[Nfb-editors] Question how to handle quoted material in an article

[Bridgit Pollpeter]

Dana,

According to the code of ethics for journalist and public relations
specialist, (http://www.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/Ethics) you do not supply
material in quotes unless it is word-for-word what a person said. Simply
deleting the quotes but still attributing the material to a person,
implies it is word-for-word what a person said. If certain material is
too long, and none of it will work as a condensed quote, I suggest doing
what Chris suggest, which is to take the original quote, break it down
as you see fit and ask the person to read and give their approval before
printing. You can also paraphrase, however, and this way you do not
require quotes (which you don't do when paraphrasing anyway) and do not
need to print a word-for-word statement as long as it is made clear you
are paraphrasing. I've also pasted a chapter from a book titled Telling
the Story on interviewing. It may or may not be of interest.

Chapter 3 Interviewing
Page 42
Wright Thompson is a sports reporter who regularly wins state and
national awards for his writing. He understands that good reporting
makes award-winning writing possible. The key to reporting is
interviewing. And the key to interviewing: "Act like a human being," he
says.
"I've cried on the phone before," he confesses. "I've yelled at someone.
I've told incredibly personal details about myself, because it's not
fair for me to expect something I'm not willing to give." When he was
assigned to write about a high school athlete who had been killed in a
car wreck, he recalls, "I didn't try to be impartial. A young girl dying
was an awful thing, and I didn't try to be a noninvolved outsider. That
would have made reporting the story impossible. So I let myself feel the
same things as the others around me. I wept at her funeral. I helped her
friends make a mix tape of her favorite songs. I was intimately
involved, and I think it made me uniquely qualified to channel their
pain in the newspaper."
Not every interview is that emotionally demanding. But every successful
interview begins with establishing trust and ends with a story.
Interviewing-having conversations with sources-is the key to most
stories you will write. Your ability to make people comfortable with you
makes the difference between mediocre reporting and good reporting.
Information is the raw material of a journalist. Although some
information is gathered from records and some from observation, most is
gathered in person-to-person conversations. The skills that go into
these conversations are the basic reporting tools of any reporter in any
medium. If you're interviewing for television, broadcast or web cast,
your goals and techniques may be different from those of a print
reporter, but the basics are the same.
In this chapter you will learn:
1. How to build trust.
2. How to prepare for an interview.
3. How to phrase your questions.
4. How to establish rapport with a source.
5. How to ensure accuracy.
6. How to quote directly.
BUILDING TRUST
The first requirement of any successful interview is a reasonable degree
of trust between reporter and source. Usually, as a reporter you will
have to earn that trust. Wright Thompson explained how he earned the
trust of a grieving family. Different situations require different
approaches, but trust-building is essential in every case. Here's
Thompson again:
About a year ago, T wanted to do a story about a former college football
player named Ernest Blackwell, who had gone on a rampage in his
neighborhood, shooting a child and almost kicking another to death. He'd
collapsed on a police gurney afterward and died en route to the
hospital. No one could figure out what happened. Media outlet after
media outlet approached the family. All got turned down.
 
Page 43
When I called, I had a line. I told them I was going to talk to the cops
and was going to do a story about Ernest. The police, I told them, would
give me more than enough detail about the last five minutes of Ernest's
life. Then I said, "I think there's a lot more to his life than the last
five minutes. I think he deserves to be remembered for how he lived and
not just how he died."
That did it; I was in. Have a plan. You must give someone a reason why
it's better if they talk to you than if they don't.
Because Thompson earned the trust of the Blackwell family, he was able
to develop the insights that allowed him to write this:
Those who knew him wonder how Blackwell arrived on that day with so much
rage in his heart, so much bad intent. Truth is, none of them could peer
into the man's soul and see the hate that grew until it reached the
breaking point.
On Aug. 11, 2004, Blackwell could take no more.
"Lord, why didn't I see the signs?" says his aunt Joyce Strong, who
mostly raised Blackwell. "Why didn't I see he was reaching out for help?
He must have been a ticking time bomb waiting to go off."
That's the payoff on the investment in building trust.
You probably won't have many assignments that difficult. It always
helps, though, to have a plan. It also helps to have the honesty and
empathy that lead strangers to be honest with you. Act like a human
being.
PREPARING FOR THE INTERVIEW
How you prepare for the interview depends in part on what kind of a
story you intend to write. You may be doing a news story, a personality
profile or an investigative piece. In each case, you check the newspaper
library and search online databases, talk to other reporters, and, if
there's enough time, read magazine articles and books.
To prepare for a news story, you pay more attention to clips about the
subject of the story than to those about the personality of the
individual to be interviewed. To prepare for a profile, you look for
personality quirks and the subject's interests, family, friends, travels
and habits. To prepare for an investigative piece, you want to know both
your subject matter and the person you are interviewing. In all these
stories, do not overlook other reporters and editors who know something
about the person or subject. Let's look at each of these three types of
stories more closely.
The News Story
One day Paul Leavitt made a routine telephone call to a law enforcement
source. Leavitt, then assistant city editor for The Des Moines (Iowa)
Register! was working on a story. He knew the source from his days as a
county government and courts reporter for the Register.
 
Page 44
He expected the story, and the interview, to be routine. Polk County was
building a new jail. Leavitt wanted to find out about the progress on
the new building. The source pleaded ignorance. He said, "Oh, Leavitt, I
don't know. I haven't had time to keep up on that, what with all these
meetings on the pope's visit."
Leavitt didn't say anything right away. A less astute reporter might
have let the source know he was surprised. The pope in Des Moines? Are
you kidding? Instead, Leavitt remembered a story he had read about an
Iowan who had extended an invitation for John Paul II to stop in Iowa
during his upcoming visit to the United States. At the time, Leavitt
didn't think the Iowan had much of a chance. When the Vatican announced
the pope's visit, people from every state were bartering for a chance to
bask in the worldwide limelight.
Still, the source's slip of the tongue seemed genuine. Leavitt finally
replied, "Oh, yeah, that's right. When's he coming, anyway?" "October
4," the source said.
As the conversation progressed, Leavitt waved frantically to the
Register's managing editor. A major story was brewing.
"I started asking him some more questions," Leavitt recalls. "Then it
dawned on him that he probably wasn't supposed to be talking about this.
But it was clear from what he said that the pope was definitely coming
to Iowa. He even had the hours."
Before the conversation ended, Leavitt had learned of a meeting between
the Secret Service, the Vatican, the U.S. State Department and Iowa
law-enforcement officials to discuss the trip. He also had learned when
the pope would arrive, where he would arrive, where he would celebrate
Mass and when he would leave.
As a result, the Register stunned its readers the next morning with a
copyrighted story saying the pope would speak in Des Moines on Oct. 4.
The story was printed three weeks before the Vatican released its
official itinerary of the visit. Other area reporters scoffed at the
story. One newspaper even printed a story poking fun at the thought of
John Paul II hobnobbing in an Iowa cornfield.
Leavitt and the Register were vindicated. As scheduled, the pope arrived
Oct. 4 - and celebrated Mass in an Iowa cornfield.
Remembering his conversation with the source, and how a routine question
turned into a bona fide scoop, Leavitt said, "I don't even remember what
the original question was."
Leavitt probably would not have gotten the story had he not remembered
the earlier story about the invitation and known something else about
interviewing: When a source unwittingly gives you a scoop, sometimes it
is best to act as if you already knew it. That may encourage the source
to give you more information.
On the Job
There's Always a Way to Get the Interview

