Instructions

Diversify the interview with all sorts of portrait descriptions of the responding participant. For example, inserts like “he grinned cheerfully”, “with his eyebrows furrowed, hastily straightened his already evenly hanging tie” and the like are very suitable. Liven up boring text with any subtleties you notice.

At the end of the interview, also make a short author's note, but as a kind of conclusion. When writing your closing note, maintain an objective stance. If certain data, facts or news were refuted or confirmed in the interview, be sure to note them in the author’s conclusion.

When designing an interview, use slightly larger bold font to highlight questions than for answers, which are left in normal font. Make the text of the announcement and conclusion in the same font as the respondent’s answers - this will create a certain style of your design.

According to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, an interview (from the English interview - business meeting, interview) is one of the information and (or) journalistic genres, which is a conversation between the interviewer and one or more respondents on socially significant and interesting topics. At the same time, respondents in interviews can both talk about themselves and comment on any events that have occurred. To conduct an interview, you need at least two people, one of whom will ask questions, and the second will answer them.

Instructions

Before you take it from anyone, prepare for it. Try to collect as much information as possible from the respondent with whom you will communicate. If this is a famous person, read about him in and. If the interviewee is an ordinary citizen, but you have the opportunity to talk with his family, superiors, ask them about him. All this is done to determine the range of topics on which you can talk, and not to inadvertently ask tactless questions. for example, if you have recently experienced the death of a loved one, you should not touch on this topic in an interview if we are talking about, say, his work and not his personal life.

Write down sample questions you are going to ask the respondent. Try to formulate them in such a way that they inspire your interlocutor to provide detailed answers, rather than a short “yes, no, I don’t know.” Questions should be structured logically, so that the main topic of the interview is revealed more and more with each phrase. At the same time, the interviewer should speak as briefly and clearly as possible, and not try to look smarter than his interlocutor. Make sure that the questions are not too long and abstruse, so that they can be easily said and do not need to be repeated twice.

Before the interview begins, briefly describe to your interlocutor the main purpose of your conversation with him. If the interview is informational, start with the reason for which you are having the conversation. If we are talking about the person giving the interview, first ask him to tell you a little about himself. ask additional questions based on the story, don’t be afraid to clarify and ask again, especially when it comes to dates and people. It happens that an interviewee, carried away by his own story, begins to move away from the topic, delving into memories. In this case, correctly return the conversation to the direction you want with the words: “This is very interesting, but I would like to know more about this...”

Video on the topic

note

Professional interviewers know about the “recorder-off effect.” It consists in the fact that after the end of the interview. the respondent relaxes and begins to say something else, remembers some details and details. Keep this in mind and don't miss opportunities to continue the conversation.

Helpful advice

If your respondent is closed and answers all questions in monosyllables, try to find topics in the conversation that will be of interest to him. Talk about something abstract, let the other person relax by talking about the weather outside the window or talking about your beloved dog. When you see that the person is talking, return to the main topic of the interview.

Sources:

• "How to interview"

The apparent simplicity of conducting interviews at first glance is mistaken. When asking questions, you need to be able to get your interlocutor talking in such a way as to get the necessary information, and not a set of streamlined phrases. An interview is a dialogue led by the one who asks the questions.

You will need

• list of questions, pen, notepad, voice recorder, interlocutor’s contacts

Instructions

First of all, involvement or interest in the topic is important. If you really ask people or a specific person about him or the event that he witnessed, then you won’t have to rack your brains over a list of questions. In advance, try to avoid cliché questions like: “how did you become? How do you write songs? How did you feel when your last book came out?”

Before the interview begins, think about what the article will look like. Try to find as much information as possible on the topic. Make an approximate list of questions (about 10), determine their sequence. Of course, during an interview, questions can change places, disappear, and often new questions arise during the conversation. Keep the concept of future material in your head, do not deviate from the intended course, otherwise you will not end up with a complete interview, but a set of incoherent questions and answers. If the interlocutors cannot hear each other, it is of no interest to the interviewer, the interviewee, or the reader.

According to David Randall's book The Versatile Journalist, tricky questions reveal either an inexperienced interviewer or a reporter who is too concerned about his story. Ask the classic but really important questions: what? Where? when did it happen? How? Why? Having received answers to them, you will understand that you have key information in your hands.

Listen carefully to the answers. This way you won’t go astray and won’t allow yourself to be deceived by veiled phrases. Ask them to clarify, often the meaning behind them is not quite the one you interpreted in your own way. The phrase “off the record” should be used as rarely as possible. To do this, discuss all the details of the conversation in advance, and once you agree, do not back down from your words.

Don't be afraid to look like a fool by asking about things that are obvious to the interviewee. Remember that the information you receive will be read by people who are also interested in it. Most sources are usually willing to tell a lot more if they see someone interested in their topic.

Helpful advice

Always write down the names and positions of the interviewees on paper, and then ask them to check in person, and not by ear, what you wrote in the notebook. Do not trust such data even to the highest quality recording equipment.

Sources:

• "Universal Journalist", D. Randall, 1996

The advantage of interviews as a genre is that the reader “sees” a living person, his feelings, his immediate reaction and frank assessment. However, the paradox is that the main difficulty in creating an interview text is related to this same thing. A journalist must be able to establish contact with the interlocutor and direct his reasoning in the right direction. Knowledge about the types of interviews and the principles of preparing each of them will help in such work.

Instructions

All types of interviews are divided into three large ones - informational, analytical and artistic and journalistic. When creating each of them, the journalist is given a special goal and objectives, in accordance with which the conversation with the interviewee is conducted.

Event informational interview. When creating it, you must learn about all the significant details of the event from its participant. Therefore, it is worth asking questions that clarify the location of the incident, its essence, the number of participants, the specifics of the actions and the results. Don’t try to collect as much information as possible at once - it needs to be structured so that the reader sees a vivid picture of the event through the eyes of another person. This text will resemble a short report.

During a conversation for an analytical interview, questions that paint an image of the situation are supplemented by those that push the expert to analyze it. During the conversation, you should find out from the person what he sees as the problem being discussed, what its significance is for society as a whole and its individual segments. Ask for a forecast of how the situation will develop and ask what ways out of the current problem could be.

Within the framework of artistic journalism, an interview can take place in two forms: a sketch and a portrait. In the first case, with the help of leading questions, you help the interviewee create an image of an event. Unlike an informational interview, what is important here is not so much exact facts (although distortion of them, of course, is unacceptable), but rather small characteristic details that make the picture especially lively, humane, and touching the feelings of readers. An artistic and journalistic interview-portrait, in accordance with the name, creates the image of a specific person on the pages of newspapers and magazines. During such an interview, you must be especially sensitive to your interlocutor, be extremely tactful and sincere in order to win his favor. Only after establishing contact can you ask questions that will become the starting point in a person’s memories and reasoning about his life. The role of the journalist in such an interview comes down not to assessing the hero, but to “moderating” his story so that a portrait appears in the text as a result of introspection and reflection.

Video on the topic

The profession of a journalist is complex and not suitable for everyone. The ability to ask questions to an interlocutor in such a way as to obtain reliable and sincere answers is acquired over the years, but the beginnings of it are laid on the bench of the institute.

You will need

• - pen;
• - notebook;
• - Dictaphone.

Instructions

Prepare in advance. Going to a press conference or without prior preparation is extremely unprofessional. Find as much information as possible about the person you are going to interview, specify dates and positions. Clearly state the main question that defines the topic of the conversation, and try to understand it so as not to look like a layman.

Simplify your language. The simpler the question, the greater the chance of getting a clear answer. Confusing questions trip up not only your interlocutor, but also you. Anyone can fit into five basic ones: who, what, where, when, how, why. By asking them in this sequence, you will certainly get a holistic picture of events and will not miss important information.

Don't limit yourself to the topic of discussion. If you feel that the interlocutor is ready to provide interesting information not related to the topic of the interview, do not interrupt him and listen to the end. Subsequently, when writing an article, you will only rejoice at your patience.

Avoid cliché questions. There are more than a dozen of them in journalism today. They should be avoided by any means, because if you ask a cookie-cutter question, you will receive exactly the same answer, which does not contain any information.

Start with secondary issues. If the first question of the interview becomes the most important for the entire conversation, you can give up on it. They will answer you briefly and without emotion, and further attempts to clarify the situation will fail.

Alternate between open and closed questions. Open ones allow the interviewee to speak fully, closed ones are clearly stated and require a negative or affirmative answer. The sequence of questions will determine the development of the entire conversation.

Helpful advice

Don't get distracted during the interview, pay attention to the person you're talking to. There is nothing worse than a journalist’s disrespectful attitude towards his interlocutor.

Sources:

• how to ask questions as a journalist

Tip 6: Copywriting school: 5 secrets on how to describe an article so that people buy it

Instructions

Do not write: “This article is about...”, etc. It is better to come up with a title that explains the essence of the article. And in the description, provide a couple of “catchy” expressions, “hooks” to interest the buyer. Create suspense. This way you show the buyer that the reader will be interested in your article and, at a minimum, will start reading it.

Reveal all your cards. If you are giving any advice, at least list the points. If you discuss a topic, write down what conclusions you came to. The buyer should know about your article even before purchasing it. Or at least have an idea. What if he needs an article where you praise the Unified State Exam, and in your thoughts you scold him?..

Write the description in the same language you used to write the article. If this is an entertaining article, then the description should be “light” and unobtrusive. If the research is serious, then the description should not be entertaining at all.

Make an additional description: write down for what audience your article is intended, for what site, where your article can be adapted. Be sure to indicate if your article is part of a series: maybe the customer will buy more or give you a personal order.

Give the buyer a nice bonus. For example, write that you made a discount on the article (even if you didn’t). Or include free photos. Or offer free revision. It will be more pleasant for the buyer to buy your article.

Video on the topic

Tip 7: Copywriter school: how a beginner can get promoted on the copywriting market - a universal recipe

Newbies in any place are treated with caution. Copywriting exchanges are no exception. Even if you are a copywriting guru and have already “lit up” somewhere, then on a new exchange you will have to prove your professional suitability again. However, usually, if you have experience and skills, this is not difficult to do. But what should those who have just embarked on the thorny path of a copywriter do?

The first thing you should take care of on a new exchange is reputation. Read the user agreement carefully and find out the rating system. You must be firmly aware of the rules of the exchange and in no case violate them. Create virtual wallets to which you will withdraw money, or indicate your credit card or current account numbers.

The second step is the initial stage. Fill in your information. Come up with a nickname. It must be readable and unique. There is no need to call yourself sergey777, this will show that you are one of many. Do not use any random combination of letters. This is also considered bad form. Some of the nickname options are part of your first name or last name, or a combination of both. Your nickname should become a brand in the future. It is better to fill out the additional information about yourself to the maximum - customers prefer to work with real people. Choose a suitable avatar or photo. This will also be an element of your brand.

If possible, complete test tasks. Many exchanges have them. For this, a rating is awarded, which at the initial stage you need like air. And on some exchanges, for example, on Text.ru, they don’t take you at all without passing the “entrance exam”.

The third step to success is a portfolio. A well-designed portfolio can significantly raise you in the eyes of the customer. And this means a greater level of trust in you. Therefore, compiling a portfolio for successful work on the stock exchange is simply necessary.

Different exchanges have different approaches to compiling a portfolio. Some have a special section where you can post your unique articles or links to already published ones. For example, on Textsale there is a “Portfolio” section and a “Free Publishing” section. On some, you can display your portfolio as a topic on the forum, for example, on Advego. And, for example, on Text.ru the application form has a section “About yourself”, where you can interestingly present information about yourself and show your work. In general, as many exchanges as there are so many options. Find out how you can present your portfolio and be sure to create one!

By orders. Need I say that all orders must be completed on time, in strict accordance with the customer’s requirements, with maximum uniqueness? All this goes without saying. Your goal, as a beginner, is not only to get promoted, but also to find regular customers. Don’t be afraid to contact customers for whom you did the work and who paid for it. You can ask if he needs your services. You can even offer him a discount. If the customer needs a lot of similar texts, and you did everything well, he usually hires you as a permanent performer.

At first, you won’t get the most “delicious” orders. But you don’t need to wait for them! Regularly post 3-4 articles to the store on the most popular topics, or on a topic that you understand. A little trick - to make your nickname appear in the store more often, upload articles not immediately, but at intervals of 1-2 hours. You will become “familiar” and the level of trust in you will be higher.

Strive to communicate on forums with customers. It happens that customers are looking for newcomers to entrust them with work at a lower price than professional performers. Don't shy away from this kind of work, especially at first. This will help you gain authority and weight on the stock exchange. Ask customers for positive things. For reviews, you can provide them with discounts or bonuses, for example, free photos or the 5th text as a gift.

Communicate with the customer as equals. Remember - you are not a slave and not. You help your customer earn money, and he shares the profit with you. You are in an equal relationship, not a subordinate relationship. When communicating in person, you need to not only discuss purely business issues, but also communicate in a purely human way. For example, share the results of a football match or opinions about a recent premiere. Then the customer will perceive you as a real person, and not an employee with a keyboard. This means you can count on good orders and interesting work.

Improvements. Sometimes it happens that a customer asks you to finalize a completed order. Don't be afraid, this is normal. If the customer’s requirements are adequate and you miss something due to your fault, correct it. But if you think that the customer is demanding too much, that is, what was not discussed in the creative brief, feel free to contact arbitration. Arbitration in 90% of cases is on the side of the copywriter.

So, by moving with perseverance, without giving up and without being upset about refusals or improvements, you will make your career on the stock exchange.

Key question: how much can you earn on the copywriting exchange? Many, very many. But at first the amounts will not be very impressive. If you work regularly, taking 3-4 orders a day, you can realistically earn about 8-10 thousand rubles in the first month. Further more. Good luck!

Tip 8: Copywriting school: 7 reasons why you should write on KakProsto

Copywriting is one of the most profitable activities of all online earnings. Every day dozens of new sites and portals appear that require content. Therefore, a talented and “promoted” copywriter is always in demand. Another thing is a beginner copywriter who has no experience, no name, and often no self-confidence. Even those who undertake to independently create and promote their own website do not always have the necessary skills and abilities. The question arises - where to buy them? You can’t work for free, for a “review” or “reputation” - you just want to eat. There is a way out - post articles on the website How Simple.

