Media Training for Scientists Pt 3: Owning the Interview
If you’re a scientist or researcher, chances are that most of your contact with the press with be through answering questions or doing interviews. While some people are better at speaking to the press, only a few enjoy the process.
According to science writer and PIO W. Matthew Shipman from North Carolina State University: “Scientists are often nervous about being interviewed by reporters. This is usually because they are worried that reporters will misrepresent their work or take their quotes out of context.” While there is no standard method to avoid this, scientists can use many different tips to ensure their quotes are represented accurately.
Email or video interview?
Even before an interview is scheduled, many researchers may wonder if an emailed interview (answering questions via email) or a video interview is better. Both have pros and cons, so it’s best to try each method and find which suits you better. As the journalist in the interview, I personally use emailed interviews more heavily than video ones, as this gives the scientist more time to answer my questions (in theory), flexibility in regards to their schedule, and I have everything they say already down in writing.
However, video interviews may include a researcher's real-time thought process, or they may take more time to craft their responses than sending a quick email reply. Like, I said, there are pros and cons for each. If you’re a researcher being interviewed, you can ask the journalist which one they prefer or find which method suits your schedule or style better.
Slow Down
While having a reporter notify you that they want to interview can be exciting, taking your time and preparing for the interview is important instead of just jumping in. Often times this means researching who the reporter is and if they’ve written about similar topics before. This can give you an idea of what sorts of questions they may ask you or what sort of perspective on your work, they may take.
Once you’ve done a bit of preliminary homework, you can respond to the reporter, offering to do an interview if you’re interested. If you’re not interested or don’t have time, declining an interview is OK. As a journalist, I would ask that if you decline an interview, recommend a colleague or fellow expert that could also speak on the topic. This saves the reporter much time trying to find experts for their story if they already have a name or recommendation.
Let’s say you accept the interview. Once the interview logistics are established, it’s important to do a bit more preparation to have a successful interview. Shipman recommends, "Once researchers have done their homework, they should write down the two or three key points they’d like to make about their research, limiting each point to one or two fairly short sentences. These ‘talking points’ will help researchers organize their thoughts and will give them a fallback that they can use during an interview.”
Timing Timing Timing
If you’ve accepted an interview (or will answer questions via email), keep the story’s deadline in mind. Ask the reporter for this deadline, and be sure to have your interview well before this deadline so the journalist isn’t rushed when writing the article (which could increase the chances of quote misrepresentation). If you’re more time-conscious with your journalist, they’ll respect and consider that for any future articles covering similar topics.
Clarify Technical Information
Unless the reporter interviewing you is another expert, there’s little chance the interviewer knows exactly what you’re talking about. This means they will ask some dumb questions, some clarifying questions, and possibly some off-topic questions because they may not understand.
While researchers may be scared that a reporter won’t care about getting the science right, this is far from the truth. “It’s important to note that the reporter does not want to get it wrong,” Shipman adds. “Reporters hate getting facts wrong; they want to convey information correctly. And researchers can help them.”
To ensure the journalist understands your work, it’s important to use accessible language. Explain any complicated terms in simple phrases, or use analogies to define a technical process. When interviewing scientists at JILA, where I’m the PIO, I often ask them to analogize their new study. Or they will often give me an analogy unprompted. This is especially helpful for quantum physics, where all of the processes are happening at scales so minuscule we can’t see anything. Having a scientist explain that they were looking at an “atomic trampoline” or sticking photons in a “quantum corn maze” not only gives me a catchy visual that I’ll refer to later when writing, but it can also break down the technical process into something more understandable. While analogies aren’t exactly what’s happening within the research, they can be incredibly useful in conveying the hard science to a general audience.
Ask for Reiteration
Not only should you use accessible language in your interview, but you can also ask your interviewer to reiterate what you just told them. This is helpful in understanding where they might have misheard or misunderstood your answers. In an email interview, this would take a different form, where an interviewee can ask for their quotes in the context of the document (we’ll talk about quoted material next time). It can seem awkward to ask the reporter to reiterate what you just said, but it ensures a higher success rate of accurately representing your work. Shipman offers the following question as a template for an interview: “I want to make sure I’m doing a good job of explaining this. Could you paraphrase it back to me?” This template question can easily expose where any misunderstandings are. As Shipman adds: “Equally important is that by saying, ‘I want to make sure I’m doing a good job,’ a researcher is putting the onus on him- or herself and making the reporter feel magnanimous. This keeps the interview from becoming confrontational, which is probably what would happen if the researcher said, ‘I want to make sure you’re not going to screw this up.’”
That said, it may be obvious to say, but it’s important not to be rude to your reporters. Just because they may not know something doesn’t mean they’re ignorant. If a reporter feels judged by an interviewee, they may unconsciously (or consciously) put that interviewee in a negative light in their writing. It’s important to keep a productive and comfortable atmosphere for an interview to ensure everyone comes out looking good.
Dealing with “Dumb” Questions
Dumb questions usually arise when someone doesn’t fully understand the science. Because most scientists have busy schedules, interview times are rather constrained. This makes asking and answering “dumb” questions problematic, as the researcher may feel forced to answer off-topic questions and waste valuable time that could have been spent discussing their new findings. “When researchers are asked one of these questions, they can steer things back on course,” Shipman explains. “One option is for researchers to take the time to explain why the reporter’s question isn’t relevant to the work….They can [also] take a different approach by answering the question they wished the reporter had asked.” These two approaches can help keep the interview on track and allow the researcher to continue explaining their science to the reporter without worrying about anything.
You, the Researcher, Have Control of the Interview
While the reporter is the one asking all the questions, the researcher is the one in control. This can be helpful for scientists who may feel they are being taken advantage of by a journalist or feeling out of touch in the interview. The researcher has the power to stop the interview whenever they want. However, for the best interview outcome, it’s important that researchers be patient and work with journalists to understand the science fully.
Summary: Rules 4 and 5
While we just discussed many different aspects of interviewing, there are a few key ideas that can summarize this process
Rule 4: Do your research and have talking points for your quotes
Many researchers skip this in the interview process, so it’s important to remember when preparing for an interview.
Rule 5: Have the journalist paraphrase your quotes
Having the reporter paraphrase what you told them can ensure you’re both on the same page and they fully understand your research.
We’ll discuss Rules 6 and 7 in the next segment of this article series, but for now, be sure to bookmark this page for referencing later when you have an interview.
