The Renegade Writer Blog

by Diana Burrell and Linda Formichelli

(Diana) Writers love to talk trash about crazy sources. Most experts I interview are smart, funny, well-spoken, and interesting. There’s always the expert source that defies reason, though. Like the renowned negotiation expert who expected me to negotiate with him — hard — for a 15-minute interview. Or the PR person who’ll call on her client’s behalf, asking when “their” story will be in print, because it has been two whole days since we talked.

Occasionally Linda and I find ourselves sitting in the expert seats. The perspective is fascinating. We worry about how we’ll sound and are ever-so-grateful when a writer or reporter lets us know what she’s looking for before the interview. And we totally understand how tempting it is to call the writer each week with, “Do you have a pub date? Huh? [slobber] Huh?”

We also get to observe how our peers do their work. Most of them do wonderful jobs, but there’ve been a few times when I’ve wondered how the hell this person summoned the energy to roll out of bed in the morning, never mind score an assignment.

For example, earlier this summer a writer contacted me through my publisher for an interview about a branded book I wrote in 2005. I was happy to do the interview, but was surprised when an e-mail showed up with a list of ten or so questions the reporter wanted me to answer — in writing, via e-mail. And these weren’t little questions with sound-bite answers, either. I wrote back to say I was happy to answer the questions over the phone, and I gave the writer days and times when I’d be available. The writer said she’d call on a certain day, and then never called. Weeks pass and yesterday, the writer e-mails with, “Sorry, I forgot about this. Could you just answer these by e-mail?” To which I rolled my eyes, hit the delete button, and silently wished the writer well for her trip westward on the stupid train.

I realize I’m sounding like a complete bitch here — and you know what? I don’t care! It’s lazy, lazy, lazy to request that your sources answer interview questions by e-mail. You can give them the option, of course, and even secretly harbor the hope that they’ll take you up on it. And hey, full disclosure — I’ve done e-mail interviews before. They’re not my first choice: they don’t leave room for the give-and-take that can nuance a story, and quotes usually sound stilted and/or canned. But I’ve done them, and I’ll probably do them throughout my career. But geez, give the source the choice!

Back to my story: I figured the hour or two it would take me to write out the answers to her questions could be better spent on querying, revising an article for one of my editors, interviewing one of my own sources, or hell, even weeding my vegetable garden — after all, a weed-free garden will give me bushels of healthy tomatoes and chili peppers to can this fall. That’s money in the bank around here. On the other hand, even if my sage advice led to 100 people to buy my book — that would be $75 toward my advance. Whoopie. Taking money out of the equation, there’s the writer. The bottom line is I have no interest in enabling the clueless when there are so many other things to tackle on my to-do list.

Ah, you sigh, shaking your head. What about the free publicity I’ll miss out on? I know — I’ve said the same thing about sources who’ve ignored or declined my requests for interviews. But I’m learning — there’s nothing free in life, including publicity. Sources *do* pay for it, and smart sources know how to evaluate that cost. I no longer get bent out of shape when someone declines an interview; I try not to take it personally when my calls aren’t returned. I’m far more grateful these days to the sources who do share their expertise. Some of them spend hours with me, leading me around their farms or taking my calls between surgeries to answer picayune factchecking questions. Their time with me costs them something, and there are a bazillion other worthwhile things they could be doing instead.

(Linda) Last week I was interviewed by a reporter for a well-known newspaper on a topic that would not result in any publicity that I need. When I asked her to send me a link to the article when it went online, she said, “Oh, just Google your name and the name of the paper and you’ll find it.” As someone who always sends sources a heads-up when an article is out — and a link if there is one, and sometimes even a print copy if they can’t find one — I was shocked that I would take time out of my workday to help a reporter and not even receive a link to the article (which would take the reporter what, like 30 seconds?).

Then there was the time, a few months ago, when a writer asked me to “write a paragraph using colorful language” about topic X. Hmm…I could have sworn that it was the writer’s job to write the article, not the expert sources’. (You don’t even know what my “colorful language” almost ended up being in that case.)

Situations like this have made it clear to me why it’s sometimes so hard to find willing sources for articles, and why so many of them are pleasantly surprised when I send them thank-you notes or let them know when the article they participated in is on the stands. I had no idea that so many writers had such sorry skills until I experienced them from the expert’s side of the desk.

(Linda and Diana) Here are some rules from the no-rule chicks on dealing with sources. (Yes, we were so shocked and appalled by what we’ve experienced that we wrote up some actual rules!)

• Remember that their time is as valuable as yours. Give sources a few possible times for a phone interview and let them pick the slot that’s most convenient for them. You can give the option of doing an e-mail interview, but don’t require it.
• If you do an e-mail interview, keep the list of questions short; we limit ours to 6 or 7 questions.
• Don’t ask questions that will require the source to regurgitate his entire study, book, or other work.
• Don’t make the source do your work by asking her to write in a certain style or to say certain things.
• Thank the source after the interview, whether by e-mail or snail mail.
• When the article is out, send the source a quick e-mail so he can see the article online or look for it on the newsstands.
• Diana likes to call sources on the fly — they tend to give livelier quotes! However, she always prefaces her questions with, “Is this a good time to talk, or shall we set up an appointment for a better time?” If it’ll just take a few minutes, most sources are happy to chat on the spot.
• Be respectful of time and keep your eye on the clock. If you’ve told someone you need only 15 minutes, and it’s minute 14, break in with, “We’re coming up to the time you alloted for me. I’m happy to keep talking, but I know your time is valuable.” Sources *love* this, as long as you’re asking good questions and the interview’s going well.
• Even experts get the jitters. Spend a minute or two settling them down. Tell them what your article is about, why you picked the topic, how you found their name, etc. You can even let them know how the magazine tends to work, so they won’t be surprised by a call from a factchecker. Then lead into your first question.

Have you ever been the on the other side of the fence as an interviewee? What are your peeves? What do you think writers could do better? Post your comments below!

Share This