Karen Branch-Brioso has an attitude.
"There is always a way to get the interview," she says. "No matter
what."
Reporting for The Miami Herald, she proved it once when she flew to
Bogota, Colombia, to find the man who had imported to Miami soft drinks
laced with liquid cocaine. Neither U.S. nor Colombian authorities knew
where the man was.
By looking under the wife's maiden name in the telephone book,
Branch-Brioso found an address. At the couple's condo, she was
confronted with a security gate. She believed she would have a better
chance of getting the interview if
 

Page 45
she could meet the man. Assuming she would be denied if she buzzed the
couple's apartment, she waited until someone else opened the gate.
"As soon as I identified myself, his wife broke into sobs and begged him
not to talk with me," Branch-Brioso says. "But I figured he wanted to
tell his story." She was right.
Branch-Brioso agreed she wouldn't tell authorities where he was. The
interview lasted 90 minutes. Several months later, authorities caught
the man in a drug-smuggling sting in Guatemala.
Her degrees in journalism and Spanish have opened many doors for
Branch-Brioso. Her first journalism job was with the Mexico City News.
After joining the Herald in 1988, she covered everything from Latino
communities to the state legislature. In 2000, she became a Washington
correspondent for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
The Profile
A reporter who decided to write a profile of Joan Gilbert, a local
freelance writer, prepared differently. Because the reporter had used
the writer as a source in an earlier story, she knew something about the
writer. But she needed to know more. So she looked in Contemporary
Authors and found biographical information. She also asked Gilbert to
send her copies of some of the articles she had written. Before the
reporter went to see the writer, she read several of the articles. She
also interviewed the editor at one of the magazines that bought the
writer's material.
The reporter was prepared. Or so she thought. She had to pass one more
test. The freelance writer was an animal lover, and when the reporter
arrived, she first had to make friends with a handful of dogs.
Fortunately, she loved dogs. That immediately established rapport with
the freelancer. The resulting story was full of lively detail:
Joan Gilbert stretches lazily to soft sunbeams and chirping birds. She
dresses casually in blue denim shorts and a plaid, short-sleeved blouse.
She and her favorite work companions, five playful dogs, file out the
door of her little white house to
begin their day with a lazy walk in the surrounding woods. When she
returns, she'll contentedly sit down at her typewriter. Such is work.
Joan Gilbert is a freelance writer.
Walt Harrington specialized in in-depth profiles when he worked for the
Washington Post Magazine. In his book, he talked about the time they
take:
Each took between one and three months to complete. All included many
hours of conversation with the subjects. Most include days of tagging
along as they did whatever they usually did. . . . With actress Kelly
McGillis, I spent a hot August month traipsing to daily rehearsals and
then hack to Kelly's apartment, where she would analyze her day on
stage. Most of these profiles also included numerous interviews with the
subjects' family, friends, and enemies. For the George Bush and Carl
Bernstein profiles, I did about eighty interviews each. Always there are
also newspaper and magazine clippings, books, and documents to read.
Few journalists are afforded the luxury of three months to work on a
profile, but whether you do eight or 80 interviews, the lessons are
still the same: Be prepared. Be there.
The Investigative Piece
The casual atmosphere of the Joan Gilbert or Kelly McGillis interviews
is not always possible for the investigative reporter. Here, the
adversary relationship determines both the preparation required and
 
Page 46
the atmosphere of the interview itself. An investigative reporter is
like an attorney in a courtroom. Wise attorneys know what the answers to
their questions will be. So do investigative reporters. Preparation is
essential.
In the early stages of the investigation, you conduct some
fishing-expedition interviews: Because you don't know how much the
source knows, you cast around. Start with persons on the fringes. Gather
as much as you can from them. Study the records. Only after you have
most of the evidence do you confront your central character. You start
with a large circle and gradually draw it smaller.
Getting the interview is sometimes as big a challenge as the interview
itself. Sources who believe you are working on a story that will be
critical of them or their friends often try to avoid you. Steve
Weinberg, author of an unauthorized biography of industrialist Armand
Hammer, had to overcome the suspicion of many former Hammer associates.
Their former boss had told all of them not to talk to Weinberg. Instead
of calling, Weinberg approached them by mail.
"I sent letters, examples of my previous work, explained what I wanted
to cover and why I was doing it without Hammer's blessing," Weinberg
says.
He recommends that you use the letter, which can be an email, to share
some of what you know about the story that might surprise or impress the
source. For instance, a remark such as "And last week, when I was
checking all the land records..." would indicate the depth of your
research.
In his letter to former Hammer assistants, Weinberg talked about how
Hammer was one of the most important people in the history of business.
The letter opened doors to seven of Hammer's former executive assistants
whom Weinberg contacted.
Weinberg, former director of Investigative Reporters and Editors, also
offered to show the sources relevant portions of his manuscript as an
accuracy check. He made it clear in writing that he would maintain
control of the content.
Requesting an interview in writing can allow you to make your best case
for getting it. And an offer to allow your sources to review the story
assures them that you are serious about accuracy. Email makes both the
request and the offer simpler and faster for both parties.
Broadcast Interviews
When you're interviewing someone in front of a camera, the basic rules
of interviewing for print don't change. Some of your objectives and
techniques, however, do. In today's news rooms, it's likely that the
 
