“I’m writing an article for The Daily Tattler, and I’m pressed for time. Is it OK if I email you questions and, if so, can you provide a response by the end of the week?”
This happens more frequently than you think.
In one of my PR groups on LinkedIn, there’s an interesting discussion under way on this topic. Amazingly, some PR people hate email interviews. One group member says this is not the best way to establish a relationship with a journalist.
No, it isn’t.
But whenever a reporter, editor or freelancer wants to interview me by email, I almost always say yes, and I’ve never regretted it.
Here are five reasons to love email interviews:
- There’s little chance you’ll be misquoted. If a journalist wants to use what you’ve written as a direct quote, she’ll most likely cut and paste content directly from your email reponse into the article.
- You get extra time to craft intelligent responses. That means you can really think about the answer. You can also take the time to research the topic before responding.
- You have extra time to research the journalist. Before responding, you can type the journalist’s name into a search engine. If you learn that a reporter blogs, you’ve struck gold! You can read the blog and make note of what the journalist covers. Then, later, pitch that reporter for a blog post or an article in the print or online publication when you have a story idea that’s a perfect fit.
- It makes you more helpful. Because you’re not spending precious time with a journalist over the phone, you can offer additional information that you think might help the writer. You can ask, “Do you need other sources?” or “Are you looking for photo ideas?”
- You can include links. If you’ve written an article or blog post that the journalist will find helpful, share it. In a phone interview, you can tell the journalist where to find your other content, but what are the chances that a reporter will bother checking them out?
If the reporter is writing a story that could put you in a bad light, don’t expect an invitation for an email interview. These kinds of interviews are much more common for trend or feature stories.
Why I love this topic
I love this topic, by the way, because email interviews are laden with so many benefits that most Publicity Hound’s don’t realize. But I might never have written about it had it not been for the PR group on LinkedIn. I’ve started paying much more attention to LinkedIn groups and I hope you do, too.
Wayne Breitbarth, a LinkedIn expert, will explain how to use the groups feature when he’s my guest during the webinar Your LinkedIn Power Formula: How to Make Killer Contacts, Pull Crowds to Events, be a Star in Your Industry & Track Down Leads Like a Bloodhound at 3 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 3. Register any if the time isn’t convenient because I’ll send you a link for the video replay.
Where to meet journalists
This is important: Journalists, remember, join many groups on LinkedIn that they know are populated by sources and experts in the topics they cover. And in a LinkedIn group, you can communicate with a journalist or any other group member even though they might not be one of your first-, second- or third-level connections.
Hope to see you on the call on Thursday.
I couldn’t agree with you more. E-mail interviews are a wonderful opportunity to craft thoughtful, precise responses. Assuming you don’t dodge the questions being asked, the journalist will appreciate your efforts, will likely draw heavily from your responses, and will consider you a valuable source for future coverage.
If you don’t like a question the journalist asked, you can always say: “Jill, I wouldn’t phrase it that way. I think the better question is….”
I totally agree with you Joan. You have a lot of control over the content and the direction of the article.
Joan, Of course, as a customer relationship specialist, my knee jerk was to say – no – I want to connnect, build a relationship,enjoy a little banter. I do like the questions via email. In fact, I have an online radio show and I always send the questions in advance for the very reasons you say; time to think them over, offer resources for additional information, formulate answers, etc.
However, after reading your blog post – I can see that your take is a good one. It reminds me of HARO – help a reporter out – you are responding to those questions via email and never talk on the phone. However, I will say that often my name is still spelled wrong. 🙂
Anyway, you’ve given me food for thought for when I’m interviewing people for press releases and/or articles. I guess I always thought that if I sent the answers in advance and then interviewed them over the phone I would be saving them from the task of having to write out their answers.
Two sides to every coin, eh?
Deborah
Any time radio talk show hosts send Publicity Hounds the questions in advance, those Hounds’ tails should be wagging.
Agree 100%! Easier for everyone involved as long as the questions are thoughtfully answered.
I request the same when high school or college students contact us for an interview for a report or article … not only does it save time, it helps them really think through their interview questions ahead of time.
Paula, good point. Journalists in a hurry (even the pros) often ask dumb questions if they haven’t done their research ahead of time.
I would say yes, and I have said yes. Most recently to a reporter from the Wall Street Journal who was using her smartphone while at a business convention to “talk” with me via email. That’s the way the world works these days.
This is happening more and more. Journalists and others are multi-tasking at conferences.
