Students Encounter Real-Life Interviewing Pitfalls

Photograph by Brandon T. Bisceglia.

It occurred to me during our series of mock interviews that there were a few issues we had yet to talk about that the Publications students might encounter in the course of conducting interviews for their stories.

There were three terms in particular I had frequently heard in my own work for Horizons:

- On the Record: The default condition during an interview in which the source can be named and quoted directly.

- Off the Record: An explanation or side-conversation the source provides for context during an interview but that the source does not expect the journalist to report. Technically, the source cannot mandate information stay off the record, but journalists generally respect this rule as a means of maintaining their source’s trust.

- Not for Attribution: A statement that the journalist can directly quote or report, but without revealing the exact name of the source. Usually the source is identified with a generic title, such as “a senior government official.”

In addition to these terms, students were likely to run into interviewees who would ask to see the article before it was published.

Although the reporter has the discretion to allow others to see her or his work ahead of time, it’s almost always a bad idea – the other party will almost invariably take the opportunity to critique the article or pressure the journalist into conforming to that person’s own agenda.

I talked with Professor Karyn Smith about quickly going over these issues during the class period after I was interviewed by the class. She agreed.

But we were already too late.

One of the students approached us at the end of class and began explaining that she had agreed to send an article to one of her interviewees. The interviewee had caught her in the hallway earlier that day and criticized her choice of quotes.

The student shed tears as she explained how she had been caught entirely off guard by the meeting.

She had a copy of the article with her. I looked at the quotes. They were straightforward and not at all inflammatory.

“Did he say that you had misquoted him, or that you misinterpreted his quotes?”

She answered that he hadn’t said anything was wrong with the quotes – just that he couldn’t understand why she chose the ones she did.

Smith and I attempted to reassure the student. I told her that I saw no reason whatsoever to pull the article from publication, but that we would allow her to make that decision. Smith said she would not penalize the student for pulling it, but both of us urged her not to. In addition, Smith said the interviewee could get in touch with her, the editor-in-chief  or me if he had any further problems.

The student expressed another worry, though – she knew the source and didn’t want to have the awkwardness of the incident hanging over things. I told her that was something she would eventually have to face, no matter what she did about the article. I said she should encourage him to write a letter to the editor in which he could say whatever he liked. We would be thrilled to have more conversation in the paper.

I also explained that, assuming she took proactive steps to repair the relationship, the whole thing would pass faster than she might think.

The pep talk seemed to help. At our next class, I began by explaining the interviewing terms. We segued into a general discussion in which various students related stories of times when sources had asked to see what was written ahead of time.

I didn’t realize it was so pervasive. Several Pub II students said they had given articles to sources to “review” before publication. One said he did it so that he could change quotes if the source didn’t like the ones he used.

That, I explained, was ceding editorial control to the source.

The student who had come to us the previous class now shared her experience with the entire group. Many of the students reacted vociferously. If they hadn’t recognized the danger of sharing their work with sources before, they now saw the potential consequences.

It can be difficult to navigate some of the ethical and procedural challenges involved in being a journalist. The first issue was spent familiarizing the students with the essential process of writing for the paper. Since then, we have begun to tackle the stickier wickets.

Though we cannot cover everything, the staff should be confident in the responsibilities and privileges of working for the press by the time we’re through with them.

My Lips are Sealed

Reporters conduct interviews. They are the bread and butter of the trade.

Unlike the structured job interview, many news interviews involve dealing with taciturn or hostile people. Some interviews must be conducted on the fly, in the few moments you have before the interviewee rushes off. Even scheduled sit-down interviews can be troublesome; not everyone is forthcoming or knows how to articulate effectively.

Reporters have to learn to navigate all these circumstances and more if they're going to get the story.

We have been hosting mock interviews in class over the last few weeks to get the students talking about common problems they might encounter. Professor Karyn Smith served as the interviewee first. Editor-in-Chief Dave Weidenfeller went second.

Then it was my turn to sit in the hot seat.

Smith asked me ahead of time to be as reticent as I could, and I took that challenge to heart. I began by giving the students as vague a premise for the interview as I could.