Page 47
television partner-a broadcast or cable station working with the
newspaper-will interview a print reporter about a story she or he is
working on. Also, the growing importance of streaming video online
pushes more print journalists to use video cameras themselves for web
cast versions of their stories.
The first thing to remember is that broadcast journalism is a
performance. Television journalists, at least those who appear on
camera, are performers. Sure, they have to report and write; but they
also have to be able to convey their stories with both words and body
language to people who are watching and listening-not reading. An
important part of the television reporter's performance is the
interview.
Interviews for print are often conducted to develop information that can
be used in further reporting. Interviews on camera usually have a
different goal. That goal is the sound bite, the few seconds of words
with accompanying video that convey not information so much as emotion.
Print is a medium of information; television is a medium of emotion. The
best interviews for television are those that reveal how a situation
feels to the participants or witnesses.
Al Tompkins, the Poynter Institute's group leader for broadcast and
online journalism, offers what he calls "a new set of interviewing
tools" intended to produce better storytelling for television. You can
find these and other tools at www.poynter.org. Here are some that show
both differences and similarities in print and television interviewing:
I Ask objective and subjective questions. To gather facts, ask objective
questions: "When?" "Where?" "How much?" Subjective questions, however,
usually produce the best sound bites. "Why?" "Tell me more." "Can you
explain?"
I Focus on one issue at a time. Vague, complicated questions produce
vague, complicated, hard-to-follow answers. Remember that readers can
reread until they understand, but viewers can't rewind an interview.
Help them follow the story by taking your interviewee through it one
step at a time.
│ Ask open-ended questions. For print, you often want a simple yes or
no. That kind of answer stops a television interview. Open-ended
questions encourage conversation, and conversation makes a good
interview.
│ Keep questions short. Make the interviewee do the talking. Tompkins
points out that short questions are more likely to produce focused
responses. They also keep the viewer's attention on the person being
interviewed and what she or he has to say.
│ Build to the point. The best interviews are like the best stories.
They don't give away the punch line in the first few words. Soft, easy
questions encourage relaxation and trust. Then move to the heart of the
issue.
│ Be honest. As true for television as for print and online, the
importance of honesty is too often overlooked by rookie reporters. You
do
 
Page 48
neither your source nor yourself a favor if you lead the source to
expect an interview about Softball when you have an indictment in mind.
Tell the source ahead of time that you'll want to ask some tough
questions. Say, and mean, that you want to get the whole story, to be
fair. Then politely but firmly dig in. As Tompkins notes, honesty has
the added benefit of helping you defend yourself against any later
accusations of malice.
Other Preparatory Considerations
All this homework is important, but something as trifling as your
appearance may determine whether you will have a successful interview.
You would hardly wear cutoff shorts into a university president's suite,
and you wouldn't wear a three-piece suit to talk to underground
revolutionaries. Although it is your right to wear your hair however you
wish and to wear whatever clothes you want, it is the source's
prerogative to refuse to talk to you.
Rick Bragg, then of the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times, told the editors of
Best Newspaper Writing: 1991 that his choice of clothing was important
in establishing rapport with a man whose mother had died of injuries
suffered 17 years earlier. Police were investigating the death as a
homicide. "I think he (the son] was more than just a little put off with
how brusque some of the other reporters had been," Bragg said, "and I
showed up in a pair of jeans and a T-shirt because I knew where I was
going, and I didn't see much point in hiding behind a Brooks Brothers
suit."
Bragg chose to fit in with the environment. That environment, too, is
important. You've already heard Harrington talk about spending hours
with actress Kelly McGillis at work and at her apartment. Most
interviews are conducted in the source's office. However, especially if
the story is a profile or a feature, it usually is better to get the
source away from his or her work. If you are doing a story about a
rabbi's hobby of collecting butterflies, seek a setting appropriate to
the topic. Suggest meeting where the rabbi keeps his collection.
In some interviews, it would be to your advantage to get the source on
neutral territory. If you have some questions for the university provost
or a public official, suggest meeting in a coffee shop at a quiet time.
A person feels more powerful in his or her official surroundings.
It is important, too, to let the source know how much time you need and
whether you expect to return for further information. And if you don't
already know how the source might react to a tape recorder, ask when you
are making the appointment.
You have now done the appropriate homework. You are properly attired.
You have made an appointment and told the source how much
 

Page 49
This reporter dresses to fit in with the marchers he is interviewing; he
gains their confidence by being friendly and attentive.
time you need. Before you leave, you should write down a list of
questions you want to ask. The best way to encourage a spontaneous
conversation is to have your questions prepared. With your questions in
front of you, you'll be more relaxed. Barbara Walters once told a
reporter that she writes as many as 500 questions on index cards, then
selects the best ones for use during the interview.
The thinking you must do to write questions will help prepare you for
the interview. Having questions prepared relieves you of the need to be
mentally searching for the next question as the source is answering the
last one. If you are trying to think of the next question, you will not
be paying close attention to what is being said, and you might miss the
most important part of the interview.
Preparing the questions for an interview is hard work, even for
veterans. If you are writing for your campus newspaper, Web site or
television station, seek suggestions from other staff members. You will
find ideas in previous stories and your newspaper's or station's
electronic
 
Page 50
database. If you anticipate a troublesome interview with the chancellor,
you might want to seek advice from faculty members, too. What questions
would they ask if they were you? Often, they have more background
knowledge, or they might have heard some of the faculty talk around
campus. Staff members are also valuable sources of information.
Although you may ask all of your prepared questions in some interviews,
in most you probably will use only some of them. Still, you will have
benefited from preparing the questions in two important ways. First,
even when you don't use many, the work you did thinking of the questions
helped prepare you for the interview. Second, sources who see that you
have a prepared list often are impressed with your seriousness.
On the basis of the information you have gathered already, you know what
you want to ask. Now you must be careful about how you ask the
questions.
PHRASING QUESTIONS
A young monk who asked his superior if he could smoke while he prayed
was rebuked sharply. A friend advised him to rephrase the question. "Ask
him if you can pray while you smoke," he said. The young monk was
discovering that how questions are structured often determines the
answer. Journalists face the same challenge. Reporters have missed many
stories because they didn't know how to ask questions. Quantitative
researchers have shown how just a slight wording change can affect the
results of a survey. If you want to know whether citizens favor a city
plan to beautify the downtown area, you can ask the question in several
ways:
 Do you favor the city council's plan to beautify the downtown area?
│ The city council plans to spend $3 million beautifying the downtown
area. Are you in favor of this?
│ Do you think the downtown area needs physical changes?
│ Which of the following actions do you favor?
│ Building a traffic loop around the downtown area.
│ Prohibiting all automobile traffic in an area bounded by Providence
Road, Ash Street, College Avenue and Elm Street.
│ Having all the downtown storefronts remodeled to carry out a single
theme and putting in brick streets, shrubbery and benches.
│ None of the above.
How you structure the question may affect the survey results by several
percentage points. Similarly, how you ask questions in an interview may
affect the response.
By the phrasing of the question, many reporters signal the response they
expect or the prejudices they hold. For instance, a
 
