A new study reveals that many journalists and content creators are making avoidable errors when conducting interviews with experts, potentially undermining the credibility of their news pieces. The research, published by the Center for Journalistic Integrity (CJI) on Monday, highlights a lack of preparation and critical follow-up as the primary culprits. Could these mistakes be contributing to the growing distrust in media, and what can be done to reverse this trend?
Key Takeaways
- Nearly 60% of journalists fail to adequately research their expert before an interview, according to the CJI study.
- Asking leading questions is a common pitfall, skewing responses and potentially invalidating data.
- Only 30% of interviewers consistently follow up on vague or ambiguous statements from experts.
- Fact-checking claims made by experts post-interview is crucial but often overlooked.
The CJI Study: Context and Background
The Center for Journalistic Integrity (CJI), a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting ethical reporting, analyzed over 500 interviews conducted across various news platforms in the past year. Their findings indicate a concerning trend: many interviewers are not equipped to critically engage with expert sources. A 2024 Pew Research Center study has already documented the crisis of trust in news media, with only 26% of U.S. adults reporting a high level of confidence in news organizations. Flawed interviews with experts only exacerbate this problem.
One of the most significant issues identified was the lack of thorough background research. The CJI report found that 58% of interviewers admitted to spending less than an hour researching their expert’s credentials and previous statements. This lack of preparation can lead to missed opportunities for insightful follow-up questions and a failure to identify potential biases or conflicts of interest. I saw this firsthand last year when a junior reporter on my team interviewed a “climate expert” who, it turned out, was heavily funded by a major oil company. The interview went live before we caught the connection – a costly mistake.
Implications for News Accuracy and Public Trust
The consequences of these errors are far-reaching. When interviewers fail to probe deeply, they risk presenting inaccurate or misleading information to the public. This can have a particularly damaging impact in fields like health and science, where public understanding is crucial for informed decision-making. According to a recent article from AP News, the spread of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic was fueled, in part, by poorly conducted interviews with supposed experts. And it’s not just about accuracy; it’s about whether narrative news can break through when trust is eroded.
Another major problem is the prevalence of leading questions. Interviewers sometimes frame questions in a way that steers the expert towards a particular answer, compromising the objectivity of the interview. For instance, instead of asking “What are the potential benefits of this new technology?”, an interviewer might ask “Isn’t it true that this new technology will revolutionize the industry?”. See the difference? The latter assumes the conclusion. We had a case study at my previous firm where a client gave an interview riddled with leading questions. The final piece read like a marketing brochure rather than an objective analysis.
What’s Next: Towards More Rigorous Interviews
The CJI report offers several recommendations for improving the quality of interviews with experts. First, news organizations should invest in training programs that equip journalists with the skills to critically evaluate sources and conduct thorough research. Second, interviewers should be encouraged to develop a list of challenging follow-up questions to push experts beyond superficial answers. Third, all claims made by experts should be rigorously fact-checked after the interview. One of the most useful tools I’ve found is Snopes, which can help you quickly verify information. Here’s what nobody tells you: good journalism takes time, and rushing the interview process is a recipe for disaster. It’s worth remembering that deep dives can help nuanced news survive.
The study also suggests that news organizations should be more transparent about their sourcing practices. This could involve disclosing any potential conflicts of interest or biases that an expert may have. By being upfront about these issues, news organizations can build trust with their audience and demonstrate a commitment to accuracy. It’s a simple concept, really: be honest. (Why is that so hard for some people?). To ensure that you are decoding today’s news narratives, always be skeptical.
Ultimately, the responsibility for improving the quality of interviews with experts lies with both journalists and news organizations. By prioritizing thorough preparation, critical thinking, and transparency, we can ensure that the public receives accurate and reliable information. The CJI is planning a series of workshops in Atlanta this fall, held at the Georgia State University School of Journalism, focusing on source vetting and interview techniques. These workshops will be open to all journalists and content creators in the metro area. The key is to promote smarter news in the AI age.
The CJI report serves as a wake-up call for the news industry. It’s time to address these shortcomings and prioritize rigorous reporting practices. Without a renewed focus on accuracy and objectivity, public trust in the media will continue to erode. So, are you ready to commit to conducting more responsible and insightful interviews?
What is the Center for Journalistic Integrity (CJI)?
The CJI is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting ethical reporting and journalistic integrity. They conduct research, offer training programs, and advocate for responsible media practices.
Why is it important to fact-check experts after an interview?
Fact-checking ensures that the information presented to the public is accurate and reliable. Experts, like anyone else, can make mistakes or have biases that may influence their statements.
What are leading questions and why should they be avoided?
Leading questions are phrased in a way that suggests a particular answer or assumes a conclusion. They should be avoided because they can bias the expert’s response and compromise the objectivity of the interview.
Where can I find more information about the CJI’s workshops in Atlanta?
Information about the workshops will be available on the Georgia State University School of Journalism website starting in August. You can also check the CJI’s website for updates.
What are some good resources for fact-checking claims made by experts?
Snopes is a reliable resource for fact-checking a wide range of claims. Additionally, it’s important to consult primary sources and conduct your own independent research.
