Are email interviews ’stilted, over-rehearsed, and evasive’?
Posted by
Martin Stabe
on 24 April 2007 at 16:51
Tags: Journalism, Wired, email, interviews
Jason Calacanis finds it ironic that a journalist from Wired magazine has refused to conduct an interview exclusively via email.
On his blog, the Internet entrepreneur explains the email-interviews-only policy that he and some other high-profile bloggers have adopted, and publishes the email that he sent to the magazine writer:
Frankly, you need to adapt. Journalists have misquoted people for so long–and quoted them out of context that many people like to have their words on record.
I don’t want someone taking half a sentence or paraphrasing me… Just too much risk.
Besides I have 10,000 people come to my blog every day–i don’t need wired to talk to the tech industry.
It may be ironic that a journalist from a tech savvy magazine would eschew email, but there are plenty of good reasons why a journalist would adopt a no-email-interviews policy.
As one commenter on Calacanis’ blog puts it, email interviews tend to be “stilted, over-rehearsed, and evasive”.
For a journalist on deadline, moreover, speed is essential. And unless a source responds immediately with full and and unambiguous answers that require no follow-up, a quick phone call is always a faster way to exchange information than email.
Being written rather than spontaneously spoken, email interviews result in overly formal-sounding quotes. Worst of all, email don’t allow for spur-of-the-moment followups or requests for clarification.
A high-profile blogger’s concern about being misquoted is understandable — but so is a journalist’s concern about having an less-than-ideal interview medium dictated to them.
