Well, today I was approached by one of the editors at Yahoo! Contributor Network and asked if I had interest in a project that may end up on the front page of Yahoo.com. Of course, I am. The assignments, however, require me to locate and interview certain people whom it may be hard to reach. The good news is that they have given me four assignments on the same topic for four separate interviews. I guess that means that all four have the potential to make the front page if I can manage to get in touch with the right interviewees.
For those not familiar with Y!CN, writers receive part of their compensation based on the number of page views that an article gets. High profile placement, such as the front page of Yahoo.com, can translate into many, many page views and many, many dollars. I know of two Y!CN writers who had featured articles earn several thousand dollars in a few days, for example. There may be others of whom I am unaware.
Generally, front page placement is kind of hit or miss. If the folks at Yahoo! see an article which catches their eye, they may feature it. Anyway, I consider this assignment a good opportunity to earn some good money while gaining some good exposure for my work. Additionally, coming through with good interviews on this type of request certainly doesn't hurt my future opportunities for similar assignments in the future.
Now, I just have to figure out who I can get for these interviews that will make them front page worthy. My first thought is to visit an area museum and have a chat with the museum director, both as a potential candidate and to network additional contacts in the field in question, but I need to think about it overnight and work out a plan of attack.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
An eyewitness to Japan's big earthquake
One of the houses washed out to sea by the tsunami that followed the
March 11, 2011 earthquake off the coast of Japan
Public domain photo by Airman 1st Class Katrina R. Menchaca
Right after the big 8.9 magnitude earthquake that occurred in Japan on March 11, 2011, I was contacted by the news department at the Yahoo! Contributor Network. They told me that they had contact information for someone living in Japan at the time of the earthquake and that he might be amenable to an interview. I was immediately interested for the obvious reason, but also because my son has a keen interest in Japanese history and culture and plans to spend some time studying there while in college.
I can't imagine how worried and upset his mother and I would have been if he were there already when the earthquake struck. So I wanted to explore the ability to communicate back to the United States in the immediate aftermath, personal safety issues, official warning systems, and a number of issues that may directly impact my own son and any others studying abroad in Japan either currently or in the future.
Using the information provided by Y!CN, I contacted the subject through email and set-up the interview.
You can read the full interview at this link.
Ordinarily, I locate and arrange interview prospects on my own and pitch it to the Y!CN news department through my regular Q&A interview beat. In this case, however, it was my good relationship and reputation with the news department's editorial staff that dropped the contact in my lap. Communication, networking and a good track record result in opportunities that would be otherwise unavailable. Cultivate contacts and let people know what kinds of things would be of interest to you from a writing perspective.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Imprisoned by Moammar Gadhafi
This interview was one of my favorites because I felt it had great emotional content. I arranged to interview a former Libyan national for comment on the uprising in Eastern Libya during its early days, before much real fighting took place, and, in fact, weeks before the U.S. and allies decided to use air power to defend the rebels from potential massacre. I didn't know until I got into the interview that the interviewee, Dr. Fathi Finaish had actually been imprisoned, albeit briefly, by Gadhafi as a young man in the 1970's. Furthermore, Dr. Finaish had family still living in Tripoli from whom he had not heard since the start of the uprising.
At first, during the interview, Dr. Finaish seemed a bit closed in his attitude. He responded very briefly to my questions, often with one word or a single brief sentence. Once I got some basic background information, I mixed in more open-ended questions to draw him out, but sometimes a short succinct answer can have a powerful impact. For example, I asked, "Is there any discussion or dissent allowed against policies or government edicts in Libya? The answer was short and to the point: "No. If you talk, you will pay for it, dearly." That simple sentence speaks volumes and really helped me to understand why, at this time, so many Libyan people were willing to risk their lives with few weapons and little, if any, training to try to wrest back their children's destiny from Gadhafi.
I'll also point out that although he spoke English very well, it was not Dr. Finaish's first language. Although I could not transcribe his accent, I did try to keep some of the phrasings and hesitations that might appear out of the ordinary to a native English speaker to try to capture more of the emotion and character of the interview and the interviewee.
