The obsolete interview, cont.
Last year I posted my e-mail exchange with Jerry Bledsoe as he was seeking information for his never-ending series on the Greensboro Police Department. Because I doubted his motives, I asked for an e-mail interview purposely to have a record of the interview. Lots of comments (and derision) ensued.
Jeff Jarvis has a good post outlining why interviewing is evolving past face-to-face conversations dictated by the interviewer. His main points:
* Who says that reporters are in charge of interviews anymore?
* Are interviews about information or gotcha moments?
* Perform the interview in writing, in public.
* My words are mine.
* Quotes need no longer be taken out of context.
* Interviews and articles need never end.
I have been on both sides of interviews. I've misquoted and been misquoted. These days I give interviews orally and in writing. Sometimes I prefer interviews in writing for the very reasons Jarvis notes. I keep the responsibility for my own words. I can still be misquoted, but it almost has to be done on purpose. It is then easy for me to expose it. In the end, I can think through my thoughts fully and express myself cogently.
Other times, I'm happy giving an oral interview because I've already thought through the topic at hand or, more likely, I'm pressed for time.
Not everyone on my staff agrees with me. Daily deadlines often force the quicker phone interview. Those are easier, too, particularly when you've caught a source on his cell phone and away from a computer. And depending on the sort of story you're writing, you may want to have the face-to-face sit-down interview. But if you're doing it only to ambush the source, then who is going to be served? Not the reader.
It is a new world out there and as has been shown many times, best practices change.