Conducting interviews with experts is a cornerstone of credible news reporting. But even seasoned journalists can fall into traps that undermine their work. Are you making these common mistakes, and more importantly, are you ready to fix them before your next big story breaks?
Key Takeaways
- Always verify an expert’s credentials and affiliations independently before the interview, using sources like university directories or professional licensing boards.
- Craft open-ended questions that encourage detailed answers beyond simple yes/no responses, aiming for at least 3 follow-up questions per initial query.
- Record interviews using a reliable device and transcribe them verbatim to ensure accuracy and provide a reference point for quotations.
Failing to Vet Your Expert Thoroughly
This is where it all begins, and it’s astounding how often it’s overlooked. You see a name, a title, maybe a quote in another article – and you assume they’re the real deal. Big mistake. I had a client last year who almost ran a story quoting a “renowned expert” on cybersecurity. Turns out, the guy’s PhD was from a diploma mill. Embarrassing doesn’t even begin to cover it.
Verify, verify, verify. Don’t just take someone’s word for it. Check their credentials. What university did they attend? Can you find them listed in that university’s directory? Are they affiliated with the organizations they claim? For medical experts, are they board-certified? Use resources like the Federation of State Medical Boards to confirm licensure. For legal experts in Georgia, check their status with the State Bar. A simple search on the Fulton County Superior Court website might reveal past cases and affiliations. If you’re interviewing someone about financial regulations, check their registration with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Do your homework before you hit record.
Asking Leading or Closed-Ended Questions
Interviews aren’t interrogations. You’re not trying to trap someone. You’re trying to get information, insights, and perspectives. Leading questions – those that suggest a specific answer – contaminate the well. “Wouldn’t you agree that the mayor’s new policy is a disaster?” That’s not a question; it’s a statement disguised as one.
Closed-ended questions, those that can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no,” are equally problematic. They shut down conversation and prevent you from getting the nuanced details you need. Instead, focus on open-ended questions that encourage your expert to elaborate. Think “How,” “Why,” “What,” “Describe,” and “Explain.” For example, instead of asking “Did the new law affect small businesses?”, ask “How has the new law affected small businesses in the Marietta Square business district?”
Walking into an interview without a clear plan is like sailing without a map. You might get somewhere interesting, but you’re more likely to get lost. What are the key points you want to cover? What are the specific questions you need answered? What’s the angle of your story, and how does this expert fit into it?
I find it incredibly helpful to create a detailed outline beforehand. This isn’t a rigid script, but a roadmap to guide the conversation. It includes:
- The central theme of the story
- 3-5 key questions I want to answer
- A list of potential follow-up questions for each key question
- Background information on the expert and their area of expertise
And here’s what nobody tells you: it’s okay to deviate from the plan. If the expert says something unexpected or brings up a compelling new angle, follow that lead. Be flexible, but always keep your overall goals in mind.
Poor Preparation and Lack of Focus
Failing to Actively Listen and Follow Up
Hearing is not the same as listening. Active listening involves paying close attention to what the expert is saying, both verbally and nonverbally. It means asking clarifying questions, summarizing their points to ensure you understand them correctly, and using nonverbal cues like nodding and eye contact to show you’re engaged. But even more important is the follow-up.
Don’t just take their initial answer at face value. Dig deeper. Ask “Why?” Ask “Can you give me an example?” Ask “What are the potential consequences of that?” Assume there’s always more to the story than what you’re initially told. I had an interview with an economist regarding the impact of inflation on local families. I initially asked about the general trends, but it wasn’t until I followed up with questions about specific sectors, like grocery prices and housing costs in the Buckhead neighborhood, that I got the truly compelling data.
Relying on Memory and Inaccurate Quotations
Human memory is notoriously unreliable. Relying on your recollection of an interview, especially when dealing with complex or technical information, is a recipe for disaster. It’s easy to misremember details, misattribute quotes, or unintentionally distort the expert’s meaning.
Always record your interviews. Use a reliable recording device – your smartphone is fine in a pinch, but a dedicated audio recorder is preferable for higher quality. Then, transcribe the interview verbatim. Yes, it’s time-consuming, but it’s essential for accuracy. Transcription services are readily available, or you can do it yourself. This gives you a written record to refer back to, ensuring you quote your expert accurately and capture the full context of their statements. This is especially important in the age of AI and misinformation.
In 2025, a study by the Pew Research Center found that 68% of Americans believe inaccurate news is a significant problem. Don’t contribute to that problem by being sloppy with your quotations.
Case Study: The Misinformation Crisis in Local Elections
Last year, we covered a story about misinformation spreading during the Atlanta mayoral election. We interviewed Dr. Emily Carter, a professor of political science at Georgia State University, about the impact of social media on voter turnout. Initially, Dr. Carter provided general statements about the potential for misinformation to influence voters. However, after pressing her for specific examples, she revealed that her research team had identified several coordinated campaigns spreading false information about candidates’ platforms.
Specifically, she pointed to a series of fake news articles circulating on Facebook, targeting voters in the West End neighborhood with fabricated stories about one candidate’s stance on property taxes. These articles, which were traced back to overseas servers, claimed that the candidate planned to raise property taxes by 300% if elected – a completely false claim. Dr. Carter’s team also found that these articles were shared by a network of bot accounts, amplifying their reach and impact. As a result of this misinformation, voter turnout in the West End was significantly lower than in previous elections, according to data from the Fulton County Board of Elections.
This case study demonstrates the importance of asking follow-up questions and digging deeper to uncover the truth. Without Dr. Carter’s specific examples, our story would have lacked the necessary detail and impact to inform voters about the dangers of misinformation.
Mastering the art of interviews with experts requires diligence, preparation, and a commitment to accuracy. By avoiding these common pitfalls, you can ensure your reporting is credible, informative, and impactful.
How do I handle an expert who is evasive or unwilling to answer my questions directly?
Politely but firmly reiterate the importance of the question and explain why the answer is relevant to the story. If they continue to evade, consider ending the interview and seeking another expert.
What if an expert asks to review my article before it’s published?
While it’s generally not advisable to allow experts to review the entire article, you can offer to fact-check specific quotes or technical information with them to ensure accuracy.
How do I handle conflicting information from different experts?
Present the conflicting viewpoints in your article and explain the reasons for the disagreement. Allow readers to draw their own conclusions based on the evidence presented.
What should I do if I discover that an expert has misrepresented their credentials after the interview?
Immediately correct the record in your article and consider retracting the story if the expert’s misrepresentation significantly undermines their credibility.
What is the best way to prepare my questions?
Research your expert and topic thoroughly. Start with broad, open-ended questions and then drill down with more specific follow-ups based on their initial responses.
Don’t fall into the trap of thinking you’re “just” a journalist. You’re a filter, a translator, and a gatekeeper of information. Take that responsibility seriously by building trust with your audience through careful, ethical interviews with experts. The public deserves nothing less.