You can read the full published interview at this link...
As an aside, this was also interesting from a writing standpoint because it is an example of the shifting vagaries of English spellings of foreign names and words. The spelling "Moammar Gadhafi" was in vogue with Yahoo! News when I wrote this interview, but it is often spelled quite differently by different news organizations, making it difficult for users of search engines trying to find information about the Libyan leader.
Moammar Gadhafi with military hat drawn low over
his eyes in 1969 shortly after taking power in Libya.
Public Domain photo from the Online Museum of Syrian History
At first, during the interview, Dr. Finaish seemed a bit closed in his attitude. He responded very briefly to my questions, often with one word or a single brief sentence. Once I got some basic background information, I mixed in more open-ended questions to draw him out, but sometimes a short succinct answer can have a powerful impact. For example, I asked, "Is there any discussion or dissent allowed against policies or government edicts in Libya? The answer was short and to the point: "No. If you talk, you will pay for it, dearly." That simple sentence speaks volumes and really helped me to understand why, at this time, so many Libyan people were willing to risk their lives with few weapons and little, if any, training to try to wrest back their children's destiny from Gadhafi.
I'll also point out that although he spoke English very well, it was not Dr. Finaish's first language. Although I could not transcribe his accent, I did try to keep some of the phrasings and hesitations that might appear out of the ordinary to a native English speaker to try to capture more of the emotion and character of the interview and the interviewee.
You can read the full published interview at this link...
As an aside, this was also interesting from a writing standpoint because it is an example of the shifting vagaries of English spellings of foreign names and words. The spelling "Moammar Gadhafi" was in vogue with Yahoo! News when I wrote this interview, but it is often spelled quite differently by different news organizations, making it difficult for users of search engines trying to find information about the Libyan leader.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Respect for the interviewee
Generally, when I conduct an interview, I send a link to the finished work to the subject of the interview. Often, however, they will ask to see the work before it is published in order to "correct any mis-statements they may have made." I always acquiesce to these requests to see the content before it is published and to date, no one has had any real issues with the content. I don't always include the title. In this article, though, I did include a title, the one that is on the article now. When I submitted it for publication on Yahoo! News, my editor requested that I change the title. So, it was published with a title different than the one now show. It was accurate and truthful, but could be interpreted in a couple of different ways. One of which was somewhat controversial.
The subject of the interview, wrote me back and strongly objected to the new title which was included in the URL, as well. He objected so strongly that he said he would withdraw permission to use his comments if it were not changed. While it might not be a legally defensible threat, I like to maintain good relations with my contacts, especially when the request to change the title did not reduce the integrity of the article itself.
I contacted my editor and explained the situation. He was able to immediately change the title, and request that the article be taken down from Yahoo! as this was the only way to eliminate the disputed title from the URL. Meanwhile, the article was added to Y!CN under the new title. Once the original was purged from Yahoo!'s cache, it was resubmitted and published at Yahoo! News.
In all it took more than a day and a number of back and forth communications to get everything changed and page views on the original submission were permanently wiped from the system. I felt that changing the title was important as an act of courtesy to someone who had granted me an hour of his time. My relationship and open line of communication with the responsible editor at Y!CN was also instrumental in my ability to accomplish this change.
While the disputed title was factually accurate, would not be considered offensive, and could have been left as is, I felt that changing it was the right thing to do to ease the anxiety my interview subject had. If i had included the disputed title in the prepublication draft I send to him and he had not objected at the time, I might have made a less-strenuous attempt to make the change. If the interviewee simply had second thoughts about what they clearly said during the interview such that it changed the character of the discussion, it would also be a different case.
Think of the example of Newt Gingrich criticizing the Paul Ryan budget, for example. If he had said what he said in the interview and then asked the interviewer to omit those remarks before they were published or televised, I think it would be disingenuous of the interviewer as a journalist to edit the discussion to change its original character. It would be fine to include a note that Gingrich later said he didn't really mean what he said or that he meant to say he supports Ryan's budget, but pretending that it never happened is misleading to the reader or television audience in my opinion. In a case like that, I would have to stand my ground.