Page 51
reporter who says, "Don't you think that the city council should
allocate more money to the parks and recreation department?" is not only
asking a question but also influencing the source or betraying a bias. A
neutral phrasing would be, "Do you think the city council should
allocate more money to the parks and recreation department?" Another
common way of asking a leading question is this: "Are you going to vote
against this amendment like the other legislators I've talked to?"
If you have watched journalists interviewing people live on television,
you have seen many examples of badly phrased questions. Many times they
are not questions at all. The interviewers make statements and then put
the microphone in front of the source: "You had a great game, Bill";
"Winning the election must be a great feeling." The source is expected
to say something. What, precisely, do you want to know?
Sometimes a reporter unwittingly blocks a response by the phrasing of
the question. A reporter who was investigating possible job
discrimination against women conducted several interviews before she
told her city editor she didn't think the women with whom she talked
were being frank with her. "When I ask them if they have ever been
discriminated against, they always tell me no. But three times now
during the course of the interviews, they have said things that indicate
they have been. How do I get them to tell me about it?" she asks.
"Perhaps it's the way you are asking the question," the city editor
replied. "When you ask someone whether they have ever been discriminated
against, you are forcing them to answer yes or no. Don't be so blunt.
Ask them if others with the same qualifications at work have advanced
faster than they have. Ask if they are paid the same amount as men for
the same work. Ask them what they think they would be doing today if
they were male. Ask them if they know of any qualified women who were
denied jobs."
The city editor was giving the reporter examples of both closed-and
open-ended questions. Each has its specific strengths.
Open-Ended Questions
Open-ended questions allow the respondent some flexibility. Women may
not respond frankly when asked whether they have ever been discriminated
against. The question calls for a yes-no response. But an open-ended
question such as "What would you be doing today if you were a man?" is
not so personal. It does not sound as threatening to the respondent. In
response to an open-ended question, the source often reveals more than
he or she realizes or intends to.
A sportswriter who was interviewing a pro scout at a college football
game wanted to know whom the scout was there to see. When the scout
declined diplomatically to be specific, the reporter tried another
approach. He asked a series of questions:
 
Page 52

 "What kind of qualities does a pro scout look for in an athlete?"  "Do
you think any of the players here today have those talents?" │ "Who
would you put into that category?"
The reporter worked from the general to the specific until he had the
information he wanted. Open-ended questions are less direct and less
threatening than questions calling for yes-no or other specific
responses. They are more exploratory and more flexible. However, if you
want to know a person's biographical data, don't ask "Can you tell me
about yourself?"
Closed-Ended Questions
Eventually the reporter needs to close in on a subject, to pin down
details, to get the respondent to be specific. Closed-ended questions
are designed to elicit specific responses.
Instead of asking the mayor, "What did you think of the conference in
Washington, D.C.?" you ask, "What did you learn in the session 'Funds
You May Not Know Are Available'?" Instead of asking a previous employee
to appraise the chancellor-designate's managerial abilities, you ask,
"How well does she listen to the people who work for her?" "Do the
people who work for her have specific job duties?" "Does she explain her
decisions?"
A vague question invites a vague answer. By asking a specific question,
you are more likely to get a specific answer. You are also communicating
to your source that you have done your homework and that you are looking
for precise details.
Knowing exactly when to ask a closed-ended question or when to be less
specific is not something you can plan ahead of time. The type of
information you are seeking and the chemistry between the interviewer
and the source are the determining factors. You must make on-the-spot
decisions. The important thing is to keep rephrasing the question until
the source answers it adequately. Gary Smith wrote in Intimate
Journalism, "A lot of my reporting comes from asking a question three
different ways. Sometimes the third go at it is what produces the
nugget, but even if the answers aren't wonderful or the quotes usable,
they can still confirm or correct my impressions."
ESTABLISHING RAPPORT
Tad Bartimus, former AP reporter, has interviewed hundreds of people,
beginning with former President Harry S. Truman while working for her
hometown weekly at age 14, She approached the ex-president and said,
"Excuse me, sir, but I'm from the local paper. Could you please talk to
me?" "I try never to go to an interview as a hostile antagonist. I am
merely a reporter asking questions, with no ax to grind. I am a person
with a family, a home, an unbalanced checkbook, a weight problem and a
car that goes 'thonka-thonka-thonka' when it's cold. Unless my interview
subject is Ivana Trump or Meryl Streep or Richard Nixon, my life is
probably, at least in one way or two ways, similar to the person of whom
I'm asking the questions."
- Tad Bartimus,
former AP regional reporter
 
Page 53
"Well, young lady, what would you like to know?" Truman responded.
Years later, Bartimus recalled, "For the first time in my life, I was
struck dumb. What did I want to know? What was I supposed to ask him?
How do you do this interviewing stuff, anyway?"
Bartimus knows the answers to these questions now. One piece of advice
she offered her colleagues in an article for AP World was to share and
care. Bartimus urges reporters to reveal themselves as people. "A little
empathy goes a long way to defuse (the) fear and hostility that is so
pervasive against the press," she says.
Rapport-the relationship between the reporter and the source-is crucial
to the success of the interview. The relationship is sometimes relaxed,
sometimes strained. Often it is somewhere in between. The type of
relationship you try to establish with your source is determined by the
kind of story you are doing. Several approaches are possible.
Interview Approaches
For most news stories and personality profiles, the reporter benefits if
the subject is at ease. Often that can be accomplished by starting off
with small talk. Ask about a trophy, the plants or an engraved pen.
Bring up something humorous you found during your research. Ask about
something you know the source will want to talk about. If you think the
subject might be skeptical about your knowledge of the field, open with
a question that demonstrates your knowledge.

CNN talk-show host Larry King interviews journalist Bob Woodward of The
Washington Post.
 
