Ping: Journalism Types

[Cuckoo]

Potentially stupid question coming...

My background is not in Journalism, although I do some journalistic writing from time to time. Well, I have just done an interview, and I had a question.

First, I should say that this interview will be presented in its entirety, not just selective quotes or anything as part of a story.

However, I realized as I was transcribing it that I was somewhat scattered in my questions, often moving quickly from one topic to another and back again.

Would it be unethical, from a journalistic standpoint, to rearrange my presentation of the questions/answers in order to make it flow a bit better. I will not be displacing any questions from their respective answers nor trying to make anything sound different than it was intended. I'm really just looking for better organization.

[vtbub]

I would not change the order of the questions or say that you are giving the entire interview unless you intend to edit it.

[Maple Leafs]

It depends on how it's presented. If it's presented as a transcript, then you should keep the order. Even that's tricky since you will be editing -- you won't leave in all the um's and ah's -- which is why transcripts are generally a bad way to present an interview.

If it's more of an informal piece that happens to be in Q and A format (like you'd get in a magazine) then it may be OK, but you want to be extremely careful that you're not changing context.

[timmynausea]

I think it's fine. I took a few journalism classes in college.

[Cuckoo]

It depends on how it's presented. If it's presented as a transcript, then you should keep the order. Even that's tricky since you will be editing -- you won't leave in all the um's and ah's -- which is why transcripts are generally a bad way to present an interview.

If it's more of an informal piece that happens to be in Q and A format (like you'd get in a magazine) then it may be OK, but you want to be extremely careful that you're not changing context.

It is an informal piece that will be presented in magazine-style Q and A format. It's a cast interview companion for a preview of a theatrical production. The context would not be changed at all.

[Cuckoo]

I took a few journalism classes in college.

Yeah, I took a couple as well and actually went searching for my old books. But I couldn't remember and must have sold the books for beer money. :D

[vtbub]

I think Maple has the right idea. Just clean it up and present it unless there is something really disjointed.

[Maple Leafs]

It is an informal piece that will be presented in magazine-style Q and A format. It's a cast interview companion for a preview of a theatrical production. The context would not be changed at all.
In that case you should be fine. In general it's expected that interview formats will be edited, so as long as it's not presented as a word-for-word transcript you should be fine.

Never assume you're not changing context, though. Even the order of questions can matter. Your subject matter isn't all that controversial, so just use some common sense.

[JonInMiddleGA]

In that case you should be fine. In general it's expected that interview formats will be edited, so as long as it's not presented as a word-for-word transcript you should be fine.

Never assume you're not changing context, though. Even the order of questions can matter. Your subject matter isn't all that controversial, so just use some common sense.

I concur with Mr. Leafs.

[Cuckoo]

Thanks guys. Much appreciation. In the end, it wasn't nearly as scattered as I thought it'd be. I moved one question/answer combo and edited out the "uh's," "um's" and "you know's." And overall I'm fairly pleased with it. Not exactly intended to be hard-hitting or anything.

[Dutch]

I've seen the "um's" and "ah's" left in before. Are you supposed to take those out?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I've seen the "um's" and "ah's" left in before. Are you supposed to take those out?

I'm not sure what the "correct answer" is in theory, but in practice it usually depends upon who is making the decision.

In my experience, they're often taken out as a courtesy to the interview subject (if they're in abundance). On the other hand, leaving them can be a handy way of undermining a subject if that happens to be your desire.

[Maple Leafs]

In my experience, they're often taken out as a courtesy to the interview subject (if they're in abundance). On the other hand, leaving them can be a handy way of undermining a subject if that happens to be your desire.
Bingo. Nobody sounds intelligent when they're transcribed exactly, so if you ever want to make someone look like a real fool, just leave every word in. Then blink innocently and say "well, that's what they said".

Common trick of biased and/or amateur operations. College newspapers and alternative weeklies especially seem to enjoy it. Joe Conason is a big fan.

Edit: That's not to say you shoud never leave an "um" in a transcript. Use your judgement as to whether it's relevant -- but if you're not sure, it probably isn't.

[JeeberD]

I just e-mailed my brother, a copy editor at the DMN, a link to this thread. I'll let you know what he says...

[JonInMiddleGA]

... so if you ever want to make someone look like a real fool, just leave every word in. Then blink innocently and say "well, that's what they said".

Heh, that was the general philosophy applied when covering most politicians back when that was part of my life. The usual phrase was "easiest way to hang somebody is to quote 'em accurately."

Edit: That's not to say you shoud never leave an "um" in a transcript. Use your judgement as to whether it's relevant -- but if you're not sure, it probably isn't.

Yep. One "good" use of those little conversational hitches is leaving them in as an indication to the reader that the speaker paused to consider something, or that they were searching for the right phrase, etc. Basically leaving the "um" in to make them appear more thoughtful instead of using it to make them appear to be just freakin' dim.