In the case of the title change I made on the above-referenced article however, there was no change to the character or content of the original interview, so there was really no reason for me to object to the request.
When we interview people and quote them directly, we have an obligation to represent their words and tone accurately, and, where possible within the limits of our own journalistic integrity, to protect them against threats, real or perceived, to their professional and personal integrity.
The subject of the interview, wrote me back and strongly objected to the new title which was included in the URL, as well. He objected so strongly that he said he would withdraw permission to use his comments if it were not changed. While it might not be a legally defensible threat, I like to maintain good relations with my contacts, especially when the request to change the title did not reduce the integrity of the article itself.
I contacted my editor and explained the situation. He was able to immediately change the title, and request that the article be taken down from Yahoo! as this was the only way to eliminate the disputed title from the URL. Meanwhile, the article was added to Y!CN under the new title. Once the original was purged from Yahoo!'s cache, it was resubmitted and published at Yahoo! News.
In all it took more than a day and a number of back and forth communications to get everything changed and page views on the original submission were permanently wiped from the system. I felt that changing the title was important as an act of courtesy to someone who had granted me an hour of his time. My relationship and open line of communication with the responsible editor at Y!CN was also instrumental in my ability to accomplish this change.
While the disputed title was factually accurate, would not be considered offensive, and could have been left as is, I felt that changing it was the right thing to do to ease the anxiety my interview subject had. If i had included the disputed title in the prepublication draft I send to him and he had not objected at the time, I might have made a less-strenuous attempt to make the change. If the interviewee simply had second thoughts about what they clearly said during the interview such that it changed the character of the discussion, it would also be a different case.
Think of the example of Newt Gingrich criticizing the Paul Ryan budget, for example. If he had said what he said in the interview and then asked the interviewer to omit those remarks before they were published or televised, I think it would be disingenuous of the interviewer as a journalist to edit the discussion to change its original character. It would be fine to include a note that Gingrich later said he didn't really mean what he said or that he meant to say he supports Ryan's budget, but pretending that it never happened is misleading to the reader or television audience in my opinion. In a case like that, I would have to stand my ground.
In the case of the title change I made on the above-referenced article however, there was no change to the character or content of the original interview, so there was really no reason for me to object to the request.
When we interview people and quote them directly, we have an obligation to represent their words and tone accurately, and, where possible within the limits of our own journalistic integrity, to protect them against threats, real or perceived, to their professional and personal integrity.
Israel, Iran and Middle East uprisings
The so-called Arab Spring, the public uprisings against existing governments in much of the Arab world this year will have lasting repercussions on the relationship between the U.S. and these countries, indeed, the effects will be felt throughout the world. There may be few nations that have a stronger interest in the outcomes than Israel. In it's ongoing conflict with Iran and others, it has few regional allies. Egypt, under Mubarek, was one of them.
To help sort it all out, I spoke with Ross Brann, professor of Judeo-Islamic studies at Cornell University. In addition to having studied in both Israel and Egypt, Prof. Brann is also the former chair of Cornell's Department of Near Eastern Studies. The discussion was particularly focused on the strategic relationship between countries.
To read the full article click here...
To help sort it all out, I spoke with Ross Brann, professor of Judeo-Islamic studies at Cornell University. In addition to having studied in both Israel and Egypt, Prof. Brann is also the former chair of Cornell's Department of Near Eastern Studies. The discussion was particularly focused on the strategic relationship between countries.
To read the full article click here...
Friday, May 20, 2011
How easy are interviews to write?
Some people think that writing interview articles is easier than other types since you are relying on someone else's words and just transcribing them. I strongly disagree.
In the first place, the interviewer must identify a relevant expert, contact him and set up an interview in time to make sure the topic is still newsworthy or timely. Some of the experts are getting calls from many media sources for interviews and they often have work schedules that permit only a small window of available time.