Page 54
Reporters who can show sources what they have in common also have more
success getting information. When the late Janet Chusmir was a reporter
for The Miami Herald, she was among a group of reporters who showed up
expecting to witness kidnappers returning a mother's child. The
kidnappers never showed up. The police slipped the mother into the back
seat of a police car and edged through the crowd. As the car went by
her, Chusmir tapped on the window. The mother rolled it down slightly.
"I hope you find your child," Chusmir said. The woman told her to call.
Chusmir did and got an exclusive story.
One of the mistakes reporters make is not being empathetic, Chusmir
said. "I genuinely feel for these people. I think sources can sense
that."
Rapport also depends on where you conduct the interview. Many people,
especially those unaccustomed to being interviewed, feel more
comfortable in their workplace. Go to them. Talk to the business person
in the office, to the athlete in the locker room, to the conductor in
the concert hall. In some cases, though, you may get a better interview
elsewhere if the source cannot relax at the workplace or is frequently
interrupted. Reporters have talked to politicians during car rides
between campaign appearances. They've gone sailing with business people
and hunting with athletes. One student reporter doing a feature on a
police chief spent a weekend with the chief, who was painting his home.
To do a profile, which requires more than one interview, vary the
location. New surroundings can make a difference.
Scott Kraft of the Associated Press once did a story on a couple who for
more than two years drove the streets of Los Angeles looking for the man
who had raped their 12-year-old daughter. The search was successful.
"When I knocked on their door in May, I wanted them to know that I would
be careful and honest, and I wanted them to tell me everything, even
though it would probably be difficult," he wrote in Editor & Publisher.
Kraft conducted interviews in three locations. The first was in the
family's living room. The second was in a car as they revisited the
places where the family had searched. The third was by phone. Kraft said
the mother talked more candidly on the phone after her children had gone
to school.
There are times when the reporter would rather have the source edgy,
nervous or even scared. When you are doing an investigation, you may
want the key characters to feel uneasy. You may pretend you know more
than you actually do. You want them to know that the material you have
is substantive and serious. Seymour Hersh, a Pulitzer Prize-winning
investigative reporter, uses this tactic. Time
 
Page 55
magazine once quoted a government official commenting on Hersh: "He
wheedles, cajoles, pleads, threatens, asks a leading question, uses
little tidbits as if he knew the whole story. When he finishes you feel
like a wet rag."
In some cases, however, it is better even in an investigation to take a
low-key approach. Let the source relax. Talk around the subject, but
gradually bring the discussion to the key issues. The surprise element
may work to your advantage.
So may the sympathetic approach. When the source is speaking, you may
nod or punctuate the source's responses with comments such as "That's
interesting." Sources who think you are sympathetic are more likely to
volunteer information. Researchers have found, for instance, that a
simple "mm-hmmm" affects the length of the answer interviewers get.
Other Practical Considerations
Where you sit in relation to the person you are interviewing can be
important. Unless you deliberately are trying to make those interviewed
feel uncomfortable, do not sit directly in front of them. Permit your
sources to establish eye contact if and when they wish.
Some people are even more disturbed by the way a reporter takes notes. A
tape recorder ensures accuracy of quotes, but it makes many speakers
self-conscious or nervous. If you have permission to use a tape
recorder, place it in an inconspicuous spot and ignore it except to make
sure it is working properly. Taking notes, whether by pad and pen or
electronically, may interfere with your ability to digest what is being
said. But not taking any notes at all is risky. Only a few reporters can
leave an interview and accurately write down what was said. Certainly no
one can do it and reproduce direct quotes verbatim. You should learn
shorthand or develop a note-taking system of your own.
ENSURING ACCURACY
Accuracy is a major problem in all interviews. Both the question and the
answer may be ambiguous. You may not understand what is said. You may
record it incorrectly. You may not know the context of the remarks. Your
biases may interfere with the message.
Knowing the background of your sources, having a comfortable
relationship with them and keeping good notes are important elements of
accuracy. All those were missing when a journalism student, two weeks
into an internship at a major daily, interviewed the public information
officer for a sheriff's department about criminal
 
Page 56
activity in and around a shelter for battered women. The reporter had
never met the source, whom she interviewed by phone. She took notes on
her interview with the deputy and others in whatever notebook happened
to be nearby. She didn't record the time, date or even the source. There
were no notes showing context, just fragments of quotes, scrawled in
nearly illegible handwriting.
After the story was published, the developer of the shelter sued.
Questioned by attorneys, the deputy swore that the reporter
misunderstood him and used some of his comments out of context. In
several cases, he contended, she completed her fragmentary notes by
putting her own words in his mouth. He testified that most reporters
come to see him to get acquainted. Many call back to check his quotes on
sensitive or complex stories. She did neither.
When the court ordered the reporter to produce and explain her notes,
she had trouble reconstructing them. She had to admit on several
occasions that she wasn't sure what the fragments meant.
The accuracy of your story is only as good as your notes. David Finkel,
whose story on a family's TV-watching habits became a Pulitzer Prize
finalist, took extra steps to be certain his material was accurate.
Observing what his subject was watching, he obtained transcripts of the
shows so he could quote accurately from them. If he knew transcripts
would not be available, he set his tape recorder near the television to
record the program.
Some possibilities for making errors or introducing bias are
unavoidable, but others are not. To ensure the most accurate and
complete reporting possible, you should use all the techniques available
to obtain a good interview, including observing, understanding what you
hear and asking follow-up questions. Let's examine these and other
techniques.
"Today one has the impression that the interviewer is not listening to
what you say, nor does he think it important, because he believes that
the tape recorder hears everything. But he's wrong; it doesn't hear the
beating of the heart, which is the most important part of the
interview."
- Gabriel Garcia Marquez,
Colombian writer and Nobel laureate
Observing
Wright Thompson says, "It's all about the scenes. Don't just ask
questions. Be an observer." Like any good writer, he offers an example
to show what he means:
I was doing a story about former Heisman Trophy winner Eric Crouch. It
was almost exactly one year since he'd won the trophy, and that year had
been tough for him. He'd quit pro football and had been forced to ask
some hard questions about his life. As we sat in an Omaha bar, a clip of
him running the football came on the television. One of the women at the
table said, "You're on TV, Eric." I remember he looked up at the screen
and spat, "That's not me, man." Then he took a shot of liquor. No amount
of interviewing could breathe life into the idea that he had changed
like that scene.
 