Having been a newspaper reporter before the web, I can only tell you how lucky people are to have the opportunity to answer questions in writing. When people would ask reporters for questions in advance or in writing back “in the stone age,” we’d tell them “no way.” Having questions in writing with days to answer is a luxury that most people would kill for. I can’t imagine turning that down!
I wouldn’t hesitate to agree to an e-mail interview. I’ve done several already. I would prefer to get the interview done in the time it takes the journalist to ask the questions, but I wouldn’t ever turn down a legitimate opportunity to gain PR for my business.
I love emailed Q&As for two main reasons:
1 – You’re usually able to work in all your key talking points without worrying about running out of time or not knowing what follow-up questions are coming. You can look at the interview in its entirety and plug in any key points as appropriate.
2 – They’re fantastic reference for future interviews. Since the client has already approved the answers to THIS interview, you can use some of them as the basis for answers to future interviews. Allowing you to turn them more quickly (and becoming known as a reliable fast-turn source!).
Good answers, another thing you didn’t mention is that you could turn the questions into blog posts for your own blog. Show you expertise on the topic and frame it as “I was recently ask about, blah, blah, blah topic and here are some of my thoughts on it” something like that. Yah it all works
Yay! I nervously went to your blog to find out the answer. I say “nervously” because I’ve done email interviews and wasn’t sure if I had made the right choice.
I do prefer those than on the telephone for all the reasons stated above. I’ve been misquoted in the past, so am very happy when I’m asked to answer the questions via email.
Thanks, Joan, for constantly providing information that’s so beneficial!
AND…if you’re like me, a Work-At-Home Mom with “little co-workers” around, you can complete the interview without having to lock yourself in the laundry room because it’s the only place the kids can’t find you for ten minutes. LOVE the e-mail interviews!!!
I could not agree with you more. I love receiving interview requests by email. Although there can still be a communication gap it is much less likely to happen by email and an interviewer who is pressed for time may still have time to email a question back on something that needs clarification.
It makes for more effective focused answers when you have time to think, write, read your response and edit before sending.
Great post Joan!
I do most of my interviews by e-mail because they can’t say–I didn’t say that! (Yes, you did!) And it’s easier to write the interview.
Plus, some of us are deaf writers and we find email is better than a relay service. Calling people through the relay service interferes with the process more than email without the “voices.” Don’t get me wrong — I’m grateful for the relay service so I can make calls, but for interviews … email wins.
And you can ask follow up questions by email, too. It gives writers time to review the responses and ask follow ups as they write the article.
I totally agree as well! I have been on both sides of the keyboard, and it has always worked out well for me.
All the best!
Andrew
Andrew Darlow
Editor, The Imaging Buffet
I agree wholeheartedly. I’ve done interviews this way many times, and it’s always worked well. It’s great to get the questions in advance and to make sure your responses come out exactly the way you want. Right now I’m doing an email back-and-forth with a writer for a major magazine in Australia. We agreed that the time difference made email the better choice.
I enjoy meeting journalists and learning how they view life. While most journalists do their best to reproduce interviews accurately, there is less room for error when the response is in writing. We welcome email interviews from credible journalists.
I have answered journalists’ email inquiries and it has worked out well for all the reasons you gave in your blog.
Joan, I’d never think twice about an e-mail interview– in fact, I’ve done several, and because I’m a writer I find I communicate better that way than in person. You can make sure your points are clearly made–AND, there’s WAY less chance of your being misquoted. Great post!
As a staff reporter for a small newspaper and a disabled person who depends on others to drive her everywhere; I absolutely agree that the “email interview” is a Win-Win solution to interviews in a time crunch.
I have done several interviews as reporter requesting interview in just this manner. It has been highly effective and pro-active in getting the news out accurately.
I totally agree. This also helps smaller outlets keep things moving at a nice pace where as they still have good content and you get a proactive placement!
I’m only an indie author, but from the few actual interviews I’ve done, I prefer the e-mail interviews. I can think about what I want to say without pressure, and I can take the time to answer the questions the right way without relying on the first thought to pop into my head when asked a question in person.
For me, email interviews are a no-brainer, simply because of a severe hearing loss. A highly respected colleague recommended me to a reporter recently, and it worked like a charm. MSN Money published it recently.
The interview questions were remarkable, bringing forth a wealth of information, most of which she didn’t use. And as one respondent says about the questions, “you can use some of them as the basis for answers to future interviews.” And as the basis for blog posts and articles.
Total win-win.
Yes, Joan, you are absolutely right! I love email interviews. I’ve had several, and it was so nice to have some time to think over my answers, and to say exactly what I wanted to say. After I was done, I didn’t have any doubts or regrets about those interviews and I knew that I wouldn’t be sorry about my answers later.
