Media Training Blog

So you’ve just got off the phone after being interviewed by a journalist. You’re not happy.

Maybe the tone of the journalist suggested he/she might pursue a particular angle to the detriment of the whole picture.

Maybe you doubted the journalist’s ability to record your quotes correctly; or to accurately record the facts you provided.

Maybe you just didn’t get across your most important point/s.

Maybe the journalist was aggressive/rude/dismissive/inappropriate and you felt it had been an unprofessional experience.

Maybe the problem lay with you and you were defensive, dismissive, evasive, unsure, ill-informed and unhelpful.

And so on. There are many ways to feel dissatisfied after an interview.

So, do you have any rights before your interview is published or broadcast?

Consider these points:

By participating in the interview, you have a major stake in it. Your role is not passive. Be pro-active.

The journalist ‘owns’ the eventual story and so you are not entitled to ask for the story to be read back to you.

But you ‘own’ your quotes and any factual information you provided. Therefore you are entitled to ask for your quotes to be read back to you. You are also entitled to check the facts that you have provided.

But remember, if you do want something corrected, the journalist may report that you called back. This may or may not be a good thing for you.

You can’t change a quote because you’ve changed your mind. For example, if you described someone as a windbag and then rang back to retract that, a good journalist will report that you rang back and wanted to retract ‘windbag’.

If you parted on bad terms with a journalist and you believe he/she was unprofessional, don’t hesitate to speak to their superior.

Keep your complaints within the realm of editorial: Nothing irks a journalist and an editor more than someone who complains to management. If you’ve exhausted editorial complaints and are still unhappy, then speak to management.

Russell Eldridge

Spokesperson Media Training

An interview by a print journalist, like a broadcast interview, is a conversation with an aim. However, whereas in a broadcast interview the audience are listeners or viewers who ‘eavesdrop’,  in a print interview they are readers.  In other words, the journalist is more of a filter in a print interview: you are relying entirely on what he or she writes. You can’t hope to convince readers if you haven’t convinced the journalist, and so the aim of this conversation is to do just that – to convince the journalist.
You and the journalist are both there to do a job.  His/hers is to get information; yours is to give it.  The journalist wants you to perform as much as you do.  The only difference is that your agenda may differ from his/hers. You need to use the subject of the questions to make the points you want to make.
The trick is to steer the interview down a middle path, so that the journalist’s questions are answered and your own objectives are achieved.  If you don’t manage this, only one of you is likely to leave happy – maybe neither of you!
Luke Roberts, Founder Spokesperson Media Training