Conducting effective interviews with experts is paramount for producing credible and insightful news. But are you making mistakes that undermine your reporting, leading to superficial insights and potentially damaging your reputation? The devil is in the details, and overlooking crucial steps can turn a promising interview into a missed opportunity.
Key Takeaways
- Always record interviews, even if only as a backup, because discrepancies in notes can lead to legal challenges.
- Prepare at least 10 specific, open-ended questions tailored to the expert’s recent work, avoiding generic queries.
- Fact-check all expert claims with at least two independent sources, as even reputable individuals can unintentionally misrepresent information.
ANALYSIS: The Perils of Poor Preparation
The cornerstone of a successful expert interview lies in thorough preparation. All too often, reporters rely on cursory background research, leading to generic questions and a failure to truly engage with the expert’s knowledge. I’ve seen this firsthand. I had a colleague last year who interviewed a leading economist about inflation, but she hadn’t bothered to read his latest research paper. The result? A bland, uninspired piece that offered no fresh perspectives. The public deserves better.
Instead, reporters should immerse themselves in the expert’s work, identifying specific areas of interest and formulating questions that delve into the nuances of their research. This means going beyond a quick Google search and actually reading their publications, following their work on platforms like Google Scholar, and understanding their perspective within the broader field. A Pew Research Center report on media habits found that only 34% of Americans trust information they get from social media, highlighting the need for rigorous sourcing and expert analysis in news [Source: Pew Research Center].
Furthermore, avoid relying solely on publicly available information. Consider reaching out to the expert’s colleagues or research assistants to gain additional insights and identify potential areas for exploration. This can uncover valuable context and lead to more compelling interview questions. For example, if you’re interviewing a climate scientist, explore their involvement in IPCC reports or other collaborative projects to demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of their work.
ANALYSIS: The Trap of Leading Questions and Confirmation Bias
Another common pitfall is the use of leading questions, which can subtly influence the expert’s responses and compromise the objectivity of the interview. Instead of asking, “Don’t you think the government’s new policy is a disaster?”, opt for open-ended questions that allow the expert to express their views freely. Something like, “What are the potential consequences of the government’s new policy?” is far more neutral.
Confirmation bias also poses a significant threat. Reporters may unconsciously seek out experts who align with their pre-existing beliefs, leading to a skewed and potentially misleading portrayal of the issue. To mitigate this risk, actively seek out diverse perspectives and be willing to challenge your own assumptions. Even if you strongly disagree with an expert’s viewpoint, it’s crucial to give them a fair hearing and accurately represent their arguments. I was working on a story about the impact of ride-sharing services like Uber on Atlanta taxi drivers, and I made a point of interviewing both taxi company owners and gig workers to get a balanced picture.
The Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics emphasizes the importance of seeking truth and minimizing harm [Source: SPJ]. This includes avoiding sensationalism and ensuring that all sources are treated with respect and fairness.
ANALYSIS: The Importance of Meticulous Fact-Checking
In the age of misinformation, meticulous fact-checking is more critical than ever. Never take an expert’s claims at face value, no matter how reputable they may seem. Always verify their statements with at least two independent sources. This includes checking data against official reports, consulting with other experts in the field, and scrutinizing any claims that seem dubious or unsupported. I strongly recommend using resources like Snopes and PolitiFact to verify information quickly. But never cite them directly—use them to find the original source data and cite that.
Even seemingly innocuous statements can be inaccurate or misleading. For example, an expert might cite a statistic from memory that is slightly off or misinterpret the findings of a research study. A recent AP News report highlighted the dangers of relying on unverified information, citing a case where a major news outlet mistakenly reported false claims about a new medical treatment [Source: AP News].
Consider this hypothetical case: A reporter interviews a local economist about the impact of the new Braves stadium on Cobb County. The economist claims that property values near the stadium have increased by 25% since its opening in 2017. Before publishing this claim, the reporter should verify this data with the Cobb County Tax Assessor’s office and compare it to data from comparable areas without a major sports venue. Only then can they confidently report on the actual impact of the stadium on property values.