Great topic and it made me think about something I had never really thought of before. I must add that the email you sent to get me here was very effective. I absolutely had to know the answer … and if I answered correctly. By the number of responses, looks like I’m not the only one! Have a great week!
I agree that in most circumstances an email interview is great- providing of course that the interviewee emails the answers to the questions in a timely manner.
But there are a few negatives to this mode of interviewing- if the reporter is doing an investigative report in the style of “60 Minutes” about corruption in business or politics, the email method would allow the subject more time to falsify information. In a spontaneous live interview, the interviewer can “catch” the interviewee trying to distort information by cleverly throwing in an unexpected question. Gifted journalists like Mike Wallace and Sam Donaldson had their best interviews live and email interviews would have distorted the facts.
One other point.. an email interview takes away some of the spontaneity of give and take. I have often found that some of my interview subjects would tell me interesting things over the phone or in person that may not have happened in email interviews and I was able to focus and change my questions because of the way the interviewee responded to me.
So, while an email interview is a good method, there are still many advantages to doing a live in person or phone interview.
I’m so glad you addressed this topic. As a freelance writer, I conduct both phone and e-mail interviews, depending on the situation. One time, a source refused to do an e-mail interview. I probably won’t contact that person again because, why form a relationship with someone you know isn’t open to something you may need to do (as you say, because of time)?
I agree – I’d be happy to be interviewed that way. In fact, I prefer to do things in writing than over the phone.
I wholeheartedly agree with your thoughts about email interviews. I just did one with morning with a journalist and had no fear of being misquoted or my remarks taken out of contest.
Anytime we can make a journalist’s job easier–and help our clients get their message out correctly—it is a win-win situation for all.
John, great reminder to PR people: Be sure to let your clients know about the possibility for email interviews, and tell them it’s OK to say yes.
I agree as well and those are great points. The only difficulty I see is if the questions aren’t clear but even that could be an advantage as you can expand the answers.
LinkedIn groups are definitely a great way to connect based on specific topics and interests.
And as I said earlier, if the question isn’t clear, just rephrase the question for the reporter (make sure it’s one you want to answer) and then give your reponse.
I agree, email interviews are perfectly great as long as you establish that the reporter is credible. I find I can better collect my thoughts about a topic and give better information in writing than I can on the phone.
The difficulty with determining whether a reporter is “credible” is that requests for email interviews might come from bloggers, and finding out if they’re credible is so much more difficult.
Still, do your homework and ask for a link to their blog. Or Google them.
Oh for sure, email interviews are great. Think about it. It saves the reporter time, all of the reasons you pointed out in your post are major benefits and that reporter will call again, knowing you are on the same page with them. Great article, Joan.
You raised a great point, Bill. If the reporter knows you are helpful, the reporter WILL call again.
I agree! I’ve done several email interviews – IMO, they’re the best ones to do, because as you mentioned, it allows you to craft the best answer — in writing. Written interviews are also published material, whether in a magazine, on a website or blog. Including a permanent link is like having your cake and eating it too 😉
Yes! Remember links, links, links!!!
Agree w/ John – it’s a win/win. Saves time for both parties. Reduces the risk of misquoting or misunderstanding.
Most importantly: you’re much likelier to produce a terrific “soundbite” that makes the article (and the interviewee!) memorable because you’ve got time to craft the most pithy response.
Leslie Nolen
http://bit.ly/WellnessTrends
Sound bites are often difficult to create on the fly. Having time to think about them, and experiment and ask others for feedback is a real plus.
Yes, I would agree to the interview and actually have done it this way several times.
I don’t think they would email you if the interest wasn’t there, and yes, it gives me time to craft my answers. It also gives you a concrete contact that you can get back to at other times.
Yes! Add these journalists to your media database. And don’t forget to ask, “What other stories are you working on and what kinds of sources do you need?”
From my perspective as a former journalist and now someone who helps clients with their media relations, I’d say you are right on target, Joan. For trend pieces or other types of articles that involved a fair amount of in-depth research, I found it enormously helpful to get the ball rolling via email. The busy, high-level sources appreciated having a list of targeted, focused questions that they could either answer by email or use as talking points when I did a telephone or in-person interview. As John observes above, it is a win-win for everyone.
Kate, it’s also worth mentioning that if the journalist emails, say, six people questions, only two of those people might end up giving answers that are good enough for the article.
At that point, the journalist might call those two people to get additional info and flesh out the story.