Instructions

Experience. You will gain invaluable experience working with text. Learn to formulate your thoughts, hone your style. Moreover, you will understand what niche you are strong in - auto, construction, ... You will understand what kind of articles are easy for you to write, and which ones are difficult. This way you can find your topic and “stake out” a certain niche for yourself. Subsequently, you will be able to post your articles on this topic on exchanges or create your own website.

Development of search engine optimization skills. Through statistics, you will see which articles are in demand and which do not arouse much interest among readers. Learn to optimize articles for search queries and make sure that “it works” - the number of readers will increase. The only drawback is that the statistics are far from detailed. You will not see where the conversions came from and what the “face” of your audience is. On the other hand, having far from complete information, you will be able to grasp the general “trend”. And for a professional copywriter it is always important to know “which way the wind is blowing”, to rely on intuition and to be ahead of the curve.

Promoted site. How Simple is a well-known and respected project. Therefore, it is quite easy to make a name for yourself as the lead author of the site. You can always indicate in your portfolio that you are a blogger of the KakProsto portal and send a link to your profile. And the customer will be able to view your materials at any time and evaluate the quality of your work.

Living community. Of course, there are still not enough comments on articles in the general mass; it cannot be compared with the same “School of Life”. But, on the other hand, society is actively developing, new functions and opportunities are being launched - the same author or the opportunity to ask questions. This encourages communication and expression of thoughts. And in the comments and questions there are a lot of ideas for future articles.

Moderation. Our articles undergo fairly strict moderation and frankly “weak” and uninteresting articles will not be accepted. This teaches the copywriter that he shouldn’t be a hack.

Convenient withdrawal system. Transferring money to a bank card with deduction of all taxes and pension savings is an excellent feature of the site. Each copywriter can work “in white” without opening an individual entrepreneur and without incurring additional costs. In addition, most other work on the Internet involves withdrawing money to Webmoney, and withdrawing money from this payment system is quite difficult in a number of cities.

Communication with customers is a whole science. After all, our word is our weapon. Therefore, when communicating, the customer evaluates how effective it is. For some reason, many copywriters forget about this. In articles they are the height of literacy, but when communicating on ICQ or through social networks they make annoying mistakes. Or they scare away the customer with their snobbery - this also happens.

Correct treatment of the customer, always and in everything. The address must be addressed to you, possibly with a small letter. There is no need to be familiar or make inappropriate jokes. Remember – you and the customer have a purely business relationship, nothing personal. As for the sense of humor - before inserting witty remarks, pay attention to whether the customer has a sense of humor at all. Otherwise, he may not like your jokes, and you risk breaking off the establishing communication.

If you want to defuse the situation a little, then use the magnificent invention of Internet communication - emoticons. Emoticons are a great opportunity to make even a serious business conversation a little more sincere.

Regardless of the method of communication with the customer, it is unacceptable to make grammatical, punctuation and stylistic errors. The customer can afford it. You, as a copywriter, can only afford typos or intentional errors, which you highlight in the text so that it is clear that this was done on purpose.

Carefully read the texts of the technical task (creative assignment), ask clarifying questions, especially if you are working for the first time. For example, what site will it go to, what audience is it intended for, will there be pictures, etc., whatever you see fit. The more information you have, the better your text will be.

Put snobbery aside. Even if you are a super copywriter, and the customer is a green beginner, and you “cut” the topic a hundred times better. Remember: whoever pays calls the tune. Therefore, it is better to carefully read the requirements and, if you think that it is better to do something differently (select other keywords or offer a different text structure), calmly and unobtrusively suggest this to the customer. Be sure to give reasons why it is better to do it. “My experience / intuition / inner voice / grandma at the entrance / another copywriter tells me this” are not arguments. The phrase: “Everyone does it this way” is not an argument either. Maybe this is what your customer wants to do, not like everyone else.

In general, giving tips to the customer is not so much the task of a copywriter as of an optimizer. Therefore, you should show your professionalism in a different way. Don’t tell the customer, but gently advise, for example: “I would do it this way”, “But to me, as a user, it seems like this”... And be careful with advice. If the customer follows your advice and everything works out, his gratitude will know no bounds. And if it’s the other way around, then blame yourself.

It is better to agree on the price of the issue in advance. Decide whether this is the price for 1000 characters or for the entire text. It happens that a misunderstanding arises if the customer indicates, for example, a price of 60 rubles for the entire text of 2000 characters, but the copywriter thinks that it is for 1000 characters. If you think that your work is paid low, or you raise the price for all customers, then be prepared that the customer will leave you. If he doesn’t want to leave or can’t, and he doesn’t have the opportunity to pay more yet, you can give him a temporary relief. Just make sure that what is temporary does not become permanent.
Try to find out as much as possible about your respondent and his profession. Read specialized literature, a magazine, or browse relevant websites. It would be nice to find a biography of your future interlocutor in advance. As a rule, this is not difficult if he is a fairly famous person. In addition, past interviews are excellent as background material. What is it for? You will draw up a preliminary portrait of a person, you will know what he is like and you will be able to ask him really interesting questions without getting bogged down in trifles and biographical details.

Preparing a list of questions
The first stage helped you form an opinion about the person. Now the list of questions automatically excludes informational questions: “Where were you born,” “What did you do,” etc. Studying the biography will give food to more interesting questions: “How did you manage to escape from the province and become the coolest copywriter of all time?” Questions should reveal the essence of a person and give him plenty of room for thought and analysis. Analytics, especially in interviews, are many times more interesting to read than dry statistics.

Chat with people who know the person
It could be anyone. If you know such acquaintances, you are lucky. Ask them what kind of character the person has, how he communicates, what his habits are, what he likes, what questions you can ask him and which ones are best avoided, etc. For example, if you find out that you like the same book or musical group, in an interview you can get him to talk about it, mention that you like it too, and the person will be better disposed towards you.

How to conduct an interview successfully

The work of a journalist is a targeted and in-depth search for necessary information that was previously unknown.

In order for the interview to be successful, the first thing you need to do is formulate goals and objectives. The conversation will be successful if you prepare questions in advance and delve into the essence of the topic raised in the interview.

You definitely need to plan a future conversation. Sample questions should be drawn up that will be asked in accordance with the stated objectives. Each of the tasks involves certain questions to solve. The ability and talent to clearly formulate questions during a conversation is one of the important qualities of a successful journalist.

Throughout the conversation, you need to be able to: adapt to your interlocutor, adjust the wording and essence of the questions.

Depending on the topic, it is recommended to use a different sequence of questions in interviews. It is best to start with light and casual questions, then move on to more personal and detailed questions. Finally, it’s better to ask questions about something pleasant.

Human perception is selective, so every professional reporter should have a voice recorder, a personal notebook or notebook. Recording information is necessary in order to later comprehend the answers and build the logic of the conversation.

What are the best questions to ask?

Questions can be direct or indirect, open or closed. Direct questions should be asked if a specific answer is required. Indirect questions are appropriate in cases where it is assumed that the person will not answer directly. Open questions are more sincere, which encourages the interlocutor to give sincere, unrestricted answers, which can take a long time. Closed questions require a specific answer - clear and precise.

You should never ask stupid or trivial questions. These include questions: “Tell me about your life?”, “How to achieve success?”.

There is no need to ask questions that the person has already answered many times. This will not be very pleasant for a person who is answering the same question for the tenth time, and for listeners who are expecting new, unique information. You should review all available information and not repeat yourself.

Interview questions should be interesting and original. You need to be able to interest the interlocutor, strive to ensure that the person opens up to the maximum. In addition, you should remember: competently posed questions encourage most people to engage in dialogue.

The main thing before the interview is to determine what new things you want to know about the person, and only after that come up with a variety of unusual questions.

You can use the so-called “hot questions”. They should be asked from the position of the majority. Responsibility to the masses makes you comment on the situation more sincerely.

You should ask questions that cannot be answered in monosyllables. Open-ended questions tend to elicit more frank responses.

You need to use a pause. If the interlocutor does not immediately answer the question completely, you can pretend to wait. Often, as time runs out, the interlocutor concludes that some more details are needed and adds to the short answer. The main thing is to be able to “silence your interlocutor.”

For an interview to be bright, interesting and rich, you need to fill it with original, correctly posed questions.

A practical guide for future journalists on how to conduct and write interviews. Suitable for the course Fundamentals of Creative Journalism.

Excerpts from the book: Lukina M. Interview technology

This manual is devoted to the most important section of the course “Fundamentals of the Creative Activity of a Journalist” and has no analogues in Russian literature. The book is intended as a practical guide for future journalists. In doing so, the author takes into account the experience of practicing journalists, as well as Russian and foreign colleagues.

Interviews are the most common method of obtaining information, which is used by journalists in all countries of the world. American researchers estimate that interviews “eat up” 80 to 90% of their working time. The equally important ones that are generally accepted in this professional activity include observation and work with documents. All three cognitive methods are implemented comprehensively and, based on the principle of complementarity, depending on the assigned tasks, they are the main or auxiliary tool for journalistic research. At the same time, as practice has shown, an interview as a contact with a “living” source more often than other methods provides material for publications: the documents used in its preparation will not replace “living” human evidence.

And observation in isolation from communication with people is unlikely to give a complete picture, even if it fills the publication with the necessary details. A conversation with a competent interlocutor can not only be of interest from the point of view of the method of obtaining information, but also be valuable in itself as a text or genre. Due to such qualities as the direct speech of the source, the interactive mode of transmitting information, the possibility of using elements of drama, special readability and ease of perception (dynamism and short periods of speech, audio polyphony), interviews have long been included in the palette of journalistic genres. It is used by professionals as the most popular format for print media, radio and television broadcasts. But it seems that it will find its niche in new online media.

The interview method is common in the practice of interpersonal communications. This is one of the activities through which journalists collect information. Other examples: job interview; interviewing a patient at a doctor's appointment; official negotiations; interrogation to clarify the circumstances of the court case; sociological survey; marketing surveys, etc. - all these are types of interviews in the broad sense of the word. In the process of conducting it, information is collected, in each case for very specific business, professional or personal purposes. In a methodological sense, they have much in common. Therefore, we often gain knowledge about interview methods from areas far from journalism, for example, from psychology, sociology or other academic disciplines. However, an interview in the context of the journalistic profession has its own specifics and definitions. Let's list some of them.

“An interview is a conversation between a press representative and a public figure on topical issues of public interest.”

“An interview is a genre of journalism, a conversation between a journalist and one or more people on some topical issues.”

“A conversation intended for print (or broadcast on radio or television) with a person.”

In these definitions, emphasis is placed on different aspects of a journalistic interview - interview method (method of collecting information), interview genre (form of presenting information). However, they contain a critical component that distinguishes the nature of journalism from other forms of communication. “Public interest”, “current issue”, “fit for publication” are the key words of these definitions that indicate this difference. It turns out that an interview between a journalist and an interlocutor is a conversation between two people not just to exchange information, but with the goal of creating a new information product - relevant, socially significant, intended for publication.

A journalistic interview, whether it is published as a conversation or provides information for materials in other genres, by its nature represents a phenomenon of special social significance. The information obtained during the conversation is intended not only to satisfy the curiosity of the participants in the conversation or for personal, professional, or corporate purposes. In an interview, the interlocutors - a journalist (interviewer) and his partner (interviewee) - participate in an information exchange to saturate the main, albeit invisible, third participant in communication - the audience.

Interview Approaches

Journalism offers several approaches to interviews. They have been developed over the years, both in practical and theoretical research. In the theory of journalism of the Soviet period, it was customary to consider interviews in two main ways - as a method of collecting information and a genre. In the scientific and educational literature of the 1970-1980s, which was read and re-read by more than one generation of journalism students, two approaches to the study of interviews were presented - methodological and genre. The first considered interviews as a tool for collecting information as a question-and-answer method of obtaining information. In a sense, this approach was included in the system of scientific concepts and in the context of such related disciplines as sociology and psychology. This, on the one hand, greatly facilitated the analysis of the generic features of this type of activity, but, on the other hand, did not take into account the variety of situations in which journalists found themselves during the preparation and conduct of interviews. By the way, the researchers recognized a certain flaw in this approach and the vulnerability of its recommendations for practical application.

Theoretical materials about the interviews were supplemented by numerous publications by practicing journalists. Among them, I would like to highlight the books of Alexander Bek and Anatoly Agranovsky - recognized “talkers” and masters of the genre. Their reflection on various situations and incidents that they encountered while communicating with people helped other journalists understand their activities.

The second, so-called “genre” approach is the consideration of interviews as a method of organizing a text with its own original structure and form-defining features. It was developed in the coordinate system of periodical press genres. The interview was classified as an information genre of periodicals, and its success, or effectiveness, according to researchers, depended on the ideological preparation of the author. In general, the initial ideological positions determined, according to the theory of the Soviet press, the professionalism and skill of a journalist.

By viewing the interviews from two perspectives, the researchers actually artificially divided the creative process. They tried to mechanically describe it according to the strict laws of science and lost sight of the fact that the nature of journalism must be sought at the crossroads of different spheres of life - politics, mass culture, economics, law. In addition, with such a conventional division, ethical and moral conflicts that arose in the professional activities of journalists and were worth more attention than their “party position” eluded researchers and authors.

In the 1980s, an attempt was made to resolve this contradiction in a number of scientific articles in which method and genre were considered in a single key of dialectical interaction. However, a holistic view of the interview as a process of preparation, production and post-production of an information product has not yet been formed. Research into the ideological and thematic component of a journalist’s creative activity has proven to be very effective, highlighting the search and development of a topic as a kind of trigger for all subsequent work. But here too there is a practical component necessary for educational literature - tips and guidelines on how to conduct interviews; achieve success and maintain your individuality; to protect the public interest and at the same time avoid unnecessary pathos and false notes - remained outside the purview of the authors. But the questions asked mainly by young journalists remained open.