Page 57
Asking Follow-Up Questions
If you understand what the source is saying, you can ask meaningful
follow-up questions. There is nothing worse than briefing your city
editor or executive producer on the interview and having the editor ask
you, "Well, did you ask. . . ? " Having to say no is embarrassing.
Even if you go into an interview armed with a list of questions, the
most important probably will be the ones you ask in response to an
answer. A reporter who was doing a story on bidding procedures was
interviewing the mayor. The reporter asked how bid specifications were
written. In the course of his reply, the mayor mentioned that the
president of a construction firm had assured him the last bid
specifications were adequate. The alert reporter picked up on the
statement:
"When did you talk to him?"
"About three weeks ago," the mayor said.
"That's before the specifications were published, wasn't it?"
"Yes, we asked him to look them over for us."
"Did he find anything wrong with the way they were written?"
"Oh, he changed a few minor things. Nothing important."
"Did officials of any other construction firms see the bid
specifications before they were advertised?"
"No, he was the only one."
Gradually, on the basis of one offhand comment by the mayor, the
reporter was able to piece together a solid story on the questionable
relationship between the city and the construction firm.
Reporters should do research after an interview to ascertain specific
figures when a source provides an estimate. For example, if a shop owner
says he runs one of 20 pizza parlors in town, check with the city
business-license office to get the exact number.
Other Techniques
Although most questions are designed to get information, some are asked
as a delaying tactic. A reporter who is taking notes may fall behind.
Emily Yoffe, a senior editor of Texas Monthly, will say, "Hold on a
second-let me get that" or "Say that again." Other questions are
intended to encourage a longer response. "Go on with that" or "Tell me
more about that" encourages the speaker to add more detail.
You don't have to be stalling for time to say you don't understand.
Don't be embarrassed to admit you haven't grasped something. It is
better to admit to one person you don't understand than to advertise
your ignorance in newsprint or on the Internet in front of millions.
Another device for making the source talk on is not a question at all;
it is a pause. You are signaling the source that you expect more. But
the lack of a response from you is much more ambiguous than "Tell me
more about that." It may indicate that you were skeptical of what
 
Page 58
Interviewing Checklist
I. Before the interview
A. ; Know the subject
1. Seek specific information j 2. Research the subject I 3. List the
questions
B. i Know the person
1. Know salient biographical information
2. Know the person's expertise regarding subject matter
C. Set up the interview
1. Set the time
a. At interviewee's convenience-but suggest a time     b. Length of time
needed c. Possible return visits
2. Set the place
a. Interviewee's turf, or
b. Neutral turf
D. | Discuss arrangements
 1. Will you bring a tape recorder?  2. Will you bring a photographer? │
3. Will you let interviewee check accuracy of quotes?
II. Dijring the interview :
A. ' When you arrive ;
t. Control the seating arrangement
2. Place tape recorder at optimum spot
 3. Warm up person briefly with small talk 4. Set the ground rules
a. Put everything on the record
b. Make everything attributable
B.  The interview itself
 1. Use good interviewing techniques
a. Ask open-ended questions
b. Allow the person to think and to speak; pause
c. Don't be threatening in voice or manner     d. Control the flow but
be flexible
 2. Take good notes
a. Be unobtrusive
b. Be thorough
3. Use the tape recorder
a. Assume it's riot working
b. Note digital counter at important parts
C. Before you leave
1. Ask if there's anything interviewee wants to say ,2. Check
facts-spellings, dates, statistics, quotes 3. Set time for rechecking
facts, quotes  4. Discuss when and where interview might appear  5. Ask
if interviewee wants extra copies III. After the interview
A.  Organize your notes-immediately
B. Craft a proper lead
C. Write a coherent story
D. Check accuracy with interviewee
 
Page 59
was just said, that you didn't understand, that the answer was
inadequate or several other possibilities. The source will be forced to
react. The only problem with this, says AP special correspondent Saul
Pett, "is that it invites the dull to be dull at greater length."
Many dull interviews become interesting after they end. There are two
things you should always do when you finish your questions: Check key
facts, figures and quotes and then put away your pen but keep your ears
open. You are not breaching any ethical rule if you continue to ask
questions after you have put away your pen or turned off the tape
recorder. That's when some sources loosen up.
Before you leave, ask if there's anything you forgot to ask. Put the
burden on the source. You are also doing your subject a favor by giving
the person a chance to contribute to the direction of the interview. You
may have missed some important signals during the conversation, and now
the source can be more explicit about what he or she wanted to say.
Sometimes this technique leads to entirely new subjects.
Quickly review your notes and check facts, especially dates, numbers,
quotes, spellings and titles. Besides helping you get it right, it shows
the source you are careful. If necessary, arrange a time when you can
call to check other parts of the story or clear up questions you may
have as you are writing. Researchers have found that more than half of
direct quotations are inaccurate, even when the interview is
tape-recorded. That reflects a sloppiness that is unacceptable. Make
sure you are the exception.
As a matter of courtesy, tell the source when the story might appear.
You may even offer to send along an extra copy of the article or tape of
the broadcast when it's completed.
Remember that although the interview may be over, your relationship with
the source is not. When you have the story written, call the source and
confirm the information. Better to discover your inaccuracies before
they are published than after.
WHAT TO QUOTE DIRECTLY
Crisp, succinct, meaningful quotes spice up any story. But you can
overdo a good thing. You need direct quotes in your stories, but you
also need to develop skill in recognizing what is worth quoting. Let's
look at the basic guidelines.
Unique Material
When you can say, "Ah, I never heard that before," you can be quite sure
your readers also would like to know exactly what the speaker said.
Instead of quoting someone at length, look for the kernel. Sometimes it
Use direct quotes when
│ Someone says something unique.
I Someone says something uniquely.
│ Someone important says something important.
 
Page 60
is something surprising, something neither you nor your readers would
expect that person to say. For example, when Pat Williams, then general
manager of the Orlando Magic, spoke about the team's bad record, he
said: "We can't win at home. We can't win on the road. As general
manager, I just can't figure out where else to play." When singer Dolly
Parton was asked how she felt about dumb-blond jokes, she replied: "I'm
not offended at all because I know I'm not a dumb blond. I also know I'm
not a blond." Striking statements like these should be quoted, but there
is no reason to place simple, factual material inside quotation marks.
A direct quotation should say something significant. Also, a direct
quotation should not simply repeat what has been said indirectly. It
should move the story forward. Here's a passage from a USA Today story
about a proposed law that would bar health-insurance companies,
employers and managed-care plans from discriminating against people
because of their genetic makeup:
Fear of insurance discrimination based on the results of genetic tests
has been on the rise for years. "It stops many people
cold from getting tested," says Karen Clarke, a genetic counselor at
Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.
The quotation is useful, it is informative, and it moves the story
forward.
Sometimes spoken material is unique not because of individual remarks
that are surprising or new, but because of extended dialogue that can
tell the story more effectively than writers can in their own words. The
writer of the following story made excellent use of dialogue:
Lou
Provancha pushed wire-rimmed glasses up
his on his
nose and leaned toward the man in the wheelchair.
"What is today, Jake?" he asked.
Jake twisted slightly and stared at the floor.
"Jake," Provancha said, "Jake, look up here."
A long silence filled the tiny, cluttered room on the sixth floor of the
University Medical Center.
Provancha, a licensed practical nurse at the hospital, glanced at the
reporter. "Jake was in a
coma a week ago," he explained. "He couldn't talk."
Provancha pointed to a wooden board propped up on the table beside him.
"Jake, what is today? What does it say here? What is this word? I've got
my finger pointed right at it."
Jake squinted at the word. With a sudden effort, like a man heaving a
bag of cement mix onto a truck bed, he said, "Tuesday,"
Provancha grinned. It was a small victory for them both.
He said, she said: Punctuating direct quotations
"Always put the comma inside quotation marks," she said. Then she added,
"The same goes for the period."
"Does the same rule apply for the question mark?" he asked.
"Only if the entire statement is a question, " she replied, "and never
add a comma after a question mark. Also, be sure to lowercase the first
word of a continuing quote that follows an attribution and a comma.
"However, you must capitalize the first word of a new sentence after an
attribution," she continued. "Do not forget to open and close the
sentence with quotation marks."
"Why are there no quotation marks after the word 'comma' at the end of
the third paragraph?" he asked.
"Because the same person is speaking at the beginning of the next
paragraph," she said. "Notice that the new paragraph does open with
quotation marks. Note, too, that a quote inside of a
 