Having spent time on both sides of the press release, I have to say I completely agree on all of these points.
I’d like to add one more, though. In today’s go-go-go news cycle, being able to do a quick e-mail interview for a journalist means you’re accessible and willing. And it isn’t just that you can add more, per se, it’s that you can simply add. When I was a reporter and editor, it meant alot that someone was willing to answer questions by e-mail… and I was far more likely to call them back for another story if I needed them.
Yep. Be accessible and easy to work with.
At first I tended to say no, but as I thought about it, the one thing that I would like about email interviews is that I could compose answers that are well done. I would never be stuck for an answer and I prefer emails as they don’t tend to take up as much time as a conversation. You can proof your answers when emailing and correct them. Live interviews do not give you that option.
Carol, you offer an excellent reminder. Proofread!
Better yet, have someone else proofread it for you.
Those are exactly the reasons why I think e-mail interviews are a great idea. I also appreciate it when a reporter sends a list of questions similar to what they’ll be asking so you have a feel fro what they want in the interview and can mentally prepare for it.
Joan:
While I agree with your post and the comments posted so far, I have a bit of different take on it.
I have been finding that many “bloggers” and “pseudo online journalists” have been contacting me via email, asking for me to answer questions and then using these answers without either quoting or attributing the answers to me or my clients.
Do you have suggestions regarding this?
Whenever anyone asks you a question like this, always insist on attribution. If they don’t attribute it to you, post a comment at their blog reminding them that the info came from you.
Joan:
Thank You. I have been contacted, as a physician, on numerous occasions. I did lots of work and email answers. Thinking that this would help me. NOT.
Ideally, this should give the journalist credibility and me more exposure as an expert. What a disappointment. What a time waster.
My time. My credibility. The win-win is not really there.
Promises, but no follow up on from the journalist. They never even sent me a copy of the article. How do you know if you really got credit. I have insisted on attribution. After you send the info, for free, it’s over. You don’t know. My time is more valuable.
This is a worldwide lack of response.
Good luck.
I just had this experience with a HARO reporter who was pressed for time and she asked if my client, whom I had pitched to her as an insurance expert, would answer her questions in email. Why not, I said. The truth is that it happened over President’s Day weekend, and my client had the ability to do the interview at her leisure and no one had to devote their holiday time to taking a business phone call. I believe that the easier you make it for any reporter to get a source and the facts they are looking for then that reporter is likely to come back to you first.
Holiday weekends are fabulous times to do interviews for all the reasons you mentioned, Carol. They’re also great times to pitch.
Absolutely. The purpose is to spread your name and your ideas, not to chat with someone. If you are looking for a date try another method.
I agree — with one caveat — believe me, you can still be misquoted! Journalists will rarely cut and paste your entire response. Depending on the size of the soundbite they are looking for, they may pull out some segment of what you wrote, or they might just summarize what you wrote. So always write with the idea in your mind that lines may be pulled, and need to stand on their own. My mantra: Every sentence a soundbite!
Great article! Thank you!
Great question and although I have to admit my initial response was no because of not knowing who the reporter was, after reading this, it makes complete sense. This is why you are the publicity hound, and I’m not. 🙂
Thank you, Joan, for this interesting post. I can see the value of email interviews as well as phone or in-person interviews.
As far as I am concerned, ANY interview is a good thing.
I couldn’t agree more. So much of the time the interviewer simply does not have the luxury of setting up a phone interview, much less a face-to-face interview. But more importantly, as you point out, your being able to write out and edit your response ahead of time is a boon. This way you can focus on and emphathize on what is on-target, most helpful, provide specific examples, without all the blather and off-target information that can insinuate itself in verbal responses. I always suggest to clients that they have prepared a basic, content-rich response format which they can amend to the specific question being asked. Fast, well-thought out replies can make you a joy to an interviewer on a tight schedule and keep you on her/his Roladex of reliable, dependable experts.
After being misquoted in a few interviews, an E-mail interview is welcome!
I write for local newspapers as well as doing pr in my own company. An assignment was to interview a famous movie star who’d grown up in my area in connection with a showing of a group of his films at local library. He could not be reached for interview – contacted all his “people” and he was out of the country filming. But google yielded some info re his mom who was involved in ngo work out of the country. I emailed her, explained my predicament and asked if I could “interview” her via email about her son, his childhood, his career, etc. It turned out very successfully – we had q and a’s going back and forth. Even his grandparents loved the story, she reported later. And several of her friends were happy to read about her and her life and got back in touch. (this was before Facebook – and of course I fully disclosed the source of my material.)
