|
||||||||||
|
Subscribe to the Absolute Write Newsletter and get the Agents! Agents! Agents! report free! Click here.
|
Win a 1-year subscription to Writer's Digest by subscribing to Absolute Markets-- all paying markets for your writing. Click here. |
|
| |||||||||||||
|
|
Just
Say No: When Interview Sources Want To Play Editor No
matter how many interviews I do and how many articles I publish, my stomach
still plummets every time I hear “the question.” "You'll
send me a copy for review before the article’s published, right?" I’ll
do what? (I don’t say that part out loud, of course. I’m always too busy
recovering from the question.) So
often, it comes after I've worked hard to act professionally. I've approached
the assignment and the interview with the goal of serving the needs of the
magazine and its readers. Then, I’ve researched ahead of time in order to know
something about the interviewee and the subject, both to instill confidence in
my source, and to equip myself to ask meaningful questions. Finally,
within the interview itself, I've really worked to establish rapport with him or
her, and to be as focused, pleasant, and relaxed as possible in the process of
conducting the interview. But
just as I’m about to wrap up, I sometimes still hear that dreaded request. It
often comes as an offhand statement tossed out at the end of the interview and
because many writers may be eager to close out, it can sometimes be easy to say
yes, even though the answer almost always, with only a very few exceptions,
should be no. The
writers' guidelines for one U.S. regional, Portland
Magazine, view the situation this way: “We write for our readers alone,
and while in many cases we're delighted when our interview subjects enjoy our
stories once they're in print, we are not writing for them but only for our
readers. Interview subjects may not ever read or hear any portion of our stories
before the stories are printed... in the interest of objective distance.” Most
editors would agree that it is unprofessional to ask (though I don't recommend
you advise the subject that this is so) and unprofessional to comply with the
request. (There are a few instances in which a writer may CHOOSE to accommodate
it, in a modified way, which I'll explain shortly.) Allowing
sources to see a manuscript and have control over its content will usually
compromise its integrity and blur the distinction between unbiased reporting and
promotional material. As a writer, your obligation-- both to the interviewee and
to the publication for which you're writing-- is to be fair, accurate, and
unbiased in the way you use the material disclosed in the interview. Obviously,
this means you’ve got a big job to do in getting all of the facts right and
conveying them in as balanced a way as you can but unless the sources themselves
are contracting your services to write the piece, you owe them nothing more then
that. However,
when you have the very human contact that often comes with an interview,
especially face to face, it can be quite challenging to deliver what for that
person may be disappointing news. So, the manner of the message’s delivery
becomes all-important, of course. Whenever
someone tosses this troubling question at me, I often have to work hard to hang
on to my enthusiasm about the interview, the story, and the subject, because it
can feel as though my professional ability is being questioned. That’s when I
have to remind myself that this most likely isn’t personal, but is rather
about the interview subject’s own comfort and confidence. My
usual response is to tell the person politely and without apology that the
publication/editor for whom I'm writing doesn’t allow this, as indeed most
don’t. If that isn’t a sufficient answer in itself, I may elaborate a bit
about the essentials of journalistic integrity involved. “'I
gently remind sources that I’ve been hired by the magazine as a professional
to do a job,” says freelancer Kimberly Ripley of Portsmouth, NH, USA. “I
tell the investor I'm quoting that I don't expect him to prove that all
investments he makes will produce high returns, but that I trust he will do his
very best with the expertise he has. I expect him to allow me the same
professional courtesy.” At
the same time, it’s always important to convey real respect for the source’s
dignity, and show appreciation that she or he is opening up to us, in order to
boost confidence and good will. I've
often noticed that when a source raises this request, I'd already sensed that he
isn’t comfortable with the interview process. The person may be wary and
guarded, or working carefully not to say something “wrong,” rather than
relaxing with me and sharing the information that would help me write the
article. Subjects
may be inexperienced at giving interviews, or may perceive that they or someone
they know has been “burned” or misquoted in an interview experience (as I
have myself). Thus, I can be empathetic and I frequently tell sources that my
own similar experience makes me extra careful in handling quoted material. I've
even asked subjects directly, “What will help you feel more comfortable about
this interview?” when their discomfort has been obvious. Almost every time,
they've opened up with a “horror story” that has prompted their concern. If
interviewees remain attached to the idea that they want to see what I write
before it's published, I sometimes offer them the option of seeing the quoted
material I plan to use. That is all I share-- their quotes and, to some extent,
the context in which they'll appear. And I only offer this when it becomes clear
that the subject is very uneasy. An
exception I've made about showing whole articles to sources pre-publication is
when the person is an expert in their field, or the topic itself is a very
complex one. I once interviewed a wild-plant specialist who offered to be a
resource if I wanted him to review and possibly correct the confounding Latin
plant names the story would inevitably include. It was an unobtrusive offer of
assistance I accepted gladly-- even though I'd majored in plant-sciences in
college-- because I wanted the subject, the magazine, and myself all to look
professional. Freelancer Tracey Meloni of Harrisburg, PA, who does a
lot of medical writing, often runs her manuscript past some of the more renowned
experts she interviews, especially when they contribute a significant amount of
the content. She does this both to ensure accuracy of what she submits, and to
equip herself in advance in case an editor's changes somehow jeopardize a
story's accuracy. “I always set firm deadlines (with the source), telling them
that the copy must be returned by a certain date or that I will otherwise assume
that everything is OK,” she notes. In
summary, you, as writer, have no obligation to show your manuscript to an
interview subject. You also have the choice of enlisting a subject's help if you
feel it would benefit your article. Whichever option you choose, always bear in
mind who is writer, who is editor, and who is interview subject, and never allow
the lines to blur. Phyllis
Edgerly Ring writes on issues of family, health, culture, and spirituality from
her New Hampshire home. Her articles have appeared in Christian Science Monitor, Delicious
Living, Hope, Mamm,
Ms., and Yankee. Formerly
program director for a Bahá'í conference center, she taught English to
kindergartners in China and is currently an instructor with the Long Ridge
Writers Group. More information about her current book projects is available at www.phyllisring.com.
|
Sponsored links 
Make a Real Living as a Freelance Writer! How to find a book publisher |
Text on this site Copyright © 1998-2007
Absolute Write, all rights reserved.
|