There was a third approach to interviews, developed in the context of ethical problems of the creative activity of a journalist. However, even here only a few cases of professional communication containing conflicts of interest situations were considered and ways of resolving them were proposed, which in those historical conditions seemed ethically correct to the author. And in this approach, the ideological assessment of the situation prevailed, and the norms of party discipline served as the criterion of morality.

Only in the mid-1990s did developments appear on the moral principles of journalism. They require the journalist to be responsible to the individual and free from ideological stereotypes and party affiliation. The professional communication of a journalist with his sources and heroes was considered here in the context of civil and personal responsibility, as well as the political non-partisanship of the authors.

A series of textbooks and teaching aids on the technology of journalistic creativity, published in recent years, has practically filled an empty niche in the literature and partially satisfied the needs of students and aspiring journalists, although separate publications devoted to the technology of conducting interviews have not appeared. Related approaches based on the theory of interpersonal communication have become productive and worthy of attention. Now the problems of human communications and their successful strategies are considered in relation to the journalistic interview. Work in this direction was carried out in parallel by foreign researchers.

The theory and methodology of interviews were developed in more detail by Western schools of journalism. Here I would like to mention only the approaches that, in the author’s opinion, deserve the greatest attention.

For example, in the now textbook theory of the inverted pyramid, interviews with sources are subject to the law of sequential answers to six traditional questions: who? What? When? Where? How? Why? This rule works flawlessly in the process of creating the classical model of event-oriented news, and in a wide variety of cultural and linguistic traditions.

Wide possibilities lie in the theory of creative interviews, when participants in a conversation, exchanging information and ideas, achieve a level of knowledge that each of them could not reach alone, on their own. The author of this approach believes that a journalist should approach his questions not “linearly,” but creatively, so that the information product ready for publication contains information unknown to the reader.

In recent years, the “new” interview methodology developed by the famous Canadian journalist John Sawatsky has become very popular in educational institutions in Europe and America. His “philosophy” is to destroy the stereotypes of question-and-answer communication, based on hidden competition between the journalist and his interlocutor, on “extorting” the answer from the latter. Competition, i.e. a kind of struggle between the communicating parties, according to John Sawatsky, is a sign of any human conversation, but is by no means a method of collecting information suitable for a journalistic interview. “There is no need to compete in an interview,” he believes, “in an interview you need to ask questions and get answers to them.”

Various approaches to interviews have emerged as a result of researchers' desire to summarize and analyze this most popular and effective way of obtaining information, but have done little to change the way journalists approach interviews. A conversation on the phone, a question on the plane, participation in a press conference, a survey on the street, a discussion on a given topic, a dialogue, a round table, a personal interview, etc. In fact, all forms and options for a journalist’s communication for professional purposes are interviews in the broad sense of the word. Of course, the behavior of a journalist varies depending on the variety of goals, the level of tasks assigned and the degree of individual participation of the journalist in them. But, nevertheless, in all cases, an interview is an interpersonal verbal communication to obtain information and produce new knowledge in order to meet the information needs of society.

Of all these approaches to interviews, John Sawatsky's approach, rejecting competition and promoting partnership, is perhaps closest to the realities of modern journalistic practice. And yet, this approach does not exhaust all the options for the style of behavior of a journalist who comes into contact with other people to obtain information. The characteristics of his interaction with his interlocutor are much more varied. Moreover, they change depending on a number of factors, both individual (for example, the personality traits of the interlocutors) and societal (the existing relationships between public institutions, media organizations and individual journalists).

Despite the conceptual differences in approaches, variety of types and formats, interviews as a method of obtaining information for the purpose of informing society also have very specific behavioral stylistic techniques that can be used by all journalists. Let's list their various options.

The confrontational style occurs when a journalist does not trust his source and looks for double meaning in every event. His questions are often impartial, and the interlocutor is waiting for a trick. Such an annoying, “prying into all the holes” journalist-skeptic. The famous TV presenter of the “Moment of Truth” program Andrei Karaulov developed a similar image. It must be said that such a behavior is quite natural for a reporter, whose line of work must get to the bottom of the matter and double-check the facts, even at great cost. By the way, the “training” of reporters, which many editorial offices do, is often carried out using terminology close to military. For example, it is proposed to “outline a battle plan”, “develop a counter-offensive technique”, “start an attack with questions”. Although in fact, the necessary attributes of successful interpersonal communication are compassion, patience and attention to the interlocutor. However, such reporters, according to colleagues, are characterized more by cold calculation, rigidity and, in a sense, aggressive assertiveness. It was this behavioral style that influenced the formation of a negative stereotype of a journalist in the public consciousness. Although this is already an obsolete type, which developed long before the beginning of the era of the information revolution.

The elite style is born in certain social conditions as a result of processes of social stratification. It opposes a confrontational, competitive strategy, and all its forms come down to a heightened sense of social responsibility of a journalist who guards the interests of certain social groups. In this case, he acts as a teacher, a “social controller” of various aspects of social life: economics, politics, morality. Oddly enough, unlike a journalist who has chosen a competitive, confrontational model of behavior and stands guard over the entire society, a representative of the elitist approach does not pay too much attention to the “common man”.

The partner mode of communication contrasts with the previous two in terms of different approaches to some basic ideas of journalists about sources of information. The process of searching for it, which is a necessary condition for the preparation and production of materials, in the first two is perceived as collecting information about the objects of reality, and the people who have it are considered simply as suppliers of information, or informants. In the context of the partnership approach, information is collected not through the role functions of “collectors” and “suppliers” of information, but in the process of human communication and equal interaction of two (or more) people. By the way, news material much more often than we think arises during interviews, and in this sense, news is a product of human interaction, resulting from the joint creative activity of the journalist and his interlocutor. The partnership approach invites journalists to change their professional thinking from the position of “gathering information” to “searching for news”, developing new knowledge in the process of dialogue, when the parties bear mutual responsibility for the result of communication. News as a result of cooperation between the work of a journalist and an interlocutor can be developed only when both parties are interested in communication, and not just the journalist performing his professional duty. This approach requires greater dedication from the author and penetration into the world of the interlocutor, understanding the components of his beliefs, attitudes, and motives, even if this is not so important for the journalistic “story.” This is how, for example, Andrey Maksimov, the host of the “Night Flight” program, works. This model, however, is not considered optimal by many journalists in such critical situations, when news production is on stream, when a certain narrow task needs to be solved and there is no time for partnership.

The era of civil society and the new information order emerging at the turn of the century have confronted all participants in information exchange with the need to revise old strategies. New approaches are also emerging in professional journalistic practice, based on the principles of openness, transparency, tolerance and respect for the interlocutor. The aggressive style of “information gathering” and the confrontational reporting style are becoming irrelevant. It is becoming less and less common for journalists to intrude into the field of assessments and opinions, the main burden of which falls entirely on the shoulders of newsmakers. The journalist gradually removes the mask of frightening elitism. When information becomes valuable in itself, a “heart-to-heart conversation”, a conversation on an equal footing with the interviewer, becomes less and less popular. In this case, the interlocutor comes to the fore as a source of information, and it is the job of the journalist to obtain this information, unobtrusively, with professional ease and grace, and then pass it on to its intended purpose, to the society in whose interests he works. A significant role in this approach is played by the interactive participation of the audience, which can, as a full-fledged partner, become involved in the interview process. The journalist then acts as a kind of director, moderator of communication between the source and the final consumer of the information product. The famous Russian television commentator Vladimir Pozner can perhaps be counted among the followers of this type of professional behavior.

Types and forms of organizing interviews

Types of interviews

Although we are considering laws that are common to all interviews, we must keep in mind that there are different types of interviews that influence the development of strategic plans, determine the nature of preliminary preparation, determine the characteristics of the behavior of the journalist and the interlocutor, as well as the specific technology for conducting the conversation.

For example, we can talk about two different methods of communication - direct, immediate contact with the interlocutor and indirect. In almost all classic interviews this happens synchronously, i.e. at the same time and with direct contact between the journalist and the interlocutor - spatial, visual, verbal.

There is also the possibility of indirect communication, and the forms and combinations of indirection can be different. For example, a telephone interview, in which the conversation may be synchronous, but there is no visual contact. True, modern technologies make it possible to conduct interviews using satellite communications, when the interlocutors can be in different cities, even parts of the world, while also having visual contact. Another option for indirect interviews - written form with the possibility of a delayed response - is practiced infrequently and, as a rule, with very important people. But interviews using various Internet services (e-mail, chats, teleconferences), presumably, have a great future. Such communication, mediated by computer and telephone wires, takes place in written form. The response can be carried out either in a delayed response mode or online, and good communication channels potentially allow you to establish both voice and video contact with the respondent.

Depending on the goals, the following types of interviews can be distinguished as a method of obtaining information.

Informational interviews are the most popular type aimed at collecting material for news. Due to strict time standards, this interview has a very dynamic pace. For example, to cover a national disaster, a television crew manages to interview more than a dozen people in just one hour. In a situation where it is necessary to find out the force of the explosion and the estimated number of victims, the journalist, of course, does not always have time for all stages of communication, in particular for the start of a “warm-up” conversation recommended by etiquette. However, despite the strict time constraints, the spirit of dialogue and respect for the interlocutor in creating conditions for answers must be created.

The backbone of a typical news interview is the journalist's key questions: who? What? Where? When? Why? For what? Experience shows that they are quite sufficient for collecting factual information. However, journalists also resort to other questions that clarify or filter information for a more subtle elaboration of the plot. “Did you really see the plane explode?” - the journalist asks the witness of the plane crash. At the same time, what is needed in the frame is not an idle onlooker who accidentally happens to be close to the shooting location and is subordinate to the general emotional excitement, ready to answer any questions in front of the camera.

Due to lack of time, preparations for going out for an interview on an event are usually rare. Therefore, when formulating questions, a journalist more often relies on his powers of observation when investigating a situation and its cause-and-effect relationships.

Finding himself with a film crew at the scene of a fire, the journalist notices that the extinguishing hoses do not stretch to the nearest fire hydrant, but almost across the entire block. He asks the fire brigade leader: “Why isn’t the nearest crane used?” It turns out not only that it is faulty, but also that almost half of the fire valves in the city are in the same condition. So, next to the event related to extinguishing the fire, a problematic story about the city fire service arises.

An operational interview is a type of informational interview, only in an even more condensed version. For example, a story about a fire includes a statement from the fire chief about the statistics and causes of city fires. The boss may speak on camera for a long time, but the news release will include a fragment of 20-40 seconds from the interview, and the quote will be clearly included in the context of the story. Such prompt statements by experts, specialists in any field on very specific occasions are an obligatory component of print news materials, radio or television news stories.

There is another type of interview, which aims to collect different opinions on a specific, usually narrow, issue. A popular form of such targeted interviews is a blitz survey, or a street survey. In English, it is called street talk; the Latin version is also often used - vox pop. A characteristic feature of such interviews is the posing of identical, fixed questions to as many respondents as possible, representatives of the same or, conversely, different social groups.

For a television report on an action against smoking among young people, you can conduct, for example, a survey of students and schoolchildren, asking everyone the question: “Do you smoke? If yes, are you going to quit smoking? But for a story about the mood in the city after a terrorist attack that took the lives of several people, it is better to interview representatives of different age groups.

Journalists often mistakenly call this type of interview a sociological survey, because it contains an element of the method of specific sociological research - a fixed, clear question for a large number of respondents. However, it lacks the main requirement for sociological research - representativeness, i.e. representation of various social groups, and, therefore, based on the results of such surveys, serious conclusions that claim scientific accuracy cannot be made.

An investigative interview is conducted with the aim of in-depth study of an event or problem. As a rule, it is organized in detail and is not strictly bound by time restrictions, although, of course, there are calendar plans here too. The subject of the investigation may be complex and contradictory. That's why they talk about the combinatorics of methods. It is very important to pay a lot of attention to setting goals and preliminary work with materials, to fully study all written sources and oral evidence, and to think carefully about the conversation strategy. The most important link here is the questions. However, it is necessary to think through other elements of communication - such as first contact, non-verbal forms of communication, listening skills. An investigative interview may involve several characters with different temperaments and social roles. Moreover, an individual approach must be found to each of them.

An interview-portrait, or a personal interview (they also say “profile” in the manner of artists), on the contrary, is focused on one character, however, in order to prepare, it is advisable to have more than one meeting with interested people, close ones, or, conversely, with outside observers. The hero of such an interview can be a person who has proven himself in some area of ​​public life and attracts the interest of the general public. Less common are portrait interviews with so-called “ordinary people” who must prove themselves in some way or be very typical. The details of everyday life, interior design, clothing, and the characteristics of the hero’s speech also carry a great burden - in a word, that which forms individuality and must certainly be conveyed to the reader.

Let's consider another type of interview, when a journalist not only turns out to be an intermediary in the transfer of information, but actually acts on an equal footing with his interlocutor in the process of joint creativity. Such a creative interview is often called a conversation or dialogue. The result of a creative partnership is an information product in a genre close to fiction, which, depending on the transmission channel, can be embodied in a feature story, an essay, a documentary-journalistic film, an on-air dialogue, etc. The first condition for such an interview is extensive professional experience and a creative reputation as a journalist. The second is the correct choice of the interlocutor, with the help of whom, due to his abilities, actions or social status, the journalist will be able to reach a deep level of generalizations, see drama in the problem, and a universal principle in personal fate.

Forms of organizing interviews

Journalists have to ask questions in different situations, which depend on a variety of, sometimes unforeseen, circumstances. But more often, interviews are conducted in predetermined places and in established traditional formats (press conferences, access to press representatives, briefings). This is dictated either by the newsmaker himself, or by the information service, which is a kind of intermediary in transmitting information to the consumer. In a situation with an intermediary, cases of controlling the information flow, in particular hiding or dosing information, cannot be ruled out, especially when it comes to groups of political or economic influence and related information.

A press conference is a collective interview when journalists are invited to a meeting with a person, a source of information, at a certain time and place. Most often, the meeting place is an information service, an agency, or a specially equipped room in a community center. Press conferences are usually convened on certain news occasions for the purpose of disseminating, clarifying or refuting any information.