ANALYSIS: Recording, Transcribing, and Legal Considerations
Always record your interviews, even if you plan to take notes. Discrepancies between your notes and the expert’s actual words can lead to misunderstandings, misquotes, and even legal challenges. I can’t stress this enough. I had a client last year who was sued for defamation because of a misattributed quote in an article. The reporter hadn’t recorded the interview, and there was no way to prove what the expert had actually said. The case was eventually settled out of court, but it was a costly and time-consuming ordeal.
Transcribing the interview is also essential. While it may seem time-consuming, a full transcript allows you to accurately capture the expert’s nuances and avoid taking their words out of context. There are many affordable transcription services available, or you can use speech-to-text software to create a rough transcript yourself. Just be sure to carefully review and edit the transcript to ensure accuracy.
Be aware of Georgia’s recording laws. Under O.C.G.A. Section 16-11-62, Georgia is a “one-party consent” state, meaning you only need the consent of one party to record a conversation. However, it’s always best practice to inform the expert that you are recording the interview and obtain their explicit consent. This not only demonstrates professionalism but also helps to build trust and rapport. Moreover, be mindful of privacy concerns. Avoid asking overly personal or intrusive questions that are not relevant to the topic at hand. If you are interviewing someone about a sensitive subject, such as a crime or a personal tragedy, be especially careful to treat them with respect and sensitivity.
ANALYSIS: Following Up and Building Relationships
The interview doesn’t end when the recording stops. Follow up with the expert to clarify any points that are unclear and to give them an opportunity to review any quotes that you plan to use. This is a crucial step in ensuring accuracy and building trust. It also gives the expert a chance to provide additional context or insights that you may have missed during the interview.
Furthermore, consider building a long-term relationship with the expert. This can be invaluable for future stories and can provide you with a reliable source of information and expertise. Stay in touch with the expert, follow their work, and offer them opportunities to contribute to your reporting. This not only strengthens your credibility but also helps to foster a more informed and engaged public discourse.
Don’t be afraid to ask follow-up questions. “I’m not sure I understand that” is a perfectly acceptable thing to say. Your readers will thank you for it. Remember that your goal is to inform and enlighten, not to impress or intimidate. The best interviews are those that are conducted with humility, curiosity, and a genuine desire to understand the expert’s perspective. Readers may also want to know how AI will change news forever.
To avoid common pitfalls in interviews with experts, journalists must prioritize thorough preparation, unbiased questioning, rigorous fact-checking, and ethical recording practices. It’s about more than just getting the story; it’s about building trust and credibility in an era where both are increasingly scarce. So, before you schedule that next interview, ask yourself: have you done everything you can to ensure it will be accurate, insightful, and responsible? Consider whether your reporting is bulletproof.
Furthermore, in today’s media landscape, it’s essential to understand how to win back skeptical readers with deep journalism. This involves not only conducting thorough expert interviews but also presenting information in a clear, engaging, and trustworthy manner.
How many questions should I prepare for an expert interview?
Prepare at least 10-15 specific, open-ended questions. While you may not use all of them, having a surplus ensures you can adapt to the flow of the conversation and delve deeper into interesting areas.
What should I do if an expert refuses to be recorded?
Explain the importance of recording for accuracy and offer alternatives, such as providing a transcript for their review. If they still refuse, consider whether you can proceed with the interview or if it’s best to find another expert.
How can I ensure I’m not introducing bias into my questions?
Review your questions carefully, looking for any language that suggests a preferred answer. Use neutral phrasing and focus on eliciting the expert’s own views, rather than steering them towards a particular conclusion.
What’s the best way to handle conflicting information from different experts?
Acknowledge the differing viewpoints in your reporting and present the evidence for each side. Avoid taking sides and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions based on the available information.
How soon after the interview should I follow up with the expert?
Follow up within 24-48 hours to thank them for their time and clarify any outstanding questions. If you plan to use any direct quotes, give them the opportunity to review them before publication.