You are correct. Once I’m known by a reporter, using the email interview is quite effective. In the early going, I do my homework on the reporter and outlet so I’m prepared to tailor my responses to their audience.
Like you, I’ve not had a bad experience.
Joan, thanks for the smart and helpful article. This is an easy one — say “yes!” But I would underscore your point #3. Like any media — in person or online — it’s essential to know whom you are talking to. And it’s important to be careful what you write, because your email can/will easily go “viral” and you lose a certain element of control that you might have (or think you have) in a verbal conversation. I’m a writer and a former journalist and I find that my clients like email interviews due to the time crunch everyone is facing. Now that I’m an author, I would welcome email interviews!
Joan –
I’ve been doing email interviews for almost 3 years. I find that they are great for all of the reasons you mention. Here are a few more observations:
Some reporters prefer email as a communication method in general. Just because you prefer the phone for small talk does not mean they do. Going with their preferred method makes you accomodating. I have been able to build some great relationships via email & even Twitter. You just have to communicate a bit differently.
You can get repeat and referral interviews from email interviews if you follow publicity hound tips on building relationships & being helpful. I will be conscious of answering all of their questions first and then add bonus info for them.
It is also important to realize that just because the communication mode is email does not mean you have a lot of time to reply. I’m often given a same-day deadline for publications. Magazines on the other hand are often working with a longer timeline.
I’ll echo a comment made earlier too. Just because you give a detailed reply does not mean they will cut and paste what you say. I’ve had writers take my thoughts and rewrite them into their own work with much smaller portions being quotes from me. If you quote things that are your tm systems make sure you mark it appropriately so you protect your intellectual property.
To your success!
I have had some e-mail interviews too. Starting last year I’ve been getting more. I also find that more reporters from HARO want e-mail interviews.
Jaime Fields wrote: “I have been finding that many “bloggers” and “pseudo online journalists” have been contacting me via email, asking for me to answer questions and then using these answers without either quoting or attributing the answers to me or my clients.”
This has happened to me too even with major media. Maybe 6-7 years ago a business reporter spent about 1 hour on the phone with me. I think it was Business Week, but it could have been Fortune’s Small Business Magazine. He was in a rush, I told him all about nude recreation and nudist resorts. When the piece came out it was mainly what I told him. And my resort and I were not mentioned in his story anywhere. However, his magazine allowed comments on the story, so I politely commented that I was happy that he used most of the information I had given him during our conversation and if readers had more questions to call me. I listed my toll free number and site and although normally that publication deletes that information, they kept it up. I assumed out of embarrassment for not mentioning me.
This has also happened to me with the New York Times years ago where I spent considerable time with the reporter and got just a small 1 sentence mention although maybe 3/4 of her article was all due to my information.
So if you don’t get a mention, and can comment online, do so.
And just because the interview is via e-mail, it means nothing good or bad. It is always the credibility and integrity of the reporter that really matters.
Tom
I’ve been interviewed by e-mail or asked to provide background for future articles. I’m always happy to provide backgorund info. I also find that reporters often appreciate getting background info via extra links — whether mine or other links that help flesh out the topic.
When I read your email wanting to know if your readers felt email interviews were a good idea, it made me wonder if my preference was wrong. Glad to hear I was thinking the right direction with so many pros!
Of the interviews I have done, I almost prefer email over telephone or face-to-face interviews. Having a chance to think before being rushed into speaking is great. And yes, I have found my quotes were copied and pasted into the articles written. Knowing they were verbatim keeps me on my toes to write great replies.
I would say that half of reporters who have sent me emailed interview questions used all my responses, but the other half tend to print only a couple of my more quotable quotes. I’m happy to be quoted either way!
At first I thought “No Way” when you asked the question-should you give an e-mail interview. I am so glad I read your article because it made me realize I was very wrong.
I now totally agree with all your reasons why we should say YES to the interview via e-mail. Thanks so much for the article.
Personally I love e-mail interviews–one of my biggest media quotes (in Woman’s World magazine), happened because a columnist e-mailed me and asked if she could interview me via e-mail.
When I respond on HARO or through other query services, I always indicate my willingness to be interviewed via phone or e-mail and it really helps.
It’s all about making a member of the media’s job easier and then you too will benefit.
Hi Joan –
I am VERY new to all of this, so from a “newbie’s” perspective I would MUCH rather do an email interview at this point due to my lack of experience.
That way I would have plenty of time to answer carefully and NOT get tongue-tied or stammer!