“I was a student here at HCC. Then I transferred to UNH. Now I'm back here helping out in this class. Go wherever you want with that.”

The students tried hard to give me worthwhile questions. I shot most of them down.

One student asked why I thought it was better to go to HCC and transfer, rather than going straight to a four-year school.

“I don't know,” I said. “I haven't had the other experience.”

Another student asked what I liked most about journalism. On that question, I gave a little ground.

“The thing I like most is being able to talk to all different kinds of people and learn about them,” I said.

“But why journalism in particular?” he replied. “You could have been a historian and done the same thing.”

“That's true,” I answered, “and I might like that just as much. I can't say. This is what I enjoy.”

At one point, a student asked me if I had always wanted to be a journalist.

No, I answered.

At that point, Smith chimed in, explaining that this was the perfect opportunity for a follow-up question. “You've just discovered something about him,” she said.

Although the students were able to extract some information from me, no one was able to get a clear story before we ran out of time. I felt I had done my job as someone with nothing to say.

One thing I did notice: most of the questions focused on my analysis of the journalism profession and my experiences reporting. That was heartening. It seemed the students really wanted to know more about what it was like to be a journalist.

That, at least, means they're interested.

The Archive

The cover of the first-ever issue of HCC's student-run newspaper. The paper had no name at the time. It was published Oct. 11, 1967.

Photograph by Brandon T. Bisceglia. Documents courtesy of Esther Watstein.

Housatonic Community College has been around for nearly 50 years, but is only now beginning to take care of its own history.

Early on in my student career at Horizons, I asked adviser Steve Mark if he knew what year the paper had started. I wanted to put a nod to the paper’s history on the masthead of every issue - something simple, such as “Since 1999.”

Mark didn’t know when it had started. No one I asked knew for sure, though it seemed to have been around as long as anyone could recall. I eventually gave up active pursuit of the subject.

The question, though, never left the back of my mind. Part of my curiosity stemmed from my own involvement with the paper. It felt similar to not knowing one’s family history. What legacies was I inheriting? How had we changed, and how had we stayed the same?

By the time I graduated from HCC, I thought the answer would be lost to me for good.

Then one day in early January, Mark and I were discussing the Publications course before he had to leave for India and he mentioned that Esther Watstein, a part-time employee in the president’s office, had been creating an archive for the college. He had heard it included the earliest copies of the student newspaper.

From that moment, I was determined to see that archive, simply to satisfy my own inquisitiveness.

In the meantime, however, other work took precedence. My desire to find the archive was a personal goal, not a professional prerogative.

In late February, though, it took on new relevance. Long-time journalism adviser Robert M. Isaacs died. I found out that he had, in fact, developed the early journalism program, including the newspaper. Editor-in-Chief Dave Weidenfeller asked if I’d be willing to put together a piece for Horizons honoring Isaacs, and I agreed.

I now had a legitimate reason to track the archive down.

Watstein was more than willing to allow me to look through all the information I could find on Isaacs and the newspaper. She has for months been collecting and organizing material collected from around the college into a room full of file drawers. Although she is not a professional archivist, she has been researching the proper way to catalog and care for the documents. She’s the sole person systematically preserving the college’s history.

Inside the archive was a folder containing clippings, pictures, press releases and other informattion from Isaac’s time at HCC. There is also a copy of his first book of poetry, Notes to the Diggers. There are early copies of the college’s literary magazine that Isaacs helped create.

And there are copies of the student newspaper, all the way back to the very first issue, published Oct. 11, 1967.

The paper had no title. Instead, the masthead consisted of two question marks on either side of the college seal. The reports in the paper shed light on the state of the college at the time. One story explains that makeshift offices were strewn across the town of Stratford, with most classes taking place in Bunnell High School. Another article reports on the very first election of members for the Student Council (what later became the Student Senate).

The newspaper was almost immediately embroiled in controversy. The editorial board held a contest to pick a name. “Speak Easy” won. The Student Government objected to the process. In a letter to the editor, then-President Howard Harinstein wrote that the editors should have either held a vote of the entire student body to choose the name or taken the list of names to the executive members of the council so they could choose one on behalf of students. He went further, suggesting that because the funds for the paper were allotted by the Student Government, “it [the Student Council] should be dealt with as your advisory board in many instances.”

