Conducting effective interviews with experts is an art, particularly in the fast-paced world of news where accuracy and depth are paramount. Yet, I consistently see journalists, even seasoned ones, stumble over predictable pitfalls that undermine their reporting and the credibility of their sources. Are you inadvertently sabotaging your next big story before the microphone even turns on?
Key Takeaways
- Thoroughly research your expert’s specific field and recent work to avoid asking elementary questions and demonstrate competence.
- Always prepare a structured list of open-ended questions, but remain flexible enough to pursue unexpected insights during the conversation.
- Actively listen and clarify complex jargon in real-time, ensuring the expert’s message is accessible to a broad audience.
- Challenge vague statements respectfully with follow-up questions, seeking concrete examples or data to substantiate claims.
- Confirm key facts and statistics with the expert before publication, preventing embarrassing retractions and maintaining journalistic integrity.
The Perils of Poor Preparation and Superficiality
I’ve been in this business for over two decades, and the most glaring mistake I witness in interviews with experts is a fundamental lack of preparation. It’s not just about knowing their name; it’s about understanding their specific niche, their recent publications, and even their nuanced stances on controversial topics within their field. According to a 2024 study by the Pew Research Center, 72% of surveyed experts felt journalists often lacked sufficient background knowledge, leading to superficial discussions. This isn’t just rude; it’s a wasted opportunity for genuine insight.
I had a client last year, a young reporter covering economic policy for a major wire service. She was interviewing a Nobel laureate about global supply chain disruptions. Her questions were so generic they could have been pulled from a high school textbook. The expert, visibly frustrated, kept steering her back to his recent white paper on semiconductor manufacturing, which she clearly hadn’t read. The resulting article was bland, devoid of any real depth, and frankly, a disservice to her audience. My advice? Read their latest book, skim their most cited papers, and understand their recent public commentary. This shows respect and allows you to ask the questions that truly matter.
“The specific type of hantavirus that this man picked up, called the Andes virus, is the only type of hantavirus known to transmit human-to-human, says Dr. Emily Abdoler, a clinical associate professor of medicine at the University of Michigan.”
Failing to Follow Up and Clarify
Another common misstep is the failure to truly listen and follow up. Many journalists treat an interview like a checklist, cycling through pre-written questions without engaging with the expert’s actual responses. Experts often speak in technical jargon or assume a level of audience understanding that simply isn’t there. It’s our job to bridge that gap. We ran into this exact issue at my previous firm when a reporter failed to ask a climate scientist to explain “radiative forcing” in layman’s terms. The quote ended up being technically accurate but utterly incomprehensible to the average reader. That’s a failure of journalism, not the expert.
My editorial policy is simple: if you don’t understand it, neither will your audience. Press for clarification. Ask for analogies. Insist on concrete examples. “Can you give me an example of how that impacts the average person?” or “Could you explain ‘quantum entanglement’ as if I’m explaining it to my grandmother?” These aren’t signs of weakness; they’re signs of a committed journalist. And here’s what nobody tells you: experts appreciate it. They want their message understood, and a good interviewer helps them achieve that.
The Trap of Confirmation Bias and Lack of Challenge
Finally, journalists sometimes fall into the trap of confirmation bias, seeking only quotes that support a pre-existing narrative, or worse, being too deferential to challenge an expert’s assertion. Just because someone has a PhD doesn’t mean their every statement is gospel, particularly when they venture outside their primary area of expertise. A Reuters report from 2025 highlighted several instances where “tech gurus” made unsubstantiated claims about AI’s immediate future that went unchallenged by interviewers, only to be debunked months later. Always maintain a healthy skepticism.
For instance, I remember a case study from two years ago involving a financial commentator on a national business program. He was confidently predicting a massive market correction based on what he called “unprecedented algorithmic trading patterns.” The interviewer simply nodded along. I would have pressed him: “What specific algorithms are you referring to? What data supports ‘unprecedented’? Can you cite a historical parallel where these patterns led to such an outcome?” By not asking these tough questions, the journalist became an amplifier for unsubstantiated speculation, rather than a gatekeeper of credible information. Your role is not just to record; it’s to critically evaluate. This approach can help break the news echo chamber.
Mastering the art of interviews with experts requires diligence, active listening, and a willingness to challenge, ensuring your reporting is not just accurate, but truly insightful and accessible to all. This is crucial for rebuilding trust in 2026 and beyond, especially when tackling complex topics like policy’s human toll.
What is the most critical step before conducting an expert interview?
The most critical step is thoroughly researching the expert’s specific field, recent publications, and public statements to ensure you can ask informed questions and engage meaningfully with their expertise.
How can I avoid asking superficial questions?
To avoid superficial questions, delve into the expert’s specific research or recent work. Frame questions that explore nuances, implications, or disagreements within their field, rather than broad, introductory topics.
What should I do if an expert uses complex jargon during an interview?
If an expert uses complex jargon, politely interrupt and ask them to explain the term in simpler language or provide a real-world analogy. This ensures your audience will understand the information you report.
Is it acceptable to challenge an expert’s statements?
Yes, it is not only acceptable but often necessary to respectfully challenge an expert’s statements, especially if they are vague, unsubstantiated, or outside their primary area of expertise. Ask for data, examples, or alternative viewpoints.
How can I ensure the accuracy of quotes and facts from an interview?
Always confirm key facts, statistics, and direct quotes with the expert before publication. This practice, often called a “fact-check” or “quote-check,” minimizes errors and strengthens the credibility of your reporting.
