As an academic, speaking with reporters can be nerve wracking.  The gut-wrench is palpable as you click on the article that follows, unsure of whether the person you spoke with has got it right, or created a train wreck with your name splattered all over it.

Building trust

Over the years, I’ve learnt to to calibrate my expectations and to trust the reporters I speak with to do the job they are paid to do – and in most cases they do it exceptionally well.  I’ve also learned the value of developing a trusting relationship with reporters that cuts both ways – they can trust me to be available and provide fast, clear, concise and accurate information; I can trust them to use the information they get from me with sense and integrity.

But a recent incident has left me wondering whether I’m being overly naive in thinking of my relationship with reporters as a two-way street.  And surprisingly, it has nothing to do with the malicious misrepresentation of academic nightmares.

Personal guidelines

Although I’ve never formalized this before, I have a fairly clear set of internal guidelines I follow when I’m approached by reporters.  If written down, they would probably look something like this:

1. The job of a reporter is to tell their story, not yours.
2. Reporters are usually on deadline – respect this by responding as fast as possible to requests.
3. Respect the professionally and expertise of the person you are speaking with.
4. Provide clear, concise and accurate answers to the questions asked.
5. Don’t try to use reporters for self-promotion.
6. Be just as willing to provide background information as you are to provide quotes.
7. Accept that what you say may not fit into the story the reporter is telling.
8. Accept that what is written after an interview may not come up to your standards of accuracy, but will be accurate enough in most cases.
9. It’s your responsibility to make sure you are understood clearly and accurately.
10. Even if the resulting article is a train wreck with your name all over it, the only person likely to remember this in the long run is you.
11. Go into interviews with your eyes open – knowing who you are talking with, what they are interested in, and what sort of pieces they write.
12. Build relationships with reporters based on trust and respect.

 

Getting informed articles out

These are of course personal guidelines, and I’m sure some people reading this will disagree strongly with them at some point.  But by on large though they work for me, and help me help reporters get informed articles out.

There have been a few occasions where I’ve had had the frustration of seeing my name attached to a story that I would rather not be associated with – although this has been rare.  And in most of those cases, I should have known better with what I said, and how I said it.

That’s not the problem that occurred recently though.  This is, and it’s an issue that, despite these guidelines, I’m unsure of how to handle it:

Casual disregard

I recently gave an interview to an established and competent reporter on something I’ve been working on for several years (the topic isn’t important).  The interview was in response to an urgent “can you help me with this asap” email – not an unusual occurrence.  I responded rapidly, and we had a good conversation.

When the article appeared the next day, I realized that I had misrepresented quite an important piece of scientific information in the conversation, and as a result the article was factually incorrect on one point.  I’m pretty sure that this was my fault for being too loose in the language I used.

My immediate response was to email the reporter, apologizing profusely, and offering a very minor alteration that would at least render the statement tolerably accurate.

I received no response back.

I resent the email a few days later, acknowledging that it was probably too late for any changes, but mainly to check whether my first email had been received.

Again, no response.

So here’s my dilemma: What is the most appropriate course of action in such a situation where a competent reporter is factually off-base because of something you said, but is disinclined to respond to your emails?

I could obviously contact the reporter’s editor, or write a blog post correcting the piece.  But both undermine trust between me and the journalists I work with.

Or I could do nothing, and hope that not too many colleagues spot the error!

The fact remains though that there is an article I had a hand in that still contains a factually incorrect statement.  And that bothers me.

What worries me more though is that this type of casual disregard for sources harms the trust that’s necessary for effective reporting.  If journalists are to write articles that get the facts right, they need to be able to trust the people they interview.  But that trust cuts both ways.

Advice needed!

I’ll still be sticking to my guiding principles when working with reporters.  But in the meantime, if anyone has any advice on how to handle being casually discarded once a piece is written, please do tell – especially if you’re a journalist or editor.

Thank you.