The Speak Easy shot back with an editorial of its own:

“We will again state that we will not be advised, oriented, or “deal” with any “advisory boards” in making the policy decisions of our newspaper. We speak to the student body about what is going on in their school. Representing the students is the job for the Student Council and we will, possibly, at times, criticize their decisions.

We will publish freely. We will not be controlled by whether what we say is liked, whether approval is given, or whether faculty advisor, administration, or Student Council disagree with us. The pages of the Speak Easy are always open for responsible comment…. It must be free of pressure and threat in order to be valuable.”

HCC’s student newspaper has gone through numerous incarnations since those heady early days. I’ve spent several hours rifling through the archive, and seen the paper transform over time. It has been a fiery political animal, a docile repository for college events, an artsy culture rag, and a watchdog for malfeasance. The paper is a reflection of prevalent attitudes and concerns throughout the last half-century, as well as a product of the ebb and flow of administration and funding.

The growing archive has made it possible for me to understand the institution that is Housatonic Community College like never before. None of us, after all, exists in a vacuum; we’re part of a historical continuum that sets the starting parameters for our lives.

Watstein told me I was the first person to use her system for research purposes. She hopes others will find it useful. I do too.

Water, with a Grain of Salt

I recently led a short discussion in the Publications class wherein I encouraged the students to think more critically about the sources they find while reporting.

I presented them with a web page called “Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide!” The introduction says:

“Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death.”

The page then lists other deadly attributes of DHMO, and claims the chemical's concentration in the environment is reaching “epidemic proportions.”

After having the students read the text, I asked a simple question: “What's wrong with this source?” I encouraged them to use the Internet to help them figure it out.

One of the editors, recalling similar activities from the previous semester, asked about the web address. She knew that .com generally indicated a private for-profit site, .gov indicated a government site, and so forth.

She was right to check, but I told her that wasn't the problem. “It's an educational institution,” I pointed out, noting the .edu suffix.

Another editor chimed in with part of the answer. “It doesn't give the whole story,” he said. “It's a biased perspective.”

“You're right. Why is it biased?” I asked.

One of the Pub I students raised his hand. “It's biased because it's not telling you what DHMO is,” he said. “It's water.”

He was correct. DHMO is a rarely-used chemical name for water. The arcane terminology has been used since the 1990's as a hoax, a joke, and an educational tool to show people the dangers of uncritically accepting the first thing they read.

“One thing to notice about this website,” I said to the students, “is that everything on it is true. Water does kill a lot of people. But what's missing is the fact that it has many more benefits that far outweigh all the dangers listed here.”

So peaceful…

…and yet so potentially deadly.

Videos by Brandon T. Bisceglia.

 A vital part of being a successful journalist involves fostering a healthy skeptical outlook. The story of DHMO is demonstrative of how failing to vet one's sources can lead to some silly actions. I have written in the past on one of my other blogs about several officials and municipalities that took up a serious – but misled – campaign against the chemical.

The proliferation of online information has, if anything, increased the need for students to think more carefully about their sources. Common wisdom holds that so-called “digital natives” of the youngest generations are web-savvy and better informed. But some recent studies of how students use search tools and think about the material they find suggests that the ease of access has not necessarily translated into better research skills.

In 2010, for instance, researchers at Northwestern University published a study in the International Journal of Communication that showed students' most common method of evaluating the credibility of a website was whether it came up first in a search engine list.  Lead author and associate professor of communication studies Eszter Hargittai said in the university's press release that “a website’s layout or content almost didn’t even matter to the students. What mattered is that it was the number one result on Google."

The Internet can be a great tool, if you know how to use it. I believe that the two most valuable skills students should get from their educational experience are critical thinking and how to research. If you can do those two things, you can pursue any other avenue of knowledge on your own for the rest of your life.

Neither skill is taught as a course, so it is up to us to build those abilities as much as possible through activities like the DHMO discussion. The students will need the skills, not only to be successful reporters, but to become engaged and independent citizens.