Atlanta, GA – Media professionals and journalists frequently engage in interviews with experts to enrich their reporting, yet common pitfalls often undermine the depth and accuracy of the resulting news. From inadequate preparation to mismanaging the interview environment, these errors can significantly diminish the quality of public discourse. As someone who has spent two decades guiding reporters and researchers through complex subject matter, I’ve seen firsthand how easily even seasoned journalists can trip up. Are we truly extracting the most valuable insights, or just scratching the surface?
Key Takeaways
- Thoroughly research your expert and their specific field to ask incisive questions, avoiding generic inquiries that yield superficial answers.
- Establish clear communication boundaries and expectations with the expert beforehand regarding time, topics, and embargoes to prevent misunderstandings.
- Actively listen and remain flexible during the interview, allowing for follow-up questions that emerge from the expert’s responses rather than rigidly adhering to a script.
- Always fact-check information provided by experts against other reliable sources, especially when dealing with contentious or highly specialized data.
- Ensure technical setups (audio, video, connectivity) are meticulously tested prior to remote interviews to prevent disruptions and lost content.
Context and Common Missteps
The pursuit of credible information for news reporting hinges on effective communication with subject matter specialists. However, many reporters, especially those new to a beat or working under tight deadlines, often make fundamental errors that compromise the integrity and utility of these exchanges. One of the most pervasive issues I encounter is a lack of specific, targeted research. It’s not enough to know an expert’s name and title; you must understand their specific contributions, their nuanced perspectives, and the current debates within their field. I had a client last year, a promising investigative reporter for a national wire service, who went into an interview with a leading epidemiologist about zoonotic diseases without having read the expert’s most cited papers. The result? The reporter asked questions that were either too broad or had already been addressed in publicly available research, frustrating the expert and yielding little new information for the story. The interview became a wasted opportunity.
Another significant mistake is failing to set clear expectations and boundaries. We often assume experts know our journalistic process, but they don’t. This includes the interview’s scope, the intended audience, and any potential for follow-up. A particularly memorable incident involved a local news affiliate in Atlanta last year. They interviewed a transportation engineer about the proposed expansion of the I-285 perimeter, but neglected to inform him that the interview would be edited into soundbites for a rapid-fire segment. The expert, expecting a more in-depth discussion, felt his comments were taken out of context, leading to a public retraction request and a damaged relationship. Proper pre-interview communication, detailing the format and intended use of the material, is paramount. This can be as simple as a 5-minute pre-call to outline the process, ensuring everyone is on the same page.
Implications for News Credibility
The consequences of poorly conducted interviews with experts extend far beyond a single news piece; they can erode public trust in journalism itself. When reporters fail to ask probing questions or misunderstand an expert’s nuanced points, the resulting articles can be superficial, inaccurate, or even misleading. This directly impacts the credibility of news organizations. According to a 2025 Pew Research Center study, public trust in news media continues to decline, with only 32% of U.S. adults expressing “a great deal” or “a fair amount” of trust in information from national news organizations. While many factors contribute to this, superficial expert commentary certainly plays a role. If we’re not extracting genuine insight, what are we even doing?
Furthermore, these errors can lead to missed opportunities for breaking important stories or providing crucial context. Imagine a reporter covering a new piece of legislation, like Georgia’s recent HB 1013 concerning mental health services. If they interview a policy expert but don’t dig into the specific budgetary implications or implementation challenges, the public receives an incomplete picture. We ran into this exact issue at my previous firm when covering the rollout of a new statewide educational initiative. Our initial interviews with state education officials were too broad, and we almost missed a critical detail about funding allocation until an astute editor pushed us to re-interview with more specific questions about the Georgia Office of Student Achievement’s oversight role. That extra effort made all the difference in providing a truly comprehensive report.
What’s Next: Elevating Expert Engagement
Moving forward, newsrooms must prioritize training that focuses on the art of interviewing, specifically with experts. This isn’t just about asking questions; it’s about active listening, critical thinking, and the ability to pivot. I advocate for mandatory workshops that include role-playing scenarios, where reporters practice challenging an expert’s assumptions respectfully, or asking follow-up questions that delve deeper than the initial response. Tools like Otter.ai for transcription can help reporters focus on the conversation rather than frantic note-taking, allowing for more engaged listening and better follow-up. Moreover, establishing a pre-interview checklist that covers research, technical checks (especially for remote interviews via platforms like Zoom or Microsoft Teams), and expectation setting can drastically improve outcomes.
Another area ripe for improvement is the post-interview process. It’s crucial to not just transcribe, but to critically analyze the expert’s statements, cross-referencing them with other data or sources. This is where the real journalistic heavy lifting happens. For instance, if an expert on urban development discusses traffic patterns around the Fulton County Superior Court building, don’t just take their word for it; check recent traffic studies or city planning documents. This robust verification process is non-negotiable. Only by making these changes will we consistently deliver the nuanced, authoritative news that the public truly deserves and desperately needs.
To produce impactful news, reporters must treat expert interviews not as a mere transaction of information, but as a collaborative endeavor requiring meticulous preparation, active engagement, and rigorous post-interview verification.
How much research should I conduct before interviewing an expert?
You should conduct enough research to understand the expert’s specific area of expertise, their published works, recent contributions to their field, and any relevant controversies or differing viewpoints. This allows you to ask incisive questions that go beyond surface-level information.
What are the key elements to cover in a pre-interview discussion with an expert?
Before the interview, discuss the interview’s purpose, the specific topics to be covered, the estimated duration, the format (e.g., live, recorded for editing), the intended audience, and any deadlines or embargoes. Confirm their preferred contact method and if they require review of direct quotes.
How can I ensure I’m not misrepresenting an expert’s views?
To avoid misrepresentation, actively listen during the interview, ask clarifying questions when unsure, and consider offering to send key quotes or a summary of their main points for review before publication. Always contextualize their statements within the broader discussion.
What technical considerations are crucial for remote expert interviews?
For remote interviews, always test your audio equipment (microphone, headphones), video quality, and internet connection well in advance. Ensure the expert has a stable connection and understands how to use the chosen platform. Have a backup communication method ready, like a phone number.
Is it acceptable to challenge an expert’s statements during an interview?
Yes, it is not only acceptable but often necessary to challenge an expert’s statements respectfully. This can involve asking for evidence, presenting a counter-argument from another source, or probing for deeper explanations, which often leads to more robust and nuanced reporting.