Secondly, preparation for an interview is at least equal to the research for any article. The interviewer must research the topic of the interview, the expert's previous statements and writings pertaining to the interview topic, and research some opposing views and factual information about the topic in order to have an intelligent discussion with the interviewee.
Questions should be prepared in advance, but the interviewer should be willing and even eager to go off the beaten path if the person being interviewed mentions or hints at something that seems interesting.
You are more likley to get in-depth and candid dialogue from the interviewee if you are engaged in a real conversation rather than running through a list of predetermined questions. The more in-depth your advanced research is, the better-equipped you will be to convey a genuine interest in the topic, recognize intriguing opportunities as they develop within the interview, and draw the interviewee out if she doesn't initially provide enough detail.
Finally, once you have the interview, the editing process can be quite time-consuming as well. I'll often talk with a subject for 30-45 minutes. During that time, there are pages and pages of directly transcribed notes. To make that ready for publication, I need to very carefully edit each response in such a way as to accurately capture the tone,context, and main content of the reply. It is important to represent the interviewee and their statements accurately while trimming them down to the bare essentials.
Trimming too much, however, can lead to the danger of stripping out the emotional content of the interview. The article should give the reader all the passion the interviewee feels about the topic and a glimpse of their personality without getting sidetracked.
All in all, I spend far more time on interview articles than I do on anything else I write of similar length. They also tend to be the articles in which I learn the most and I hope that learning passes through to the reader as well.
In the first place, the interviewer must identify a relevant expert, contact him and set up an interview in time to make sure the topic is still newsworthy or timely. Some of the experts are getting calls from many media sources for interviews and they often have work schedules that permit only a small window of available time.
Secondly, preparation for an interview is at least equal to the research for any article. The interviewer must research the topic of the interview, the expert's previous statements and writings pertaining to the interview topic, and research some opposing views and factual information about the topic in order to have an intelligent discussion with the interviewee.
Questions should be prepared in advance, but the interviewer should be willing and even eager to go off the beaten path if the person being interviewed mentions or hints at something that seems interesting.
You are more likley to get in-depth and candid dialogue from the interviewee if you are engaged in a real conversation rather than running through a list of predetermined questions. The more in-depth your advanced research is, the better-equipped you will be to convey a genuine interest in the topic, recognize intriguing opportunities as they develop within the interview, and draw the interviewee out if she doesn't initially provide enough detail.
Finally, once you have the interview, the editing process can be quite time-consuming as well. I'll often talk with a subject for 30-45 minutes. During that time, there are pages and pages of directly transcribed notes. To make that ready for publication, I need to very carefully edit each response in such a way as to accurately capture the tone,context, and main content of the reply. It is important to represent the interviewee and their statements accurately while trimming them down to the bare essentials.
Trimming too much, however, can lead to the danger of stripping out the emotional content of the interview. The article should give the reader all the passion the interviewee feels about the topic and a glimpse of their personality without getting sidetracked.
All in all, I spend far more time on interview articles than I do on anything else I write of similar length. They also tend to be the articles in which I learn the most and I hope that learning passes through to the reader as well.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
The Death of Osama Bin Laden
Photo by Abdul Rahman bin Laden (son of Osama bin Laden) released to Hamid Mir
Creative Commons Attribution S.A. 3.0
OK, Osama bin Laden is dead, but what does that mean for America's War on Terror? Does it weaken Al Qaida? What are the overall strategic implications of bin Laden's death? I wanted to know the answers to these questions so I spoke with a renowned expert on terrorists and terrorism, Dr. Adam Lankford, who is also an assistant professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Alabama. Dr. Lankford is the author of Human Killing Machines: Systematic Indoctrination in Iran, Nazi Germany, Al Qaeda, and Abu Ghraib
, a book which examines the recruitment and psychology of suicide terrorists.You can find my full interview about the strategic implications of bin Laden's death by clicking here...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)