We've all seen it happen: A TV reporter asks someone a question, and the person being interviewed says something that's either very interesting, just plain wrong or patently outrageous, the kind of answer that cries out for a follow-up question. And yet the reporter ignores this bombshell of an answer and continues on with his list of questions.
It's a mistake that many novice journalists - and even some seasoned pros - can make: Failing to ask the follow-up question while interviewing a source.
A Mistake That Went Unchallenged
For example, in 2010 Rudy Giuliani made flat-out wrong statements regarding President Obama and terrorism three times in the space of a month, and in all three cases the supposedly experienced reporters interviewing the ex-New York mayor failed to challenge him or correct the record.
In a CNN interview the morning after Obama's State of the Union address, Giuliani said the following:
"He said the least about national security than any American president I can recall at a time in which we are at war with Islamic terrorists -- and notice, once again, he never used that word."
But as Talking Points Memo pointed out, Obama "used the word 'terrorist' twice and 'terrorism' once."
In an interview on the Fox News Channel that same morning, Giuliani claimed that Obama didn't use the word "war" in his address, even though he actually used it seven times. And the failed GOP presidential candidate complained that Obama "didn't talk about the Christmas almost-bomber."
In fact, as The New York Times reported Mr. Obama said this:
"We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence."
Giuliani's most bizarre comments in this regard on ABC's "Good Morning America" when he told George Stephanopoulos:
"We had no domestic attacks under Bush; we've had one under Obama."
The mayor of New York on Sept. 11, 2001, somehow forgot the worst terrorist attack in the nation's history?
My point here isn't about Guiliani; it's about bad interviewers who fail to challenge interviewees who say things that are factually incorrect, whatever their motivations (which in Giuliani's case was to make Obama appear weak).
Katie Couric Says Reporters Must Prepare
Journalist Katie Couric, in an interview with the Poynter Insitute's Mallary Jean Tenore, made this point well. Reflecting on her famous encounter with Sarah Palin, Couric said reporters should over-prepare for big interviews, and be ready to ask tough follow-ups.
"I'm often frustrated when I watch interviews and I feel as if (a) the person didn't listen to the answer or (b) didn't pick up on something or (c) moved on even though they were given a non-answer answer."
Couric also talks about this in the YouTube Reporters' Center, where she says:
"Nothing is worse for me than to watch someone go down a laundry list of questions and not explore something with a little more depth, maybe pick up on an inconsistency... Remember who you're serving, your audience. You're trying to inform them, trying to illuminate a certain subject... You need to keep that in mind."
So how can you avoid making such a mistake?
• Do your homework. Fully research your interview subject and the things you're going to be discussing before the interview. That way, if your interviewee says something that's factually incorrect you'll know it, and be ready with a strong follow-up.
• Listen to what the interviewee says. Sounds obvious, but many new reporters are so fixated on getting through their list of questions that they don't really hear what the person they're interviewing has said. And if you aren't listening to what's being said, you're going to miss something.
• Be willing to go where the interviewee leads you. Many reporters go into interviews with an idea of what's going to be said, especially if they're talking to someone like a politician who's in the news a lot. But a good reporter is always ready for an interview to take an unexpected turn, and to ask good questions if it does.