Page 61
quotation needs a single quotation mark, as around the word 'comma'
above."
The Unique Expression
When looking for quotable expressions, be on the lookout for the clever,
the colorful, the colloquial. For example, an elderly man talking about
his organic garden said, "It's hard to tell people to watch what they
eat. You eat health, you know."
A professor lecturing on graphic design said, "When you think it looks
like a mistake, it is." The same professor once was explaining that
elements in a design should not call attention to themselves: "You don't
walk up to a beautiful painting in someone's home and say, 'That's a
beautiful frame.'"
A computer trainer said to a reporter: "Teaching kids computers is like
leading ducks to water. But teaching adults computers is like trying to
teach chickens to swim."
Sometimes something said uniquely is a colloquialism. Colloquialisms can
add color and life to your copy. For example, a person from Louisiana
may say: "I was just fixing to leave when the phone rang." A person from
certain parts of Pennsylvania "makes the light out" when turning off the
lights. And people in and around Fort Wayne, Ind., "redd up" the dishes
after a meal, meaning that they wash them and put them where they
belong.
Important Quotes by Important People
If citizen Joe Smith says, "Something must be done about this teachers'
strike," you may or may not consider it worth quoting. But if the mayor
says, "Something must be done about this teachers' strike," many papers
would print the quote. Generally reporters quote public officials or
known personalities in their news stories (though not everything the
famous say is worth quoting]. Remember, prominence is an important
property of news.
Quoting sources that readers are likely to know lends authority,
credibility and interest to your story. Presumably, a meteorologist
knows something about the weather, a doctor about health, a chemistry
professor about chemicals. However, it is unlikely that a television
star knows a great deal about cameras, even if he or she makes
commercials about cameras.
QUOTING ACCURATELY
The first obligation of any reporter is to be accurate. Before there can
be any discussion of whether or how to use direct quotations, you must
learn to get the exact words of the source.
 

Page 62
The first priority of any reporter is accuracy.
It's not easy.
Scribbled notes from interviews, press conferences and meetings are
often difficult to decipher and interpret. A study by Adrienne Leher, a
professor of linguistics at the University of Arizona, found only 13 of
98 quotations taken from Arizona newspapers proved to be verbatim when
compared to recordings. Only twice, however, were the nonverbatim quotes
considered "incompatible with what was intended."
A column by Bill Hosokawa of the Rocky Mountain News notes the following
examples of changes in a quotation from former Denver Bronco quarterback
John Elway:
Rocky Mountain "We came out of the gate slow. I said, 'Hey, come on,
News man, we've got to get going here. . . . You're going to be
attending my funeral if you don't.'"
 
Page 63
The Denver Post "I just said, 'Hey, come on man. We gotta get going
here. . . . We gotta put some points on the board. You're going to be
attending my funeral if you don't.'"
A second Post story "In case you didn't notice it, we really came out of
the blocks slow. I just said, 'Hey, come on, let's get going. You're
going to attend my funeral if you don't.'"
Does it matter whether Elway said they were slow coming out of the gate
or out of the blocks? Perhaps not. But one thing's for sure, he said one
or the other. One is correct; the other is not.
Your passion for accuracy should compel you to get and record the exact
words. Only then can you decide which words to put between quotation
marks.
"When you see yourself quoted in print and you're sorry you said it, it
suddenly becomes a misquotation."
- Dr. Laurence J. Peter, author of Peter's Quotations and The Peter
Principle
Verification
When someone important says something important but perhaps false, just
putting the material in quotes does not relieve you of responsibility
for the inaccuracies. Citizens, officials and candidates for office
often say things that may be partially true or altogether untrue and
perhaps even libelous. Quotations, like any other information you
gather, need verification.
During Sen. Joseph McCarthy's investigations into communism and
espionage in the 1950s, many newspapers, in the interest of strict
objectivity, day after day quoted the Wisconsin senator's charges and
countercharges. Some publishers did this because they agreed with his
stance and because his remarks sold newspapers. Few papers thought it
was their responsibility to quote others who were pointing out the
obvious errors and inconsistencies in the demagogue's remarks. Today,
however, in the interest of balance, fairness and objectivity, many
media sources leave out, correct or point out the errors in some
quotations. This may be done in the piece itself or in an accompanying
story.
If candidate Billy Joe Harkness says that his opponent Jimbo McGown is a
member of the Ku Klux Klan, you should check before you print the
charge. Good reporters don't stop looking and checking just because
someone gives them some information. Look for yourself. Prisoners may
have an altogether different account of a riot from the one the prison
officials give you. Your story will not be complete unless you talk to
all sides.
Correcting Quotes
When do you, or should you, correct grammatical errors in a direct
quotation? Should you expect people in news conferences or during
informal interviews to speak perfect English? Journalists of an earlier
 
