ethical question for working journos

[voodoodollsinna]

Hey, I'm a journo student in my final year with a question for print journalists

Comments

[nicwhite86]

I do it frequently and it's never been a problem.

[voodoodollsinna]

thanks for that. i ususally do work in radio so you NEED the quotes directly from the horses mouth to be able to use it.

[nicwhite86]

Also try to develop a good memory for quotes. Often I can remember word for word specific lines or other information I wasn't able to write down fast enough which I can write down after the interview or during a break or when the source is saying something I'm not interested in using. Pausing them for a <8 seconds to finish your notes is ok, but try to avoid it if you're dealing with a heavyweight lest you appear weak, slow, unprepared or inexperienced - you always have to look and sound better, older and more experienced than you actually are

[mswalter]

I can't even remember the last time I recorded an interview, either over the phone or in person. Learning to type or write down accurate quotes is part of training to become a journalist. If you don't feel confident that the quotes are exact (or pretty damned close), then paraphrase, or use the parts of the quote you're sure about and paraphrase the rest.

Also, you might find that typing -- rather than handwriting -- notes during phone interviews is a lot easier. When I'm typing my notes I get probably 99 percent of what the source is saying (unless he or she talks super fast); when I'm handwriting, it's probably more like 75 percent, on a good day.

[otakushan]

I completely agree with the bit about typing versus handwriting. I get almost a complete transcript when I'm typing during a phone interview. I'm waiting for a new laptop to arrive and then when I can, I'll type during live interviews.
Recording is helpful but transcribing the tape is just so damn tedious.

[redlightpress]

I think I owned a recorder once, but I haven't seen in a couple of years. I write for a daily newspaper. My life would be entirely too difficult if I had to record everything. That's what good notetaking is for.

[voodoodollsinna]

wow thats really interesting. The university I attend is one of the best for journalism courses and there is not much of a emphasis on note-taking. They always drill into us to record everything, but it's good to know that is not always nessary.

[otakushan]

I had a professor who would just jot down notes during his interviews and when the subject said something quoteworthy, the prof would say "that was so good I have to write it down, can you repeat it?"
It's a matter of learning to recognize when the subject says something important.

[journalismgirl]

That was how mine was.

Then I went to my first job and my recorder died the second day on the job. My editor (jackass that he was, but was right on this) not-so-gently informed me that I wasn't doing a cover story for Vogue and to get over myself and use pen and paper.

[thespian]

I use Skype for all my interview type calls these days, because it will track things (time, number, etc). However, because I have tinnitus, I use a thing called PowerGramo, which records them for when I miss something because of the ringing. Then I don't just have a recording, but I have it in mp3, which lets me listen to it without anything but the computer and occasionally use it (with permission) for audio and video blogs. Both Skype and PowerGramo are free, though SkypeOut does cost (I paid $15 at the start of the year for a year of unlimited calls in north america, and I have $10 in credit for overseas use).

[wolk_off]

>Has anyone else done this before

Yes, all those involved in about two hundred years of printed journalism before any recording devices were invented.

Speaking seriously, I do record interviews, but there is no problem interviewing people using just plain old note-taking -- it's just convenient to have a record for other purposes (podcasts, with the interviewee's permission, etc.)

[nicwhite86]

I think the point wasn't the not recording thing, but rather using quotes that might not be word for word accurate but still have all the essential elements so the intended meaning is maintained, even if the exact wording was not.

[wolk_off]

I was taught (and did as taught, actually, for 20 years now) that using quotes that might not be word for word accurate but still have all the essential elements so the intended meaning is maintained, even if the exact wording was not, is an even more legitimate technique than keeping original wording intact -- because we as journalists are intended to deliver the meaning first, not the form; the fact of the matter rather the exact protocol; and not every speaker is a Cicero, so keeping the exact wording sometimes can even spoil the meaning, or make it indecipherable for the reader.

[nicwhite86]

That's sound teaching.