Such events are carried out according to a pre-established procedure: the initiator makes a detailed report about an accomplished or planned event, decision, proposal, after which journalists are given the opportunity to ask questions. Often information is prepared in advance for dissemination in writing, in the form of press releases, which, on the one hand, makes it easier for journalists to prepare the material (names, facts, quotes have already been verified), on the other, is a way to control its “output” (to the press -release “packages” the information that is beneficial to interested parties).

Press conferences are also held to convey unofficial, so-called “background” information to media representatives. It is clear that it is undesirable to print such information, and journalists are usually warned that the information is unofficial.

The practice of holding press conferences in most countries of the world shows that the process of transmitting information is usually led by a moderator. This figure is key at a press conference: it is he who first invites the newsmaker or his representative to speak, and then gives journalists the opportunity to ask questions. The moderator has to decide which of them will do this. True, in some countries, for example in Sweden, there is a tradition: the journalist himself takes the floor without waiting for an invitation. But in the United States, at a presidential press conference, the floor is given to the journalist by the president himself or his press secretary.

Journalists who often attend press conferences are also faced with cases of infringement of information freedoms, for example, when the right to ask questions is given to representatives of publications that are “beneficial” to the organizers of the press conference for political or other reasons. This motive may also manifest itself in the refusal of accreditation to certain journalists. In general, one must keep in mind that many press conferences are part of planned PR campaigns, the purpose of which is to present a certain person or event in a positive light. This, of course, calls into question the trust in the relationship between the participants in the information exchange.

This is exactly how journalists from the “disgraced” media perceived the first press conference of President Mikhail Gorbachev after the suppression of the August putsch in 1991. Then his press secretary Vitaly Ignatenko gave the floor mainly to Western journalists.

“It was to them, by some clearly thought-out intrigue of this almost overthrown president’s appearance to the world, that his press secretary Ignatenko, who disappeared for three days, gave the floor. Ignatenko did not notice the hands of journalists from Soviet newspapers banned by the junta, including the hands of NG correspondents. Although it was NG journalist Tatyana Malkina, the only one both from the Soviet Union and from abroad, who asked the puppet dictator Yanaev head-on in front of the television cameras on August 19: Do you understand that you have carried out a coup d’etat? But both Gorbachev and Ignatenko demonstrated excellent knowledge of who asked what questions and who answered how at that Yanaev-Pug-Starodubtsev press conference.”

When going to a press conference, you must also keep in mind that it is always limited in time (also, by the way, a method of putting pressure on those present), so the journalist should hurry up and ask questions. If it was not possible to obtain the necessary information, you should ask questions at the end of the press conference, of course, if the presenter does not immediately leave the room. Sophisticated journalists believe that “the main thing is to prevent the person from leaving the room” and that in order to ask a question, “you have to stand between him and the door.” In journalistic practice, there are also cases when correspondents, invited to a press conference on a very serious matter, entered into an unspoken conspiracy in order to ask all the necessary questions, including impartial ones.

A similar experience is practiced by Swedish journalists, who themselves decided to develop rules of conduct for reporters during press conferences in parliament. Accredited correspondents gather before they begin and discuss the order of their questions. As a rule, the first to ask questions are reporters from television and radio companies covering the press conference live. They are also allowed to develop the topic in subsequent questions, but must then yield the floor to other correspondents.

Of course, such a voluntary agreement between journalists is possible only in countries with a developed civil society, where horizontal corporate ties are strong, including between representatives of the journalistic workshop. However, such a “social contract” also requires special responsibility of the parties: if this agreement is violated for some reason, you must be prepared for the fact that your colleagues will not shake hands with you.

In connection with the development of PR technologies and the spread of their methods in almost all spheres of life, press conferences have become an integral part of information exchange, and the participation of journalists in them has become commonplace and in some ways even routine. Typically, editorial management tries to send young journalists to such events, who rarely manage to prepare something sensational based on the material received. Although there are rare cases where journalists have made a name for themselves by asking a single question at a press conference.

The aforementioned Tatyana Malkina, who worked as a correspondent for Nezavisimaya Gazeta in August 1991 after graduating from the Faculty of Journalism at Moscow State University, went down in the history of domestic journalism as the author of a “frontal” question to one of the organizers of the putsch: “Do you understand that you committed a coup?”

Going to the press is actually a small form of press conference to inform journalists about the results of a past event (meeting, negotiations, etc.), initiated by a newsmaker. This, as a rule, is not planned in advance, which distinguishes this interview format from the previous one. The newsmaker or his press secretary goes to the press immediately after the meeting, as at a press conference, making a statement and answering questions from journalists, providing only the necessary dose of information. This event, which can easily be classified as a form of information support for the media, has a weak spot: the initiative in it belongs to the newsmaker, who determines the dose of information.

But going to the press also has an advantage: it is done “hot on the heels” of an event, when emotions after discussions have not yet subsided. That is why journalists need to listen very carefully to the answers and monitor the mood of the “respondent”. The latter, by the way, also has a hard time, because he is bombarded with questions from journalists who, trying to out-shout each other, hold out their hands with microphones. His skill in communicating with media representatives will manifest itself if he is able to choose the most advantageous question for himself and give an answer to it, containing the necessary dose of information, without saying too much.

Briefings are a planned event that is held at regular intervals and is dedicated to disseminating current information about the activities of an organization or company. For example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs regularly holds briefings. They inform journalists about current foreign policy issues. The official departmental interpretation of the most current events in world politics is also offered to the attention of media workers. At the briefings of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, held once a week, you can hear official statistics on road accidents, solved crimes, and learn about planned preventive measures to combat organized crime.

A complex interview format is the “round table”, in which the journalist conducts a conversation with not one, but several participants. Here, the interviewer’s functions are broader - like those of a moderator: in addition to question-and-answer communication, his tasks also include managing the conversation. Unlike previous formats, the round table and its variations - debates, regular and panel discussions - should be even more carefully worked out. Particular attention should be paid to the preparatory stage, think over the meeting strategy, and clearly define the scenario. During a round table, especially if antagonistic participants are invited, tense, even dramatic situations can arise. In order not to lose control of the situation and achieve the desired result, a journalist must become a director.

A textbook example of the helpless conduct of political debates was the Red Square program by Alexander Lyubimov. The journalist was unable to prevent the situation when two prominent politicians - Boris Nemtsov and Vladimir Zhirinovsky - began to pour orange juice on their friend in a rage, and eventually interrupted the program. These shots spread all over the world and were subsequently repeated several times without an eventful reason, which, of course, was to the advantage of politicians, but did not add to the popularity of the presenter.

The “round table” implies a serious analysis of the issues involved, therefore, mainly experts are invited to participate in it. With the help of interactive forms, it is possible to attract a wide audience to the discussion, which makes the role of the journalist-moderator multifunctional.

Telephone interview. Americans have calculated that the average journalist spends 50-80% of his time talking on the phone. They say that in Chicago there lived a famous crime reporter who collected information without leaving the editorial office by telephone, and, I must say, was very successful in his craft.

Journalists from almost all media outlets work under temporary pressure, but they fight with particular zeal for every minute saved in Internet publications. In them, telephone interviews are the most popular tool for obtaining information among journalists. Pick up the phone, dial the number, and you are talking to the right person. If the information provided is published immediately, there is a chance to win the competition for the reader.

Of course, the main argument in favor of a telephone interview is the time factor. Today, in terms of efficiency, a telephone call can only be rivaled by communication via email. But voice communication using IP telephony has not yet received mass distribution.

A telephone interview is a working procedure for preparing publications by journalists from all media channels, but it is also a completely independent format.

Komsomolskaya Pravda special correspondents Yuri Geiko and Stanislav Kucher were the first and, probably, the only journalists who interviewed the famous Steven Spielberg. The first one remembers it this way. “For two months we hunted down the brilliant director almost all over the world. Finally, the long-awaited telephone number in Los Angeles appeared on my desk... Spielberg's secretary answered the phone. For a long time he could not understand that journalists from Russia were calling, but, having come to his senses, he answered: “Okay, gentlemen, fax your questions...” Stas translated my questions into English, added his own, and we sent them to the other end of the world.

Two days later they called again. The secretary was very kind: “Stephen is ready to talk to you, I’m connecting...”

Ten seconds later, a dull, slightly stuttering voice sounded on the phone: “Hai! You are the first Russian journalists I talk to. But, unfortunately, I hear all my phrases from space, this prevents me from speaking. And besides, I don’t want you to waste your newspaper’s money... Give me your number and I’ll call you, the conversation will be at my expense, and maybe space will disappear...” (the interview lasted more than an hour and was published in Komsomolskaya Pravda in two issues with a continuation).

Telephone interviews are often used on television and radio for topical inclusions, for example, in breaking news releases, in “hot” stories when information from the scene is needed. On television, of course, the “picture” effect is lost, but time is gained. Such an interview has another advantage - it is cheap, does not require travel fees, or the purchase of a plane ticket to fly to meet the hero for the sake of a few questions. The nerves of the conversation participants are also spared: you can, while remaining in pajamas and slippers, simply pick up the phone and dial a number. In addition, many are afraid of meeting strangers, and it is easier for them to discuss everything over the phone.

Telephone interviews do, however, have target limitations. For example, it is certainly applicable in the situation of collecting up-to-date information; quite reliable when it comes to collecting or confirming facts. Moreover, in some situations it is preferable for communication participants, because in many respects it is better than a live meeting, since it saves time, effort and nerves. However, telephone contact is not at all sufficient for a portrait interview or investigation of a problematic situation when a full dialogue with the interlocutor is necessary. According to Marshall McLuhan, modern people generally tend to trust their eyes rather than their ears. To believe, he believes, one must see, not hear. Personal contact will undoubtedly provide more information than just words heard over the phone. Even more food for thought will be given to the journalist by such non-verbal signs of communication as facial expressions, external characteristics, postures, gestures, etc., which cannot be picked up over the phone. For example, it is not always possible to assess irony or sarcasm only by the speaker’s voice modulations, but if you see the expression of his face and eyes, this is easy to do.

During a telephone interview, a journalist cannot fully control the situation. For example, if you call an office and the secretary replies that the boss is away at the moment, it is not easy to verify this. They may avoid contact with you, but you will not know about it. And having come to a public place in person, you can easily determine by certain signs whether your “hero” is there, even if he does not intend to communicate with you. By the way, waiting patiently to be invited into the office is not the worst way to get a meeting.

Here are some other limitations inherent in a telephone interview. The interlocutor, for example, can suddenly end the conversation at any moment: “Oh, sorry, the doorbell is ringing! Please call back later...”; “Sorry, they came to see me, let’s reschedule the conversation.” A telephone conversation can be interrupted by people present in your interlocutor’s room, but not visible to you. How the “person behind his back” will affect his answers, whether he will make the conversation more frank or, conversely, introduce an element of embarrassment into it, it is also impossible for a journalist to know if he is holding a telephone receiver in his hands.

A young journalist working on the radio admitted that she always perceived the need to call experts as a punishment: “On the radio, unfortunately, telephone interviews are almost the most common way of obtaining information. It is used both in emergency situations (explosions, plane crashes, murders, etc.) and on ordinary days to obtain commentary or confirmation of information from official sources.” This is how she described the standard situation of preparing a news program on a radio channel: “The news of a terrorist attack in Dagestan is received through news agencies. Half an hour before airing. During this time, we need to find out the details of what happened. The correspondent climbs into the editorial database or into his address book and sits down at the phone, having previously inserted the tape so that if he gets through, he can press the treasured “Record” button.

Interviews can also be conducted using various Internet services - email, forum or chat. In terms of the degree of indirection, this type of interview organization naturally surpasses those already discussed: the interlocutor is remote, and, as a rule, there is no visual contact with him. However, there are a number of advantages, such as saving time and money, because with the help of a global computer network you can contact anyone and at any distance. Journalists with experience in professional communication via e-mail admitted that it turns out to be very effective, and in many situations they would even prefer this method of communication to a telephone interview. Because there is time to carefully think through the questions, and the interlocutor is more focused at the computer and formulates answers better. As for online interviews (teleconference, chat), although this method of communication is extremely fast, the circle of possible interlocutors using these Internet services is still too narrow or extremely specific. Mostly these are either young people or specialists in a certain field. Accordingly, representatives of these particular socio-demographic groups can be potential subjects of online interviews. By the way, it is useful to take this into account for producers of radio and television programs who use interactive voting on certain socially significant issues in their programs, and present their results as representative.

Preparing for an interview

To understand the rules by which the mechanism of a journalistic interview works, let’s break the process into conditional components, from defining goals to ending the conversation. As an example, we will choose a “sterile” case of an interview, not bound by time frames, position in space or other restrictions - in a word, ideal, when it is theoretically possible to go through all stages of the work process. It must be taken into account, however, that a journalist rarely finds himself in such a “hothouse” situation. As a rule, it works under strict deadlines for the delivery of material, when one or even several links in the chain of stages inevitably fall out. However, to achieve professional results, the interviewer should strive to go all the way from start to finish.

Work on an interview can be divided into three successive stages: preparation; holding; completion.

At the first stage, which precedes the course of the conversation, very important work is carried out on planning the interview, its goals are determined, information resources are studied, the first contact with the interlocutor is made, the time and place of the meeting are set, possible risks, the conversation strategy and the main topics of the questions are thought through. Let us list once again the most important steps in preparing an interview: determining its goals; preliminary study; organizing a meeting; thinking about the nature of the questions, as well as interview strategies and tactics.

Let us consider sequentially the main operations of the interview preparation stage.

Determining the purpose of the interview. This is the starting position. The success of all subsequent steps depends on how clear the goals of the interview are. The interview you have conceived and proposed, or planned by the editors, must be “tested for strength” by asking yourself several questions, the answers to which will largely clarify your goals.

§ Why do you want to interview? » What results do you want to achieve?

§ Why did you choose this particular interlocutor to solve these problems?

§ Is he personally interested in you?

§ Is there interest in it among the general public?

If, after answering these questions, you do not have a clear idea of ​​what the intended interview is about, the conversation may turn into pointless chatter that will make both you and your partner uncomfortable.