Page 64
generation routinely corrected the garbled syntax used in news
conferences by President Dwight Eisenhower. Today changed standards and
live television have made President George W. Bush's adventures with the
language common knowledge.
Although quotation marks mean you are capturing the exact language of a
speaker, it is accepted practice in many news rooms to correct mistakes
in grammar and to convey a person's remarks in complete sentences. None
of us speaks regularly in perfect, grammatical sentences. But if we were
writing down our remarks instead, presumably we would write in
grammatically correct English.
Reporters and editors differ widely on when or even whether to do this.
A reporter for the Rocky Mountain News quoted an attorney as saying,
"Her and John gave each other things they needed and couldn't get
anyplace else." The reporter said the quote was accurate but, on second
thought, agreed it might have been better to correct the grammar in the
written account.
Most papers have no written policy on correcting grammatical errors in
direct quotations. Because so many variables are involved, these matters
are handled on a case-by-case basis. Some argue you should sacrifice a
bit of accuracy in the interest of promoting proper English. However,
some would let public figures be embarrassed by quoting them using
incorrect grammar.
Columnist James Kilpatrick asks, "When we put a statement (of a public
figure) in direct quotation marks, must it be exactly what was said? My
own answer is yes. On any issue of critical substance, we ought not to
alter a single word." Yet, on another matter in a different column,
Kilpatrick writes, "It is all very well to tidy up a subject's syntax
(italics added) and to eliminate the ahs, ers and you-knows, but direct
quotation marks are a reporter's iron-clad, honor-bound guarantee that
something was actually said."
At times it may be necessary to illustrate a person's flawed use of
language. In some cases, you may wish to use the word "sic" in
parentheses to note the error, misuse or peculiarity of the quotation.
"Sic," Latin for "thus," indicates that a statement was originally
spoken or written exactly as quoted. It is particularly important to use
"sic" for improper or unusual use of language when you are quoting a
written source.
And if you think there is some agreement on the subject of correcting
grammar in direct quotations, read what The Associated Press Stylebook
and Briefing on Media Law (2002) says:
Never alter quotations even to correct minor grammatical errors or word
usage. Casual minor tongue slips may be removed by using ellipses but
even that should be done with extreme caution. If there is a question
about a quote, either don't use it or ask the speaker to clarify.
 
Page 65
Correcting quotations is even more difficult for radio and television
reporters. That's why they don't worry about it as much. Online and
print writers and editors might remember that the quotation they use may
have been heard by millions of people on radio or television. Changing
the quote even slightly might make viewers and listeners question the
credibility of print and online reports. They might also ask why print
and online writers feel the need to act as press agents who wish to make
their subjects look good.
That applies to celebrities of all kinds, but it might also apply to
registered political candidates and elected officials. At least, some
argue, news agencies should have some consistency. If a reporter quotes
a farmer using incorrect grammar, then should the same be done for the
mayor or for a college professor?
A letter in The Washington Post criticized the newspaper for quoting
exactly a mother of 14 children who was annoyed at then Mayor Marion
Barry's advice to stop having babies. The quote read: "And your job is
to open up all those houses that's boarded up." The writer then accused
the Post of regularly stringing together quotes of the president to make
him appear articulate. The writer concluded: "I don't care whether the
Post polishes quotes or not. I simply think that everyone-black or
white, rich or poor, president or welfare mother-deserves equal
treatment."
That's good advice.
Suggested Readings
Biagi, Shirley. Interviews That Work. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1992.
A complete guide to interviewing techniques. The instruction is
interspersed with interviews of journalists describing their techniques.
Burgoon, Judee K. and Saine, Thomas J. The Unspoken Dialogue: An
Introduction to Nonverbal Communication. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1978.
An excellent look at the subject for readers who are not acquainted with
the field.
Germer, Fawn. "Are Quotes Sacred?" American Journalism ReiHew, Sept.
1995, pp. 34-37. Many views of all sides of whether and when to change
quotes.
Gottlieb, Martin. "Dangerous Liaisons." Columbia Journalism Review,
July/Aug. 1989, pp. 21-35. In this excellent debate over whether
interviewers betray sources, Gottlieb interviews several authors.
Harrington, Walt. American Profiles. Columbia, Mo.: University of
Missouri Press, 1992. Fifteen excellent profiles and the author's
explanation of how and why he does what he does.
Malcolm, Janet. The Journalist and the Murderer. New York: Knopf 1990.
Using the Joe McGinnis-Jeffrey MacDonald case, the author accuses all
journalists of being "confidence men" who betray their sources.
Metzler, Ken. The Writer's Guide to Gathering Information by Asking
Questions, Third Edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. An invaluable
in-depth look at problems of interviewing.
Weinberg, Steve. "Thou Shalt Not Concoct Thy Quote." Fineline, July/Aug.
1991, pp. 3-4. Presents reasons for allowing sources to review
quotations before publication.
 
Suggested Web Sites
www.poynter.org
We send you to this extremely useful site repeatedly. This time, go to
the "Resource Center" section, and check out the bibliography of
articles, both scholarly and professional, and books on interviewing.
Print, television and online are all included.
www.newslab.org
This site is an excellent source of tips on television. NewsLab works
with television news rooms to find better ways of telling complex
stories.
E x e
1. Learn to gather background on your sources. Write a memo of up to two
pages about your state's senior U.S. senator. Concentrate on those
details that will allow you to focus on how the senator views the
pro-life versus pro-choice issue. Indicate the sources of your
information. Do an Internet search on the senator.
2. List five open-ended questions you would ask the senator.
3. List five closed-ended questions you would ask the senator.
4. Interview a student also enrolled in this reporting class. Write a
two- to three-page story. Be sure to focus on one aspect of the
student's life.
www.cjr.org
This is the site of the Columbia Journalism Review. Go to the "Search"
function and enter "Interviewing." You'll get a list of articles you can
then scan.
www.ajr.org
This is the site of the American Journalism Review. Follow the same
procedure as for CJR, above. In both cases, you'll find a variety of
references.
Ask your classmate to read the story and to mark errors of fact and
perception. The instructor will read your story and the critique.
Using the resources suggested above and any others you can find, do a
database search for articles about journalists' use of anonymous
sources. Write a short report on your findings.
Attend a meeting, a press conference or a speech, and tape-record it.
While there, write down the quotes you would use if you were writing the
story for your local news source. Then listen to the tape, and check the
accuracy of the quotes. What do you learn?

Sincerely,
Bridgit Kuenning-Pollpeter
Read my blog at:
http://blogs.livewellnebraska.com/author/bpollpeter/
 
"History is not what happened; history is what was written down."
The Expected One- Kathleen McGowan

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:29:50 -0700
From: "Dana Ard" <danalynard at q.com>
To: <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
Subject: [Nfb-editors] question on how to handle quoted material in an
	interview
Message-ID: <ACEPLANIEDDBLHPBFAEKOEFBCCAA.danalynard at q.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

I am Dana Ard from Idaho. I am our newsletter editor, and probably know
some of you on this list. My question is this. I recently interviewed an
individual for an artical on retirement. I have several long comments
that this person made, but I don't have exact word for word quotes. I am
close, since I took down her comments on my pac mate, but I wouldn't say
the words are exact. Is there any way to handle this without saying "she
said that... or some other verbage indicating that this is paraphrased.
I'd like to be able to treat some of the comments like quotes, but if
they are not exact quotes I probably can't do this. Any suggestions?
Thank you.