I am halfway through your CD’s for crafting a publicity plan, then I plan on hitting it hard 😀
I appreciate all of your valuable tips ~
I agree with you whole heartedly. And I do love interviews via email – no rush, and you can edit before you send them. I thought at first that I might refuse, perhaps it was someone just trying to get information about me, but then I’m not that wildly famous yet {smile} so I would agree.
Thanks for the great post – as always.
Billie
During the last 3 years, I have been interviewed via email no fewer than six times. It’s a marvelous way to be interviewed because I can edit my responses. I have also been interviewed in person many times, and it is much more difficult, at least for me, and the same goes for telephone interviews, but I NEVER refuse! It’s publicity!
Your email question grabbed me, and I thought you were going to be opposed to an email interview, so I came here to look and find out what I didn’t know.
Even though I already favored email interviews, you and your guests here have given me more reasons why it’s a wonderful communication medium. Very insightful.
One thing I hadn’t thought of is intuitively true, “If the reporter is writing a story that could put you in a bad light, don’t expect an invitation for an email interview.”
I love finding another group of people who are smarter than me. Thanks very much.
I think e-mail interviews are wonderful! I have time to think about the best way to phrase my answer, and if appropriate, to lead into a subject I want to mention.
As a speech pathologist and business speech consultant, I have been responding to questions about The King’s Speech! It has brought extra attention to my profession and to my company, Business Speech Improvement. Doing an interview by e-mail is much more convenient when I am busy.
Great topic to discuss, Joan!
Hi Joan,
Completely agree with all these points. Now, this may be another clue whether one is an introvert or extrovert: intro if you prefer email interviews 🙂
I’d like to add a few points:
1. Some of us go on verbal tangents – especially if a new idea pops up during a phone conversation. I prefer email interviews so I can edit my responses and hone the new ideas that occur to me while I’m thinking through me answer. (Some reporters may want us to go off script — an investigative journalist probably wants a personal interview.
2. I get a better sense of the interviewer’s POV by how they structure their question. I can deconstruct their thinking process a bit and address what may be a gap in their knowledge. Which may annoy them, or may deepen the range of their article.
Since we are usually contacted about sustainability issues, I can diplomatically unwrap some ‘conventional’ thinking. If I’m being interviewed by phone, I may not manage that diplomatic part very gracefully.
Helen wrote: “this may be another clue whether one is an introvert or extrovert: intro if you prefer email interviews ”
I disagree. I am a pretty extreme introvert but I strongly dislike email interviews. I would prefer a phone interview any time. Why?
1)By email, I run the risk of missing what the reporter is actually looking for and therefore doing a work of work and getting left out of the article. By phone, the reporter can quickly clarify their needs and redirect the conversation more productively.
2)I have a much better chance of getting the reporter to include a relevant resource I’ve created when I suggest it during a phone interview. If it’s not exactly right, I can suggest something else that is.
3)An email interview can be a sign of laziness on the reporter’s part. They gather information while making the interviewees do the bulk of the work. It is a LOT more work to respond to five questions substantively by email than to do so on the phone. And sometimes it amounts to pretty much writing the article for a freelancer who is then going to get paid for it!
I agree that it’s not smart to turn down publicity opportunities, but that doesn’t mean you have to enjoy or approve of the process.
And I don’t agree that introverts have to feel at odds with phone interviews. If you are well-prepared, a phone interview is simple and unstressful.
Marcia Yudkin
Yup do it all the time and happily got my clients doin it as well. (sorry, didn’t read the blogpost, just answered the question, then clicked thru to see if I ‘got it right or wrong’.)
I was really worried when I read your email, thinking you might be recommending people not do it! Boy was I glad you said Yes! I’ve gotten over 100 media mentions by being a fast responder, always available and willing to do whatever it takes in whatever timeframe they have. And answering over email is just that! AND I can make sure my quotes are precisely how I want them, not sort of how I said them.
I’ve been on both sides of this situation, and I agree 110% with everything you said.
What really astounds me is when I’ve posted a HARO query with very specific instructions for a response and then PR people try to pitch me their client, instead of just sending them the questions and getting the answers. There’s a mistaken assumption that journalists are going to choose their sources based on their credentials. In most cases, as long as they meet some basic qualification criteria, I’m far more interested in how well they can articulate their ideas and help me get my story done in time than I am in their credentials.
If I’ve got five other seemingly qualified people who read the query instructions and followed them, I’m not even going to bother responding to a pitch that doesn’t. Pay attention to the specifics of the query and follow them.