Not only the journalist should have a clear picture of goals. You also need to tell your future interlocutor about it. Moreover, if you clearly formulate the goals of the interview, then, firstly, it will make it easier for yourself to develop questions (by the way, typical for novice journalists: “I don’t know what to ask” comes precisely from a vague idea of ​​​​the goals); secondly, reduce the likelihood of misunderstanding on the part of the interlocutor and be able to convince him of the need for a meeting. When goals are clear and clearly formulated, your partner also has an understandable feeling of confidence that he will be listened to, understood, and will try to convey what he heard to the reader.

The goals of an interview are determined by many factors. These are the character traits of the interlocutor, and his role in a certain situation, and the prevailing socio-political circumstances, and the scale of the problems that are associated with the hero, and the social stereotypes that have arisen in this regard.

Suppose you decide to interview the head of the Moscow City Rescue Service. What kind of chain are you putting in front of you? Find out the circumstances and details of an incident (for example, rescuing a child during a fire) in which employees of this service took part? Or are you interested in the general picture of incidents in Moscow and how the Rescue Service works in principle? Or maybe you were attracted by the figure of the boss himself with his unusual (or, conversely, ordinary) fate? Will his life story be of interest to the general public? But certain problems could have arisen in his department, about which rumors have already circulated, and the situation needs to be clarified?

As you can see, each of the goals is worthy of a separate interview. However, it must be borne in mind that there are situations when serious details emerge in the conversation that can change initial plans and adjust the goals of the interview.

Preliminary study. Depending on the goals set, the collection of working material about the hero or the situation in which he is involved can either be carried out in full, or limited to a short search, or not carried out at all. Preparation or impromptu - this is the choice that a journalist will have to make before each meeting. Here's what two seasoned journalists think about it.

Anatoly Rubinov: “Naturally, you need to go to the interview prepared. The Minister of Railways will laugh at you if you ask him about changes to the train schedule for next year. But if you sit in the library, study the old train schedule of the fourteenth, forty-third, fifty-fifth year and formulate your point of view on the future schedule, then the conversation will be completely different. If the minister sees your awareness, feels your intelligence, is stunned, he can tell you a lot of interesting things...”

Urmas Ott: “The interviews with Rodnina and Evstigneev can be considered impromptu meetings for which I did not have enough time and opportunity to carefully prepare. I admit this now with a clear conscience, since my experience suggests that much, but not everything, can depend on preparation. For some reason, people are accustomed to believing that if you sweat a lot beforehand, then your work must be crowned with a masterpiece. Alas, this is not always the case. Fortunately, no one knows what success actually depends on, and I think that my profession would lose a lot, lose the charm of gambling expectation, if someone ever discovered this secret. In any case, I would prefer to meet without preparation than to immediately admit defeat by refusing to meet. If someone called me now and said that in five minutes I would have the opportunity to meet with so-and-so and record the program, I would certainly jump at this opportunity instead of asking for at least a few hours of delay and run to the library. Of course, this person must really interest me and, of course, I must be sure that he is also of interest to the audience.”

In a reporter's turnover, there are often situations when there is no time for serious preliminary work and one has to rely on the fragmentary information that has been obtained. However, such information is often enough for a short, relevant interview or for one or two questions at a press conference.

The journalist was tasked with preparing a report on the arrival of the Secretary General of the World Health Organization in Moscow. The editor hinted that during the press conference at the airport it would be advisable to ask him an exclusive question from the editors. What sources can you use in a very short time? Here is a list of possible information resource options:

§ a telephone call to the Moscow office of WHO regarding the purposes of the visit (perhaps a press release has already been prepared there);

§ work with the editorial dossier (most likely there will be information about the main programs of this organization and its leadership);

§ viewing available resources on the Internet, including foreign ones, using various search engines;

§ advice and ideas from work colleagues;

If a journalist has time, then for preliminary preparation it is advisable to use sources as complete as possible. Resources for preliminary research can be divided into two broad groups: documentary and oral.

Documentary sources, which are various types of written sources, include:

§ reference literature (encyclopedias, dictionaries, reference books);

§ special sources (financial documentation, statistical reports, sociological survey data, etc.);

§ scientific literature (monographs, dissertations, scientific articles, etc.);

§ periodicals (filing of newspapers and magazines, thematic or personal collections);

§ dossier (own, editorial, etc.);

§ various types of databases;

§ Internet resources.

Useful information about a person or situation can be obtained by observing the material environment. Particularly valuable can be the noticed details of clothing, surroundings, behavioral characteristics and manner of communication of the hero, which will then help you correct questions and use an adequate style of conversation.

Make an appointment. As a rule, a meeting with an interviewee is arranged by telephone, although recently journalists are increasingly using e-mail. But you can arrange an interview through direct contact.

The last option is perhaps the most win-win, since the intended “victim” simply has “nowhere to go” and has to accept the journalist’s offer, even make some promises. And this is already half the success.

Here's a funny incident that happened to journalist Olga Shablinskaya, who had been seeking a meeting with Lev Durov for almost a year. She was unlucky: every time she agreed on an interview, something always happened at the last moment, and everything fell through. “I urgently needed to go to Nizhny Novgorod,” the journalist writes. - There were no tickets. They only managed to break into the dining car. And then... lo and behold! Lev Durov enters. Next are Zharikov and Konkin. When it came to songs, I invited Lev Konstantinovich to dance. It turned out that the artists were going to Nizhny Novgorod for the opening of a cinema. Durov mercilessly trampled my feet, and I took revenge on him: I am from AiF. And this is me calling you all year! ... A couple of weeks after the memorable conversation on the train, Lev Konstantinovich invited me to the theater on Malaya Bronnaya for his play Aesop.”

But still, more often, interview negotiations are carried out over the phone. Such communication, mediated by distance and lack of direct contact, has its advantages and disadvantages, which must certainly be taken into account when arranging a meeting.

When arranging a meeting with your interlocutor, avoid the word “interview”

When negotiating a meeting, your intended interlocutor may give you a variety of reasons for refusal. Let us list the most typical ones that can be foreseen.

§ Distrust of the journalist (and often, in principle, of everyone). It is known that it is more difficult for a newcomer to obtain consent for an interview than for a well-known and experienced journalist.

§ Doubts about the reputation of the publication. You can be wary of being denied an interview if the journalist represents a publication that is little-known or, worse, has a bad reputation.

§ Distrust of a particular publication if it is associated with an unsuccessful interaction experience or a negative publication (criticism of the hero, distortion of the meaning of statements, incorrect citation, etc.).

§ Fatigue from journalists, which is usually characteristic of stars.

§ Fear of public speaking (especially often when you see a television camera or microphone).

§ Lack of interest in the subject of the conversation.

§ Lack of knowledge of the intended interlocutor about the subject of the conversation.

§ Limited time.

Each of the above reasons can serve as a reason for refusing an interview. Oddly enough, most often the stumbling block is not the name of the journalist himself, but the reputation of the publication on whose behalf he speaks.

This is how one young journalist managed to arrange an interview with composer Alexei Rybnikov: “When Alexey Lvovich was already sitting in the car, I jumped up to him and for some reason said that I admired his music... for the movie Buratino. Then she added, “Is it possible to interview him for Novaya Gazeta?” The composer turned a deaf ear to my enthusiasm, but became interested in Novaya Gazeta and asked if Zoya Eroshok worked there. Zoya Eroshok actually worked in my newspaper, but she did her material about Rybnikov for Komsomolskaya Pravda - the best of all that I have read. No wonder he remembered it. Such journalists are a kind of calling card of the newspaper, and it helps us young people too. We agreed with Rybnikov, he gave me his phone numbers. I didn’t have to persuade the person for long.”

Among the refusals there are also objective cases beyond the control of the journalist, for example, absence or limited time. There are also explanations that indicate the wrong choice of the interlocutor, who does not show interest in the subject of the conversation or does not have sufficient knowledge about it. And yet, a journalist should always have convincing counter-arguments in his arsenal. When arranging a meeting with the hero, try, depending on your goals and the current situation, to convince him that an interview is an opportunity (the most likely figures for these arguments are suggested in brackets):

§ gain fame and recognition, talk about yourself (popular culture figures);

§ influence the consciousness of people (politicians, priests);

§ enlighten the public, destroy prejudices (scientists, educators);

§ express your point of view, shed light on the problem (representatives of the warring parties in any conflict);

§ help other people avoid mistakes (those affected by any shocks, representatives of risk groups);

§ appear on the screen so that friends and relatives (“ordinary” people) can see you.

If you are denied an interview because the interlocutor does not know your name, try advertising yourself: “I interviewed so-and-so...”. An argument in favor of an interview with a popular but disreputable publication may be its circulation: “After all, almost 85% of the townspeople read us...”.

In addition, when negotiating a meeting, do not forget to ask the interlocutor for permission:

§ for photography,

§ for a dictaphone recording,

§ to talk with family members.

Time and place of interview. When arranging a meeting, setting a time and place, listen to the wishes of the interlocutor. Whether the interview subject will feel comfortable depends on these circumstances. Therefore, most often a meeting is scheduled on his territory (at home or at work) and at a time convenient for him. If the interlocutor finds it difficult to choose a meeting place, invite him to come to the editorial office. There are situations when, for some reason, it makes sense to meet on “neutral ground”, then the time and place for the interview are determined in a joint search. If there is an eventual occasion for the interview, then the circumstances dictate it: it can take place on an airplane ramp, in an official car, on the sidelines of a convention, at the scene of an incident, etc.

When planning time, a journalist must take into account the specifics of his hero’s working day. There are people with early, “morning professions,” but there are also those whose working day has virtually no limit, or who work more in the evening hours. It is understandable that a doctor or teacher starts his work day early; it is “difficult for a minister or member of parliament to find a minute” during the working day; but people of bohemian professions - actors, artists, singers - only open their eyes at noon. This means that the interview with the latter may last well past midnight. People are not late for such meetings. If you ring the doorbell half an hour later than the appointed time, consider that you will disappoint your hero in several “directions” at once - as an inaccurate, unreliable, inattentive and forgetful person. And your excuses: “I got stuck in a traffic jam”, “The bus was gone for a long time”, “I couldn’t catch a taxi” - will sound like the babble of a schoolchild who was late for class. And if you also ask for a pen and paper to take notes, know that the first impression of you will probably not be favorable.

Preparation of the questionnaire. You can start asking questions after the objectives of the interview have been determined, all possible supporting materials have been studied, and the time and place of the meeting have been set.

Based on the results of the first contact, it will become clear which interlocutor you are dealing with - an “easy” one, open, approaching him freely, or a “difficult” one, closed, hiding information. Depending on this, it is worth considering the first questions. Is there any reason, for example, to talk about something that is not related to the intended goal: about the weather, children (grandchildren) - in general, about something that will always resonate with any person? Or should we immediately “take the bull by the horns” by moving on to the main goal of the conversation? Will you need special questions to break the ice of misunderstanding? Or will you immediately plunge into the atmosphere of friendly conversation?

Preliminary work with sources will help determine the main topic

Drama interview

After the preparatory phase, which includes defining the objectives of the interview, conducting preliminary research, scheduling a meeting, and developing a strategy, you can begin the interview. In the most general sense, it is a conversation between two or more people with the aim of obtaining new information. However, not an ordinary one, from the series of those that form our everyday interpersonal communications. An interview is a conversation that follows certain rules of professional journalistic communication. It takes place in question-and-answer form, when the journalist asks and the interlocutor answers. Therefore, the formula for success lies in how professionally questions are asked and how fully they are answered.

However, interviews are not just about asking questions. Like any other act of human communication, it includes other, no less important verbal components that contribute to the success of communication. How does a conversation between two people begin? From pronouncing etiquette phrases that open a conversation, from words of greeting. Next, the interlocutors, especially if this is their first meeting, must establish mutual contact. The preamble to an interview, as a rule, does not go beyond an etiquette exchange of pleasantries or a neutral conversation about the weather. There are, however, other ways to make it easier for interlocutors to start a conversation. The successful outcome of the interview depends on whether the journalist is able to find an approach to his hero from the very first words, establish a harmonious relationship with him aimed at an open exchange of information, and obtain and develop information of interest to the details.

Next, it is very important to find the right way to develop the conversation, structure it so that the course of your thoughts is clear to the interlocutor, and the sequence of questions is subordinate to the main goal of the interview, so that order is clearly visible in the seeming chaos of questions and answers. The interview cannot be interrupted mid-sentence. It is hardly possible to predict what the interlocutor will say at the end of the conversation, but an experienced interviewer will not forget to end it on the right note, asking the last and clarifying questions, and, of course, saying the ritual words of farewell.

Meeting with your interlocutor. Greetings. Journalists meet new people every day. They greet each other, shake hands, talk, say goodbye. Experienced reporters usually do not think about what form to say greetings in, and choose a neutral “Hello!”, a friendly “Hello!”; familiar “Great!” The greeting tactics depend on the specific situation, the degree of closeness with the hero, and his social status. Of course, there are ideal “for all times”, forms of greeting that are socially and stylistically neutral “Hello!”; "Good afternoon!". In most cases, imagination and creativity will be clearly inappropriate here.

However, a greeting that is too cold and formal can serve as a signal that the journalist prefers to keep a certain distance from the interlocutor and does not want to cross the barrier of formal question-and-answer interaction. To soften the form of the greeting, you can add a personal address to it: “Hello, Mikhail (Ivanovich)!”

The tactics and final results depend on the manner in which the conversation begins, formal or informal.

Choosing the right form of address has its own pitfalls. In modern colloquial practice, four stylistic levels of address are distinguished:

§ official - by name, patronymic and “you” (Hello, Mikhail Ivanovich!);

§ semi-official - by full name and “you” (Hello, Mikhail!);

§ unofficial - by name and “you” (Hello, Mikhail!);

§ familiar - by short name and “you” (Hello, Misha!).

When choosing one or another style of address - by first name or first name and patronymic, by “you” or by “you” - at least two factors are first taken into account: the hero’s age and social status. If the interlocutor is older, regardless of what place he occupies in the social hierarchy, it is better to address him by name, patronymic and “you”.

