a conversation with the consent of only one party. In the case of an interview, the consenting party would be the reporter doing the taping. But even where it is legal, taping a conversation without the other party’s consent raises ethical questions. Undisclosed tape recording seems manipulative and invasive. Readers, viewers and jurors (if a story results in a lawsuit) may consider tainted any information reporters obtain through secret recording.
Final Thoughts
Interviewing is an art form that requires practice. Journalists who are most successful at interviewing have done it for years and have developed insights into the sources they interview and into their own strengths and weaknesses in relating to other people. Student journalists often lack the experience and the maturity to be excellent interviewers, and their initial attempts at interviewing may yield disappointing results. Young reporters should not become discouraged, however. With time and persistence, they, too, can become excellent interviewers.