As a journalist who emails questions, Joan, great topic!
*** Which LinkedIn public relations group has been discussing this topic?
As a reporter, I often resort to emailing questions after I have played phone tag with a subject and have a deadline looming.
The disadvantage of this practice, for me, as a journalist, is that I lose the spontaneity and sometimes humor of the response from my subject.
Typically, people are so concerned with how they are portrayed that when given the opportunity to WRITE a response, they use formal language and go on at greater length than I would want or can use. In fear of sounding silly, they may use bigger words or edit out their humor.
My advice: For each question, quickly write your first response off the top of your head. Then, if needed, go back and edit after that.
And @Cher is correct: I have never (or perhaps rarely) just cut and pasted someone’s entire answer. I will edit it as needed – and my subjects know this beforehand.
Lastly, as some of your savvy readers mentioned – soundbites! And if you don’t understand that term, just think short sentences.
It’s standard now, too, for me to indicate that the quote came via email:
“Answering reporters via email is a good practice,” said PR expert Joan Stewart, via email.
Cher is correct. Even when you send carefully-crafted material, the “reporter” can still misquote you. One woman took the “not” out of my sentence because she assumed I meant the opposite of what I wrote! Fortunately, she told me when the blog posted and I was able to contact her to get it changed and clarified. Many times, the reporter or blogger does not tell us if our material is used or where, even though I make it a point to request such notice.
I prefer the old-timer professional reporters who telephone. I don’t mind answering a simple query by email but some newbies are not focused. They ask for so much information on so many subjects that you’d have to send your entire book to answer their query. I think they just vacuum the material, cut and paste without analyzing it.
Bottom line: Short, focused queries lend themselves to email. Otherwise, please call and let’s find out where you really want to go with this article.
and for me, the best part is that if, heaven forbid, you get misquoted…you have YOUR copy of what was sent if you need to ask for a retraction or a second chance at discussing the topic!! I do year-round PR for nonprofits … because “donors won’t give if they don’t know who you are!”…and encourage email interviews every chance I get!
This exact scenario happened to us, after we sent a text to a radio show host..we ended up meeting for drinks after their show, and subsequently were interviewed by email. Then, we did a live broadcast with the two DJs, and a follow-up one with a newscaster (where we had a prediction of the local mayoral election come true…spooky! )
So, it does work, and it is a good idea, and an effective way to get a foot in the door…
Lee
I absolutely agree! With better-crafted thought out responses, it would be much more difficult to misconstrue any direct messaging for the organization(s). Also by submitting responses in writing, it enables input from top executives and other departments for a more well rounded interview.
I have also learned any time you can save a reporter time and effort they are much more likely to use you as a resource in the future. While face time is important, understanding and anticipating the reporters needs are sometimes more valuable.
Great topic!
Joan,
I agree with the previous commenters who favor responding to reporters by email. As a matter of fact, in the interest of time and accuracy I even prefer it in most situations.
Since we all rely on email so much these days, we can’t ignore it as a viable form of communicating and getting quick responses.
Thank you for addressing this topic and confirming the vital part LinkedIn groups play.
Joan- I completely agree with you. Another point, Why would you turn down any opportunity to A) Help out a journalist, and B) Get coverage for a client? E-mail interviews are a win-win in my book!
Joan, I’ve come at this from both sides. As a journalist, I prefer phone or in-person interviews, because it’s easier to get a handle on someone , especially if they’re not into writing and give short answers that don’t explain much. I do offer that option to subjects who are hard to pin down for interviews, however. As a publicist for the National Federation of the Blind, I welcome any opportunity to interface with journalists, and e-mail gives you more control, especially in cases where your subject matter is widely misunderstood and journalists are laboring under unchallenged social prejudice. E-mail interviews can be a great time-saver for everyone, if you use the opportunity to your advantage and don’t get hung up on doing a lot of the journalist’s work for them. The goal is to get the correct message out there; not to spend time on the phone.
I agree entirely with you, Joan, I prefer interviews thru email and I never refuse them. My own reason is based on the fact that out of the very many articles and interviews made about me NOT ONE SINGLE is wholy correct up to now though the journalist took his/her notes personally – sometimes they even contradicted themselves in the article/interview they wrote, and then it’s too late to make corrections. And most journalists are too arrogant to ask you to review the article/interview before it’s published. For some time now, I encourage email interviews whenever possible. Besides the reason that there is little chance you’ll be misquoted, it’s also a fact that we have more time to think about our answer.
This is a well-argued piece, and it makes some good points. But I’m one of those PR pros who generally opposes interviews by e-mail.