Only on the condition that the journalist and his hero belong to the same age group can only the name be used in the address, but it is desirable that the initiative be taken by the interlocutor. If you were not asked to switch to calling by name, but the situation and context of the conversation encourage this; In addition, the interlocutor is young, offer to do this yourself, which may help break down the barriers that inevitably arise at the beginning of a conversation. In children's and youth radio and television programs, it is quite appropriate to address the interlocutor by name and “you”. But incidents happen in adults too. The famous journalist Urmas Ott got into trouble by addressing the Latvian Maris Liepa in the European manner, only by name. Riga resident Liepa preferred to be called emphatically polite:

“I decided to start neutrally, but at the same time unsafely, to test Liepa and my intuitive feeling of him. And although now, when I re-read that first question asked of Liepa then, I am a little ashamed, I cannot refuse it by simply keeping silent about it. So, here is the first question that I asked Maris Liepa in November 1986, when he arrived in his native Riga at the invitation of the TV Acquaintance program.

O. Hello, Maris! We are very pleased to meet you here in Riga, because you are a Riga resident. We are both Balts and can probably talk to each other even without patronymics. What do you think about it?

L. Well, considering that I lived most of my life in Moscow, I, unfortunately, got used to patronymics.

Oh. So, Maris...

L. Eduardovich...

O. Eduardovich, yes...”

Unfortunately, there are many examples of a familiar style of address both in print media and on air. Hosts of FM radio stations are especially guilty of this, often deliberately emphasizing their closeness to one or another show business star. They explain this manner by the norms of communication accepted in a given social group. Indeed, in the bohemian artistic environment it is customary to address each other as “you” and by name, even nicknames are often used. However, the hero's manners, which form his image, should not be blindly copied by journalists. They should understand that such a reduced style of address is in poor taste and often looks pathetic and inappropriate in wide broadcasting.

TV presenter Lev Novozhenov, having addressed actress Valentina Titova quite politely, by name and patronymic, on air, received a long rebuke in response: “I beg you, do not call me Valentina Antipovna. Actors have a name. I don’t know why the prefix-patronymic is needed? It’s very official with her, and you feel like you’re sitting deep, deep underground...” “But this is a good Russian custom,” Novozhenov timidly objected to his counterpart. “When they show respect at a meeting, they really say: “Hello, dear Lev Yuryevich!”, But if we meet in front of our public, then, of course, I want them to see not an official person, but their loved one.” The presenter’s mistake was in the ceremonial tone of the address to the interlocutor, who wanted to appear before the viewer not as an official lady, but in the guise of a “family friend.”

Preamble to the interview. "Warm-up." With a short and seemingly meaningless conversation at the beginning of the interview, you can achieve greater results than throughout the entire conversation. But with the same success you can destroy your goals. American researchers claim that when strangers meet, the first four minutes of conversation usually determine the entire subsequent conversation.

It is in the tradition of our communication to start a conversation by varying common phrases that establish a friendly atmosphere: “Hello! It's very nice to meet you! How are you? What bad (beautiful) weather today!” This is social etiquette with the help of which people establish initial contact with each other and “build bridges” for further communication.

Journalists, when starting a conversation, should not deviate from the generally accepted codes of communication, although the temptation to avoid ceremony and “worthless” phrases always exists, on the part of both the ever-hurrying journalist and the newsmaker, who is also often under time pressure. Of course, there are times when a preamble is completely inappropriate. For example, during short interviews with an event or at a press conference. It’s just important not to miss the occasion when a short conversation is simply necessary to establish contact.

Depending on the goals of the interview and the characteristics of the interlocutor, the journalist can develop a communication tactic in which the ritual of starting a conversation will be personalized as much as possible.

For example, when going for an interview with a member of parliament, it is advisable to listen to the latest releases of parliamentary news, so that the introductory phrases acquire the meaning that will truly interest the hero: “Were you at the last meeting of the Duma? What can you say about the speech of Deputy N? Do you think the law on natural monopolies will be adopted tomorrow?”

It must be admitted, however, that this technique cannot be applied in any conditions and to any type of interlocutor. There are, for example, very busy people who cannot waste time on “trivial talk.” Anyone who is not in the mood for a frank conversation can take advantage of your chatter and “lead” you in the other direction.

Based on the interlocutor’s reaction to the first appeal, an attentive journalist will immediately determine the psychological state of his hero: a) what mood he is in; b) whether he is in a hurry or not; c) shows interest in the conversation; d) whether he will have a frank conversation or whether he intends to hide and dose out information.

The preamble of any interview (it is also called a warm-up in a sporting manner) fulfills the strategic task of establishing contact between the journalist and the interlocutor, a mutual search for a “common language.” Let's take a closer look at the preamble of the conversation - the seemingly meaningless chatter. If this is a “talk about nothing,” then what is its meaning? And if there is a warm-up before a battle, what does it consist of and what tasks does it solve?

According to many journalists, at the beginning of a conversation it is often necessary to destroy the negative stereotypes formed in society about all journalists: “arrogant”, “cunning”, and “everyone lies” - in general, “all troubles come from journalists”. We will not discuss here the reasons for the appearance of such an image. In this context, it is important to recognize that such stereotypes in some cases are a serious obstacle to communication, especially when the interviewee is a person who is easily suggestible and, as a rule, represents the poorly educated, low-income or elderly segments of the population. It is not easy to destroy a negative stereotype formed under the influence of many factors of a historical, economic, political and social nature. The interviewer’s task at the first stage of communication is to try to dispel the tension and wariness that has arisen during the meeting.

The right way is to talk about what is in the sphere of interests of your hero, and it is desirable that the subject of conversation be a hobby or activity that evokes positive emotions in a person. For example, during the preliminary research you managed to find out that your interlocutor is an avid fisherman. Ask what kind of fishing and what time of year he prefers, where he last caught fish, and whether the catch was good. Such seemingly “meaningless” communication, not related to the goals and objectives of the interview, actually prepares the ground for further communication. It both distracts and entertains the hero, and helps relieve the tension arising from the meeting with the correspondent, creating calm, comfortable conditions for the start.

In order for contact between two people to take place, a friendly, non-aggressive atmosphere must be created at the beginning of the conversation. This means that the subject of conversation should not concern such potentially provocative areas as political views, income, interethnic relations, religious beliefs, etc. Jokes and witty remarks lighten up the situation perfectly. Laughter generally brings people together, of course, if it is appropriate. But if at least one of the parties’ sense of humor is not all right, laughter can only do harm.

Barriers and wariness are also well overcome by a sincere compliment. Pleasant feelings from recognition of merit, success or achievement are characteristic of every person. However, a favorable climate of communication will be formed with the help of a compliment only if the journalist’s confessions expressed to the interlocutor sound sincere, sincere, and not servile.

“I share your position on this issue...”;

“I admit, I didn’t expect such a bold act from you...”;

“Your speech in parliament received a great public response...”

At the same time, you should avoid stock phrases like “I am a fan of your talent...”, “It is a great honor for me to meet you...”. This version of the compliment will sound much more convincing: “Your latest work (play, painting, concert) made a great impression on me, I would like to talk in more detail about it...”. Or such balanced, balanced praise: “Your latest work made a deep impression on me, but for many it caused very conflicting assessments. I would like to talk about it in more detail...” The creation of a trusting atmosphere can be facilitated by common interests or acquaintances (fraud and fabrications are excluded).

“Do you remember N? He worked with you in the news department" -

"Is it true! How do you know him? He was a great reporter!”

“I know your sister - we often met in the same house.” -

“Wow, how small the world is! Yes, I often heard from her that interesting people gathered there...”

“They say you have just returned from a trip to the Urals.

My family and I vacation there every year. Where have you been?".

After such a “warm-up”, we can assume that you and your interlocutor are not separated by insurmountable barriers of misunderstanding, you are almost familiar, almost akin, you already have common interests. This immediately simplifies further conversation, even if serious and not very pleasant topics for the opposite side are touched upon.

By the way, the most win-win way to “relieve tension” is to talk about pets - dogs, cats and other living creatures. As a rule, the owners dote on them.

Of course, it’s very difficult to think in advance what to talk about when you meet; you can only “tie some knots” when you study your hero’s dossier (yeah, he just had a granddaughter; he likes to scuba dive; he has a favorite cat, etc. .). Experienced journalists, as already said, usually improvise. They are helped in this by observation and a “trained eye” for interior details, clothing style, and behavioral characteristics. Urmas Ott began his interview with composer Rodion Shchedrin with a question... about furniture. An Estonian journalist noticed that the furniture in Shchedrin’s office was Estonian. And so the thread of the conversation began...

“The moment I walked into the office, I realized where I could start a conversation. I almost never have a clear outline for a conversation, so I use whatever detail the situation offers me. Thank God, I thought, everything is okay. I was absolutely sure of this even before I received permission to begin.

A. Although this is my first time in your office, I feel good because you have Estonian furniture everywhere here. Do you know about this?

SCH. Yes, I am aware of this, that the furniture is Estonian. And I think that it’s no secret to anyone that Estonian furniture is considered to be of the highest quality. That's why our Composers' Union is equipped with first-class furniture.

I am sure that Shchedrin could have expected anything but such a start. I got what I wanted - the usual tension before each program subsided, and without wasting time and effort. Now I’m asking the question I prepared at home.”

So, here are the basic rules for warming up before an interview:

· At the beginning of the conversation, it is necessary to eliminate as much as possible all possible barriers to communication, but the “warm-up” should not be prolonged. Observe the interviewee carefully and if signs of impatience or haste appear, move directly to the topic of the interview.

· Stick to neutral, pleasant topics. The subject of conversation should not concern potentially provocative areas such as political views, income, interethnic relations, religious beliefs, etc.

· Find points of intersection of interests: common hobbies, common acquaintances.

· Do not focus the conversation on yourself, but try to find out as much as possible about the interlocutor.

· Show interest in the environment, but avoid critical comments and advice about it.

· Laughter helps relieve tension. Jokes and anecdotes are appropriate, but only if you have confidence in your own taste and a sense of proportion. If your interlocutor does not have a sense of humor, your efforts may ruin the deal.

· Compliments help to win over a person. At the same time, one must avoid excessive, especially insincere admiration - it always catches the eye. Discreet, moderate praise is always preferable.

The first impression on your interlocutor is formed not only from the first phrases you utter, but also from the impression your appearance makes. For some reason, this question is of great concern to young journalists, so we will dwell on it in more detail in the chapter devoted to the peculiarities of nonverbal communication. For now, we’ll limit ourselves to general advice: when thinking about your outfit for an interview, take into account the age and profession of your hero. Don't wear short skirts to an interview with a priest. A formal business suit is hardly appropriate at a meeting with a famous showman.

Interview strategy and tactics. It is advisable to think through all this in advance, at the preparation stage, in parallel or after compiling the questionnaire. The strategic objectives of the interview include the creation of certain communication conditions that contribute to the achievement of the interviewer’s goals with the most complete information return from the interviewee. It should be remembered that the informational goals of a journalist do not always coincide with the informational intentions of the interlocutor, as a result of which signs of voluntary or involuntary concealment, suppression of information or manipulation of information may appear. In this regard, the strategic design of interviews takes on special meaning. It is equally important to think over a strategy for developing a conversation for a situation where there is a coincidence of the journalist’s goals and the intentions of the interlocutor. But even with a successful combination of circumstances, the goals of the conversation are not always achieved, and it is possible to fulfill the plan. However, in both cases, the responsibility for fulfilling the informational tasks of the interview lies with the journalist, and not his interlocutor.

Within the framework of this manual, it is not possible to analyze all the options for developing an interview - there are actually as many of them as there are specific cases of professional contacts between journalists for the sake of obtaining information. Tactically, they are all unique and inimitable, like the life situations themselves and the people whom the journalist goes to meet. However, this tactical originality of each individual interview is based on several basic strategic principles that are common to all interviews and applicable to each individual case. Let's look at the basic strategic principles of interviews.

"Pick up the key." This may seem like a professional platitude: the success or failure of an interview depends on whether the journalist found an approach to his interlocutor, whether he was able to “find the key” to him. Journalists also say: you need to “feel the interlocutor,” “tune into his wavelength,” “get into his coordinate system.” Then, they say, the good will come out.

It must be said that the search for the “key” to the interlocutor is the starting principle of any act of communication. It is also known: in order for contact between two parties (the communicator and the recipient, i.e. the sender and recipient of the message) to take place, their communication codes, including social ones (codes of generations, social strata), must match. Well, at a minimum there should be the same language - Russian, English, French or some other. If the language codes do not match, when at least one of the participants does not speak the language of the other, an intermediary translator who knows both languages ​​must enter into the dialogue. Communication in this case is mediated by a third party, and therefore contact is more difficult to establish.

However, the commonality of language codes of participants in the communication process is not the main factor of success. In an interview, finding approaches, “keys” to the hero means more than just the interlocutors understanding each other’s speech. Sometimes even experienced journalists are let down by their instincts. Urmas Ott admitted that he was never able to “find the key” to Evgeny Evstigneev. The journalist was hampered by the established on-screen stereotype of this actor, which, as it turned out, does not at all coincide with his own nature.

“The charm of a star is not always accompanied by purely human charm. A person can be incredibly interesting in his profession, and this becomes a stereotype that is perpetuated on the television screen. And he may turn out to be completely different at a chance meeting, so to speak, outside his profession... I think this is approximately what happened with Evgeny Evstigneev, who, to the dismay of the audience, turned out to be not at all who we are accustomed to taking him for based on his acting work . Of course, this is just my attempt to explain what happened in the most convenient way for me. The point may simply be that I was unable to find the key to Evgeniy Alexandrovich. I didn't really try hard to find it because I believed I had it in my pocket all the time. And I saw him on the screen hundreds of times, and I was captivated by his talent, and it seemed to me that in communication he should be as generous as his screen showed me. Of course, when things didn’t go as I expected, I lost my head.”

Despite the best intentions of the journalist, despite all his efforts to please his hero, it turns out that it is not so easy to approach many people. Until the end of the interview, they appear unapproachable and callous in their reactions. There can be many reasons: reluctance to share information, failures in previous experience communicating with journalists, lack of sympathy, trust in a given interviewer, and simply “harmful”, suspicious nature.

