The world of news and interviews with experts is rife with misinformation, especially as we navigate the complexities of 2026. Separating fact from fiction is essential for both journalists and the public. Are you ready to debunk some common myths surrounding interviews with experts in the news?
Myth #1: Any Expert Will Do
The misconception: If you need an opinion on a topic, just find someone with a title and credentials. The more letters after their name, the better, right?
Wrong. This is a recipe for biased, irrelevant, or even outright false information. The key is finding an expert whose expertise aligns precisely with the specific angle of your news story. For example, if you’re reporting on the impact of AI on the Fulton County court system, don’t just grab any AI professor. Look for someone who specializes in AI ethics and has experience working with legal institutions. I remember back in 2024, a local news outlet interviewed a “cybersecurity expert” about a data breach at Grady Memorial Hospital. Turns out, the guy’s specialty was securing small business networks. He had no experience with the complex systems of a major hospital, and his insights were almost useless.
Furthermore, consider potential biases. Does your “expert” have a vested interest in the outcome of the story? Are they funded by a company or organization that would benefit from a particular narrative? Transparency is vital. Disclose any potential conflicts of interest to your audience. Reputable news organizations like the Associated Press have strict guidelines on sourcing and avoiding conflicts of interest. Don’t settle for just any expert; find the right expert.
Myth #2: The Longer the Interview, the Better
The misconception: A lengthy, in-depth interview will always yield more valuable information. More time equals more content, right?
Not necessarily. A rambling, unfocused interview can be a waste of everyone’s time. The best interviews are concise, targeted, and well-structured. Before the interview, develop a clear set of questions that directly address the key aspects of your story. Share those questions with the expert in advance so they can prepare thoughtful answers. It’s about quality, not quantity.
I’ve seen so many reporters fall into the trap of letting an interview run on and on, hoping to stumble upon a “golden nugget” of information. Often, what they end up with is hours of unusable audio and a lot of wasted time. Instead, focus on crafting sharp, insightful questions that elicit specific, quotable responses. Think of it like this: are you trying to write a novel, or a tight news report? Be economical with your time.
Myth #3: All Experts Are Media Trained
The misconception: If someone is an expert in their field, they automatically know how to communicate effectively to a general audience. They’ll naturally be articulate, engaging, and provide sound bites perfect for the 6 o’clock news.
Oh, how I wish this were true. Many brilliant minds struggle to translate their knowledge into digestible sound bites for the public. It’s our job as journalists to guide them, not expect them to be polished performers. This can include helping them avoid jargon, asking them to explain complex concepts in plain language, and even gently redirecting them if they start to go off on tangents.
We had a situation here at the station just last month where we were interviewing a leading researcher from Emory University about a new Alzheimer’s drug. The researcher was incredibly knowledgeable, but he kept using highly technical terms that no one outside of his field would understand. It took some careful questioning and rephrasing to get him to explain the drug’s mechanism of action in a way that our viewers could grasp. The result? A clear, compelling segment that resonated with our audience. Here’s what nobody tells you: sometimes the best interviews involve a bit of translation. It’s a skill.
Myth #4: News Is Always Objective
The misconception: News should present facts without any bias. Interviewing experts should be about getting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
The ideal of objectivity is noble, but complete neutrality is often impossible to achieve. Every journalist has their own perspectives and biases, even if they are unaware of them. The questions you ask, the experts you choose to interview, and the way you frame the story all reflect your own point of view to some extent. Transparency and fairness are more realistic goals than absolute objectivity. Acknowledge different perspectives, present a range of viewpoints, and let your audience draw their own conclusions.
Consider the coverage of the proposed expansion of I-85 through Gwinnett County. Some news outlets focused on the potential economic benefits, interviewing business leaders who supported the project. Others highlighted the potential environmental impact, interviewing conservationists who opposed it. Neither approach was inherently “wrong,” but it’s crucial to recognize that both perspectives existed and that the story was being told through a particular lens. Want to learn more about perspectives? Check out our piece on how to see bias and think critically.
Myth #5: Once Published, the Interview is Done
The misconception: After the news story is released, the journalist’s job is over. The expert’s contribution is complete. Time to move on to the next story.
In 2026, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The lifespan of a news story extends far beyond its initial publication. Engage with your audience in the comments section, on social media, and in follow-up reports. Monitor the conversation around the story and be prepared to address any questions or concerns that arise. The expert you interviewed can also play a role in this ongoing dialogue.
We ran a story last year about the rising cost of housing in Atlanta, interviewing a local economist. After the story was published, we received a flood of comments and emails from viewers who had questions about the economist’s methodology and assumptions. We invited the economist back for a follow-up interview to address these concerns, which helped to clarify some of the key points and build trust with our audience. The news cycle never truly stops, and neither should your engagement with your audience. To stay ahead, newsrooms need to be aware of cultural trends.
How do I find credible experts for interviews?
Start with reputable academic institutions like Georgia Tech and Emory University. Check professional organizations like the State Bar of Georgia or the Georgia Society of Professional Engineers. Look for experts who have published peer-reviewed research or have a proven track record of working in their field.
What questions should I ask an expert to ensure an informative interview?
Focus on open-ended questions that encourage the expert to elaborate on their knowledge. Ask for specific examples and data to support their claims. Challenge their assumptions and ask them to address potential counterarguments. Avoid leading questions that suggest a particular answer.
How can I prepare an expert for an interview to make them more comfortable?
Share your questions with them in advance and explain the purpose of the interview. Let them know the format of the interview and how long it will last. Encourage them to speak in plain language and avoid jargon. Reassure them that you are there to help them communicate their expertise effectively.
What legal considerations should I keep in mind when interviewing experts?
Ensure that you have obtained the expert’s consent to be interviewed and that they understand how their words will be used. Be mindful of defamation laws and avoid publishing false or misleading statements about individuals or organizations. If you are discussing sensitive or confidential information, consult with a legal expert to ensure that you are not violating any privacy laws or regulations.
How do I handle an expert who is providing biased or misleading information?
Challenge their claims with evidence and alternative perspectives. Ask them to explain the basis of their opinions and to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. If they are unwilling to be transparent or objective, consider ending the interview. Always strive to present a balanced and fair account of the issue.
In conclusion, conducting effective interviews with experts for news in 2026 requires a critical approach, a commitment to accuracy, and a willingness to challenge conventional wisdom. Don’t blindly accept what you hear. Question assumptions, verify facts, and always strive to present a balanced and informed perspective. Your audience deserves nothing less. Go beyond the surface, ask the tough questions, and remember that your role is to inform, not just to report.