Here’s a recent post of mine in which I offer three reasons it’s a bad idea: http://www.mrmediatraining.com/index.php/2010/12/13/should-you-do-media-interviews-by-e-mail/.
The truth is somewhere in between: It’s a valid tool, but it shouldn’t become a reflexive one, especially during a crisis.
Sincerely,
Brad Phillips
Author, Mr. Media Training Blog
The interaction of people online has shifted opinions of how to communicate. This change influences the way business operates in the Information Age. Email interviews is another example of how leaders of today must adapt to these nuances. Your post explained some of the reasons why communication through email helps a leader gain publicity and advance his/her cause. I look forward to my interview on leadership development via email! Thanks for the heads up.
Cathy Stucker at SellingBooks.com interviewed via e-mail through HARO. Facebook posts this interview when I google them. I do not know if it comes up when someone else googles Facebook, but it feels good to have this interview up there. I have also been interviewed via radio. I believe either route is good publicity. Cathy even put up a big photo of my book on her website. She changed my answers very little if any.
I agree with you, Joan. E-mail interviews are just fine. While e-mail interviews take longer than phone interviews do, in the long run I find that they can save time as I don’t have to spend as long correcting things during fact checking. I’ve even had big national magazine feature stories, complete with photo shoots, that came from e-mail interviews.
Mellanie
Great advice Joan, I have done dozens of email interviews. Although they take more time, I find I can give a much clearer – educated answer. Thanks for the tips.
I recently became the editor of a genealogical society’s newsletter. In the two issues I’ve edited so far, I included email interviews. Both genealogists are well-known in the field, and communicate primarily online. It would have been difficult to arrange these interviews in any other way. I ran the answers in full, and also sent them PDFs of that issue.
I would definitely agree to an email interview. As a writer, I find it easier, although I do like to talk also! In a verbal interview, there’s always the possibility of your brain momentarily short-circuiting, or your words being taken out of context. Emails can be edited, and an email interview gives you more time to research.
I’ve had quite a bit of publicity in the media over the last couple of years, and I’ve had many more reporters quote me because of information I sent in an email than through phone interviews.
I’m flexible, and I will go with either email interviews or phone interviews. However, I have found that I can be more thorough in my answers when I have an opportunity to think about my responses in depth before I respond in writing to a reporter.
If I had turned down opportunities to be quoted through email, I would have had significantly fewer opportunities to be quoted.
I think an interview by email is great and the times I’ve been asked to do one I’ve accepted.
Not only do I get to actually stop and think about the question and the best answer, I can attach articles and more info to the email and I can be pretty sure the piece will be read because it was requested.
In the work I do as a disaster preparedness trainer (www.disasterprep101.com) there are so many tiny tips and details to pass along to help other people, that many times the subtleties are missed in a fast-paced voice interview.
I think email interviews are great.
Hi Joan,
You’re a star on my horizon. Reading you and Following! Interested in your blogs about trends LinkedIn (#in) and Facebook (#fb).
The advice you give recommending “5-Reasons to Say Yes” is of tremendous value.
My blog is becoming more interesting because of your TIPS and ~ as soon as I get it together ~ you will be featured with a Link under People To-Meet!
~ Sharlet
aka Charlotte Liebel
[…] their treasure of ideas and helpful words of wisdom and not expect rewards ~ she is best known as The Publicity Hound. Visit her website and soak-up her sunny disposition and winning attitude. I have been reading […]
I have probably done at least 100 e-mail interviews as a source, and a smaller number as a journalist.
While I do see the problem that Marcia wrote about, “It is a LOT more work to respond to five questions substantively by email than to do so on the phone. And sometimes it amounts to pretty much writing the article for a freelancer who is then going to get paid for it!”
–I also love that it’s much more likely my quotes will be accurate. As for the time factor, just today, I was on the phone with a journalist for 42 minutes, and I’ll probably get a paragraph in the article. But I was relationship-building, and the journo actually said she’d call me to have coffee next time she visits her parents, who happen to live one town over from me. It’s rare that I spend more than 30 minutes answering e-mail questions, and usually much less.
And in an e-mail interview, I have *never* experienced the reporter making a complete mess of what I said, as for example, the Boston Globe did in a phone interview about 15 years ago. They even ran my contact info under someone else’s free offer–yeech!
Marcia, I’d be curious how you feel about journos who crib extensively from press releases. The first time one of my press releases was used in the New York Times, about 2/3 of the *bylined* article was lifted straight from my press release.