Officials, as well as their representatives - press secretaries or officials from public relations departments, are considered “tough nuts”. The nature of their relationship with press workers is confrontational in principle: one side is called upon to guard public interests, the other to defend the interests of its department, corporation or influence group.

Mutual dislike and wariness often form in advance the bias and partiality of both parties, as a result of which a touch of aggressiveness appears in communication. However, a journalist is unlikely to achieve his goals with an aggressive approach. Moreover, aggressiveness “down the chain” can transfer to the interlocutor and cause a sharply negative reaction. What's the result? In the best case - a minimum of information, in the worst - you will simply be kicked out the door, and then you can put an end to this source.

Aggression is contrasted with persistence as the most acceptable way of communicating with stubborn interlocutors. Unlike aggressiveness, it implies respect for both one’s own person and the personality of the interlocutor. A persistent, assertive journalist does not cut from the shoulder, does not “squeeze” information, but leads the interlocutor to answers to the questions that interest him gently but confidently, carefully but firmly. While the “aggressive” correspondent takes into account only the needs of one party to the detriment of the rights and freedoms of the other, the “persistent” one respects the rights and motives of the defendant.

However, persistence as a chosen option for an information strategy does not always guarantee the desired reaction from the interlocutor. A journalist must be prepared to be refused information. You shouldn’t make hasty conclusions like “This official doesn’t like the press, so he won’t say anything.” A better question to ask yourself is: who is responsible for the unsuccessful attempt to access information - me or my hero?

Choice of role. The journalist develops a conversation strategy using his role functions. The question of whether he should be a performer, changing roles like an actor, depending on the nature of the interlocutor, the level of the tasks assigned and the circumstances of the conversation, has always caused controversy. They essentially come down to two opposing points of view. One group of interview experts says, “Be natural; whatever role you choose will only ruin the deal.” Another, on the contrary, sees the right choice of her role as the key to professional success. Depending on the circumstances, a journalist can wear a “cold ears”, “young gypsy” mask, etc. All role roles, according to supporters of this theory, are dictated by various communication situations, the character and psychological state of the interlocutor and the journalist, which depend on many factors. For example, a “young gypsy” will be accepted in bohemian circles and rejected where structural-hierarchical connections play a large role, for example, in the state apparatus.

And yet, most journalists combine both principles in their work - both “natural” and “role-playing”. They tend to behave naturally, but put on different masks when circumstances require it. It’s the same in everyday life: for educational purposes, a parent can either put on the mask of a demanding teacher, or act as a “caring hen” when the child is sick. The only necessary condition for a partner (child or interviewee) to trust you is fair play. Then the accusations of manipulation, which are often brought against journalists who are “players,” will be groundless. In addition, deceitful or insincere masks used by a journalist (“bosom friend” in a situation of unfriendly relations or “confessor” when the interlocutor does not intend to be frank) will only add wariness to an already difficult relationship. Therefore, in a conversation with an interlocutor whose views you do not share, it is better to remain neutral. This does not mean at all that a journalist should assent to a person with fascist or racist beliefs, or justify the inclinations of a murderer or rapist. On the contrary, his position in the conversation must certainly be voiced, but without emotion, but simply as a different point of view.

Logic, chronology or improvisation. When planning their next interview, journalists, as a rule, pay a lot of attention to the semantic component of their questions, their semantic content. Indeed, what you ask your interlocutor largely determines what he will answer. But not all. An equally important and strategically significant component of the interview is the correctly chosen sequence of questions asked. Establishing the required order in the list of questions is a task that a journalist must solve in each individual case. Of course, there can be an infinite number of interview scenarios, just as the events, human destinies and stories associated with them are infinitely diverse. But still, here, too, patterns can be seen that make it possible to choose the optimal tactics in a seemingly endless variety of situations.

By and large, all journalistic stories can be divided into three typical ones. The first is based on events, the second on subjects of public discussion, and the third on the personality of the interlocutor. Their conceptual difference lies in the fact that stories of the first type develop according to the laws of time, and the principle of their presentation is chronological; the second - according to the laws of reason, and in them logic, adherence to its laws, comparison of assessments and arguments, causes and consequences acquire fundamental importance; stories of the third type, associated with the “human factor”, unfold in an intuitive and improvisational manner. Of course, there are stories of a mixed plan, when an event, for example, is considered not only as a sequence of some plots, but also as a chain of cause-and-effect relationships. Thus, in covering the death of the Kursk submarine, in parallel with the chronological principle of presenting materials, logical work was carried out by journalists, and with the help of experts, an analysis of the causes of the tragedy was carried out.

Chronological, logical, intuitive and improvisational principles also underlie three approaches to developing an interview script. The chronological principle is implemented if the journalist is interested in how the story unfolded over time, of which his interlocutor was a witness or eyewitness. Logical - when the subjects of discussion are a social problem, a conflict of interest, or situations related to the drama of human relationships. Improvisation is more suitable if the journalist’s focus is on human character, with its psychological characteristics and unique personality.

There are three strategic principles for the sequence of questions asked - chronological, logical, improvisational.

In the first case, the focus is on events; in the second - subjects of public discussion; in the third - human character.

It is equally important to organize the list of questions asked by meaning. Most journalists adhere to loose rules for scheduling interviews.

§ The interview preamble, or “warm-up”, is a conversation for “building bridges”; its topic may not have anything in common with the main goal of the interview.

§ At the beginning of the interview, questions that are not difficult for the interlocutor, such as factual ones, are asked. However, if you assume that your hero will try to avoid answering, you can use a little trick, for example, expand the thematic field of the conversation.

An interesting question is also a gift to the interviewee: it, like a magic wand, will lead him to a good answer. At the same time, an interesting question is a very individual concept. What seems unusual to one character will bore another.

The famous TV presenter Vladislav Flyarkovsky was interested in the journalism student’s question only because no one asked him about this. But there was nothing original in it:

What qualities do you value most in a person?

I'm 42 years old, but you're the first to ask this question. Nice.

I never thought that what I value most is... Cheerfulness, openness... You know, I would say integrity, but the word “decent” itself is not an accurate definition of what you mean. Everyone understands it differently. I mean a person who does not lie, does not betray, is responsive, reliable...

§ The most important question, for which the interview was started, should be saved for last. Tough or unpleasant questions for the hero are never asked at the beginning of the conversation.

§ The final stage of the interview is very important, in which, as a rule, only the ending time can be planned in advance. It is good form to adhere to the agreed length of the interview. It is also advisable to end the conversation on a positive note. Even if unpleasant questions were asked at the end, you should try to “steer” the conversation aside, talk about something pleasant for the interlocutor, so that no one is left with an unpleasant aftertaste.

When composing questions and developing an interview script, you should not forget that the main role in it does not belong to the journalist, but to his interlocutor. He is the main communicator; he has information at his disposal, and in principle he is free to do with it as he pleases. A journalist, as offensive as it may sound, is only a translator, a transmission link between his interlocutor and society. This banal idea is often forgotten in practice, and the center of the conversation is often not the informant, but the journalist. The conversation ends up focusing not on answers, but on questions, which are given more importance than information itself. Such conscious or unconscious journalistic egocentrism leads to professional “deafness,” an inability to listen, when the questions asked do not follow from the answers, and the interlocutor turns out to be a passive player in the information field.

The strategic principle of the interview is to awaken the activity of the interlocutor and maintain it with the precise reaction of the journalist to the answers.

Ending the interview

It is very important to end the conversation correctly, without referring to the fact that you need to run to the next meeting, but be sure to say the words appropriate to etiquette. Novice journalists often don’t realize that the most unexpected things can happen at the final stage of an interview. For example, after saying goodbye, your hero may finally decide to say the most important thing for which he agreed to this meeting. Therefore, you cannot relax your attention until the last moment when the door closes behind you. Don’t be shy and knock on the door again if you remember that you forgot to ask something very important, for example, to clarify the spelling of first and last names or ask permission to publish photos from a family album.

It is strategically correct not only to start, but also to finish the interview on time. Accuracy and punctuality are a necessary condition for a favorable impression of a reporter. It is unacceptable to be late for an interview. But it is no less bad to delay the interlocutor beyond the time agreed upon in advance. After all, he may have other things planned, and even if, due to sensitivity, he does not admit it, a prolonged conversation may cause understandable irritation, since it will prevent him from completing his plans.

Of course, it is difficult to plan in advance how the interview will end. Ideally, this happens naturally when both the reporter and the interviewee mutually agree that all questions have been settled. However, in most cases, when ending a conversation, you need to follow two basic rules: “leave with dignity” and “do not overstay your welcome.” There is also a golden rule - leave in such a way that the interlocutor still has a desire to communicate with you again, to prepare for a new meeting.

Now we list the most important steps that will help you follow these rules.

§ Finish the interview strictly at the agreed time. Only the interlocutor himself can invite you to continue. If the conversation goes on too long, he may answer questions inappropriately, become distracted, or even irritable simply because he has an appointment and is late for it because of you. The worst option in this case is if the meeting is interrupted not by you, but by your hero. And the best is when a reporter proposes to end the conversation: “Our time, unfortunately, is running out. Let me ask you one or two more questions...” It is possible that the interlocutor will then say: “Don’t worry, I still have a little time. Let's continue the conversation...” However, if this does not happen and you feel that the topic has not been exhausted, arrange another meeting.

§ The interlocutor may, without noticing it, send you signs that it is time to end the conversation. For example, when he is tired or for other reasons cannot continue the conversation, nervousness and fussiness may appear in his behavior, and his answers may become monosyllabic. These are signals that the conversation should be stopped or postponed to another time.

§ When completing the interview, take the time to review your notes. It will take a little time, but you will protect yourself from possible mistakes: forgotten questions or unverified names, etc. If time permits, you can also clarify unclear areas. Ask your interlocutor for a minute to look through the notes - this is a good reason to sum up the conversation: “Our time is coming to an end, let me look at my notebook, did I forget to ask about something...” By the way, during the pause, your hero will also be able to think about whether he forgot to say something important.

§ Finally, you can ask if your interlocutor wants to add anything to what was said. Perhaps you didn’t ask about the most important thing for him.

§ Remind me of the documents, articles, letters, photographs that were mentioned in the interview. Tell them you can check them out later, and be sure to get permission to publish or quote them.

§ When saying goodbye, do not put a “last stop”; discuss the possibility of calling or visiting again to ask more questions, clarify details and specifics.

§ It is advisable to end the interview on a positive note. In conclusion, you can ask about something pleasant for the interlocutor. Sometimes questions about children (grandchildren), pets (dogs, cats) are quite appropriate.

§ Do not weaken your attention when you are standing on the threshold: it is at this moment that your interlocutor can say the most interesting thing. He has already relaxed after the interview, the recorder is turned off, and his thoughts continue to spin. Remember, if possible, and write down all the remarks after the door has slammed behind you. True, one must keep in mind that the publication of these recordings will be ethically quite questionable, since the interlocutor has the right to refuse these words, and you are unlikely to be able to prove their authenticity.

Your personal goal - to attract attention to your own site - will be achieved faster if you build on their needs. When it is clear, the conversation becomes interesting.

The interlocutor understands what is expected of him, feels attention to his person and tries to give complete, detailed answers. At one time, there was a debate among copywriters about whether everyone who wanted to master this profession could or not.

Everyone has their own opinion, supported by experience. By the way, what do you think, maybe or not? (The comment form is waiting for you at the end of the page.) I decided to interview copywriter Peter Panda to find out his position on this matter, and for my portfolio.
I started from this goal when composing the questions. Once the questions have been compiled, you can arrange an interview.

Famous copywriters, by the way, love to share their opinions with the public. Take note of this.

Interview: how to take it correctly, write it successfully and interest the reader

Attention

What attracts you to this position in our firm? 88. For what reasons did you start working in your current position? 89. What is the biggest responsibility in your current job? 90.

Describe your progress at your last job. 91. What did your managers praise/criticize you for? 92. What can you offer our company? 93.
Does the proposed position fit into your personal career plans? 94. In what work-related situations do you feel most comfortable/stressed or constrained? 95.

Info

Why do you agree to a pay reduction? 96. Why did you decide to become? 97. Why do you want to change your field of activity? 98. What is the main responsibility of a manager/subordinate? 99.

How do you feel about the same type of repetitive tasks? 100. How do you feel about your work being closely monitored? 101.

How to write a killer interview?

You can take an interview:

• Personally upon meeting
• Remotely (by phone, Skype, calling in messenger)
• In writing, when you send someone a list of questions and receive answers to them

The first two options are better. Written is, rather, a questionnaire. A person sees a list of questions, thinks about them and then answers. He can remove the parts he doesn't like. For example, emotions that bubbled up when discussing a hated issue.

Personally, you would receive a colorful answer, and in writing - a reputation-safe unsubscribe. If a question seems inconvenient, it may be skipped altogether or removed from the list.

What can we say about interviews, if even briefs for copywriting, when the customer is interested in detailed answers, are constantly returned half empty. Trick. Unless you're a writer for one of the popular media outlets, it's difficult to get a full interview with a celebrity.

How to arrange an interview

This is why an interview is needed, to cover all the points, even the most superficial ones in the opinion of the expert. On the contrary, it is interesting to the reader. But at the same time, you can’t skimp and ask the same thing ten times.

Instructions 1 Design the interview according to the font or color principle. This means that all the journalist’s questions are either written in a different font from the answers, or highlighted in a different color from the answers.

2 Do not apply both discriminating principles at the same time, especially if there are two people in the interview, that is, one asking and one answering. 3 If there are more than two interview participants, assign different text colors to them, if you use color markings and other fonts - if font. Here also, do not combine both types of replica splitting. 4 If the interview is a small press conference, then do the following: use fonts to separate the question remarks for those asking, and use colors to separate the answer lines for those answering.

How to write an interview sample

Not colleagues, but friends. Then everything is deliberately polite, and if questions are on the verge of some kind of sharpness, then the interviewer tries to show that he is on the side of the answerer. In general, if you need to interview someone close to you, it is better to delegate this task.

The less of you in the interview, the better. You can’t embarrass yourself in front of a guest, but you also can’t pull the blanket over yourself. The mistake is to ask too many questions, interrupt the interlocutor and actively clarify something.

Don’t confuse the person you are talking to, make notes and only then return to the question if the answer is not given. It's important to remember that it's not the guest who makes an interview fun, but the host. Even with the most famous person you can have a boring and completely gray conversation. And vice versa - any guest has something to tell if he is talked to correctly.

How to interview example

Interviews are one of the most rewarding types of content. You select questions, send them to the hero, receive answers, format them and - print! Of course, this is a superficial scheme for creating an interview.

In fact, this is an independent and vibrant content format. And on the blog it looks very advantageous against the background of the usual articles, guides and news. We have already prepared several materials on the topic of the interview. If you wish, you can read them here, here and here.

Now we will talk about the most important stage of preparing for an interview - questions. When studying a hero, you want to ask him important and pressing questions at the same time.

I would like the interview not to be boring, banal and typical. I want the reader to swallow it, savoring every letter, every line.

And at such moments, there is a really lacking selection of interview questions at hand that can be tailored to an individual character.

How to interview sample

Why write an interview You can do without text in the form of an interview. Make an article, put information from an expert into it, summarize and provide guidance for action. It will be useful. We have already told you how to interview for such a text. But it is always more interesting for the reader to follow someone. It’s more interesting to see direct speech, to observe and read about a living person.

Another interview is relevant. Popular projects fuel user interest in the format. Podcasts have been given new life. Interviews with editors in audio format are recorded and posted on Telegram by Pavel Fedorov, and Alexander Marfitsin writes podcasts on Sound Cloud.

The entire RuNet is following Yuri Dud's channel. He does interviews with media personalities and just hype heroes on the wave of popularity. More conservative users watch Posner and Solovyov - who likes what.

How do you feel about moving? Are there any places you wouldn't want to move to? 52. Which of your responsibilities at your last job did you find difficult? 53. How would you rate your career progress to date? 54. Tell us about the problems you encountered at your last job. 55.

How is your current job different from your previous one? 56. Which of the jobs you have done paid the best/worst? 57.

How much do you think your current job has prepared you to take on additional responsibilities? 58. What was the most painful and unpleasant situation for you throughout your career? 59. Why do you want to leave your current job? 60. What do you think about the leadership style that developed in your department/division at your last place of work? 61.

How to write an interview sample

How do you feel about working overtime? 102. How do you feel about the fact that you can be called to work at any time? 103. What reasons would you consider compelling to work for this company until retirement? 104. What reasons could make you leave this job? 105. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe that a supervisor or manager should perform the duties of his subordinates? 106. How would you deal with a subordinate who is consistently late? 107. This job will require your ability/skill. What experience do you have in this area? 108. What do you think will be the most challenging and most rewarding part of this position? 109. If you are asked to do work that is not part of your job responsibilities, what will you say? 110.
From offline media, this type of journalism migrated to the Internet. Nowadays, websites and blogs increasingly feature interviews with sports and pop stars, leaders of domestic business, and more. The World Wide Web has erased not only geographical boundaries. A great invention is social networks. With their help, we can write to any person we are interested in, ask him questions, and get answers. True, this will depend on how pressing questions you ask. But more on that later. A little theory Interview belongs to the information genre of journalism. Work on it follows a simple scheme: Preparing for a survey, like any serious work, begins with setting a goal. But the goal here needs to be set in a way that would meet the interests of regular readers.

I will share, as always, my intimate experience, both mine and that of my practical teachers, world-famous journalists from THE SUN newspaper.

What exactly will we consider? I think I’ll expand a little on the topic of preparing and conducting INTERVIEWS. I will lay out recommendations, in summary order, that will help both beginners and advanced journalists and editors in their difficult struggle for the right to be called the best!

So, let's go.

Interviews are the most difficult genre for novice journalists. Before going to the interview a journalist must do two things:

- prepare as many original, “cutting” questions as possible

- find out as much information as possible about the interview subject himself

Very often, the author of an interview finds himself in a very difficult position: he cannot go beyond the scope established by the editor and at the same time try to preserve the manner of communication and language of his interlocutor. The latter, as a rule, are too verbose and like to repeat the same thought in different variations. That's why The main rule in interview processing is not to repeat yourself..

Feel free to cut your interlocutor if the same thought is repeated twice.

Feel free to correct his words if the interlocutor made a mistake or inaccuracy.

Feel free to correct it if the interlocutor overuses words or terms that you consider too difficult for your reader.

Feel free to edit it if the interlocutor has not agreed with you on the condition under which the interview can go into print only after his visa.

It is better to start an interview not with a direct question, but with the words of the author, in which the answer to the first question is contained, the interlocutor, as it were, clarifies it. In this case, the boring “question-answer” dialogue smoothly turns into a conversation.

For example:

« Roman Abramovich is called the most powerful oligarch in Russia. He practically opens any door in the Kremlin with his foot and even enters the president’s family. However, Roman Arkadyevich himself really doesn’t like being called an oligarch, and claims that he is just an ordinary businessman...

- Well, judge for yourself what kind of oligarch I am if I have to sit for hours in the reception room of some deputy minister just so that he can sign a license that gives the right to trade oil...

- Well, Roman Arkadyevich, so I believed you...

- Why are you surprised? Now I will give you an example...»

Such an “easy” beginning, as a rule, draws in the reader. Sometimes even one sentence in the introduction is enough to move directly into the interview:

« Weightlifting veteran Anatoly Sidorov is these days preparing for the European Championships, where he promises to give the “last fight” to young weightlifters.

- Yes, this will be my last start in big sports. I'm leaving…»

Interview shouldn't be too big. If the interlocutor is not very famous, if everything he says does not tend to be sensational, you can limit yourself to five or six questions.

The answer should be no more than three times as long as the question.

Don't ask the same question twice(in another interpretation). Try to end the interview so that the reader does not get the feeling that he misunderstood something. The easiest way to end the interview is with the words: “ I wish you success" or " Thanks for the interview"(however, the latter should not be used at all). But it’s better if the last word remains with your interlocutor.

Signature for the interview. This can only be the name (Boris PETROV) of the author. Or - Boris PETROV talked.”

Title for the interview most often something like this suggests itself: Roman Abramovich: “ I can open any door with my foot."

This is the easiest option, but far from the best. Yes, and you can’t do without quotes. The title is best given by the author, but it should reflect the most “strong” thought of the interlocutor or the most valuable detail of what he has stated. For example: " Roman Abramovich opens any door with his foot».

IMPORTANT: a newspaper interview should be structured in such a way that it is interesting not to the HERO OF THE INTERVIEW, but to the READERS. That is, a person must be constantly directed into the “channel” of the readers’ interests.

That's all for now. In the future I will continue to reveal the secrets of successful journalism. If you're interested, subscribe)) If you're not interested, don't subscribe))

Have a great interview and interlocutor!

Standard structured interview

Preliminary preparation.

Make sure all the necessary information is prepared and at hand.

Establishing contact.

Try to make the candidate feel at ease.

Go out and say hello to the candidate at the reception desk.

Show the candidate to the meeting room.

Ask him a few irrelevant questions, for example: “Was it difficult to get here?”, “Did you find us easily?”

Standard interview questions.

2. Who would give the worst review of you and why?

3. What have you done to make your company/department more profitable?

4. What have you done to help your company/department save costs?

5. What have you done to help your company/department save time while increasing the volume of work?

6. How did you manage to stand out among your employees?

7. Tell me one by one about how you grew professionally in your current job and what you now do on a day-to-day basis.

8. Describe a problem you encountered in your current job/in your client's department and how you solved it.

9. What are your immediate and long-term goals?

10. Among the duties that we would like you to perform, there are three most important (list them). What experience do you have to solve these problems?

11. Do you have any other experience or knowledge that would be helpful to our client?

12. What personal challenges were you facing when you took on your current job?

13. How successful were you in solving them?

Questions regarding education.

14. What subjects did you like/dislike most/least in high school/university? Why?

15. What grades did you receive in your favorite and least favorite subjects?

16. In which subjects did you do better than in others? Worse?

17. Why did you decide to study at the university?

18. Why did you major in?

19. Why did you decide to attend?

20. What extracurricular activities have you been involved in? Why this one?

21. How did you plan your career at the beginning of your university course?

22. How did you plan your career when you left high school/university?

23. What did studying at high school/university give you?

24. If you had the opportunity to go back to school, what would you change or nothing at all?

25. What special courses did you choose? Why?

26. How much did high school/university prepare you for “real life”?

27. Tell us how you studied (any field relevant to the position).

28. Do you believe that studying this field has prepared you for the type of work required in your proposed position?

29. When did you decide that you wanted to be a specialist in the field of _______?

30. Name your favorite/least favorite teachers/teachers in high school/university? Why did you like/dislike them?

31. Tell us how you organized your classes while studying at school/university?

32. Tell us about where you worked part-time while studying at school/university?

33. Which of these temporary jobs was the most interesting/most uninteresting for you?

34. How did you spend your summer holidays when you were at school/university?

35. Why did you work while studying at school/university?

36. Do you have any plans to continue your studies? If so, which ones?

37. What do you think is the most difficult thing about combining work and study?

38. What advice would you give to someone who wants to study and work at the same time?

Questions regarding prior experience and other job-related topics.

39. Please describe your typical working day.

40. How would you describe an ideal manager? Subordinate? Employee?

41. Which people are difficult/easy for you to work with? Why?

42. What did you like/dislike most about your last job?

43. Please describe your ideal work environment.

44. What motives drive you? Why?

45. What qualities make you an effective leader?

46. ​​What is your highest career achievement to date? Why?

47. Remember and describe a situation when you found yourself under pressure at your last job. How did you deal with it?

48. What, in your opinion, is the duty of an employer to an employee?

49. How do you feel about business travel?

50. Tell us about how often and for how long you had to go on business trips before.

51. How do you feel about moving? Are there any places you wouldn't want to move to?

52. Which of your responsibilities at your last job did you find difficult?

53. How would you rate your career progress to date?

54. Tell us about the problems you encountered at your last job.

55. How is your current job different from your previous one?

56. Which of the jobs you have done paid the best/worst?

57. How do you think your current job has prepared you to take on additional responsibilities?

58. What was the most painful and unpleasant situation for you throughout your career?

59. Why do you want to leave your current job?

60. What do you think about the leadership style that developed in your department/division at your last place of work?

61. If I asked your supervisor/manager to describe your job, what would he say?

62. What would you do if...?

63. How would you cope with...?

64. What prospects do you see in your new job compared to your old one?

65. What would you like to find in your new job?

66. Did military service influence what field you chose for yourself?

67. Please tell us what you did in the army?

68. What do you want to achieve in your career in the near future and in the distant future?

69. What would you like to avoid in your future job?

70. What are your salary requirements?

71. Who or what influenced you in setting your career goals? How exactly?

72. To what do you owe your success?

73. What do you think is your greatest strength?

74. In what areas do you need to improve? How are you going to improve?

75. What kind of leader do you think you are? Subordinate? Employee?

76. What part of your job gives you the most satisfaction?

77. How do you complete tasks that you don't like?

78. How do you manage your time?

79. What is your leadership style?

80. What have you learned from each of your previous jobs?

81. Please give examples of decisions that you made during your work. What were the consequences of these decisions?

82. How do you make decisions?

83. From your point of view, do you know how to distribute work among subordinates?

84. What do you consider to be your standard of work discipline - in relation to yourself and your subordinates?

85. Please tell us about the relationship you had with your last manager.

86. Please give an example of a project whose implementation did not correspond to your plans. What happened?

87. What attracts you to this position in our company?

88. For what reasons did you start working in your current position?

89. What is the biggest responsibility in your current job?

90. Describe your progress at your last job.

91. What did your managers praise/criticize you for?

92. What can you offer our company?

93. Does the proposed position fit into your personal career plans?

94. In what work-related situations do you feel most comfortable/stressed or constrained?

95. Why do you agree to a reduction in payment?

96. Why did you decide to become _________?

97. Why do you want to change your field of activity?

98. What is the main responsibility of a manager/subordinate?

99. How do you feel about the same type of repetitive tasks?

100. How do you feel about your work being closely monitored?

101. How do you feel about working overtime?

102. How do you feel about the fact that you can be called to work at any time?

103. What reasons would you consider compelling to work for this company until retirement?

104. What reasons could make you leave this job?

105. Under what circumstances, if any, do you believe that a supervisor or manager should perform the duties of his subordinates?

106. How would you deal with a subordinate who is consistently late?

107. This job will require you to have the ability/skill to ______. What experience do you have in this area?

108. What do you think will be the most challenging and most rewarding part of this position?

109. If you are asked to do work that is not part of your job responsibilities, what will you say?

110. What do you think “loyalty to a company” means? To what extent does it extend?

111. How would you behave when discussing dissatisfaction with your job with your boss?

112. What could your previous employer do to convince you to stay?

113. Have you ever fired someone? Tell us how it was.

114. Is there anything you would like to tell me about your qualifications that will help me make my final decision?

Final part

Confirm information about the opportunity.

Describe the department, the project and the role this position plays in the company structure, as well as provide all relevant information about the company.

Determine the required qualifications and indicate the client's preferences.

When selecting a candidate, you make sure that his qualifications meet the client's requirements.

Check the candidate's resume, his successes and achievements in terms of specific requirements requirements for the proposed position. Based on successes and achievements, try to ensure that the candidate can solve the problem or achieve the desired result based on the requirements of the proposed position.

Testing of technical knowledge and further familiarization/sighting survey is carried out when there is a need to obtain more detailed information about the candidate's experience.

Goals and prospects

(Again, find out the candidate’s desires and compare whether their career goals match the job opening with your client.)

How did the candidate describe the ideal prospect at the screening stage?

Where does the candidate expect to work in a year, three, five years? What type of company would the candidate prefer to work for? Why?

What type of company would a candidate least like to work for and why?

What are the candidate's personal goals?

Compatibility with corporate culture

(Describe the client's corporate culture and compare it to the candidate's preferences and work style.)

What is the candidate's working style?

How did the candidate describe the companies he would prefer to work for?

1. Which management style suits the candidate best?

2. How does he describe the corporate culture of his current/previous employer?