|
"Verbally, interviews usually take one of three forms. I have distinguished
them on the basis of the type of question used to elicit a comment
from the interviewer. But it is noteworthy that some groups of interviewees
get asked only one type of question, whereas others - perhaps involved
in the same news events - get a different type. The three types
are:
- How does it Feel...?
The standard vox pop question. What is the experience you are
part of like for you as an individual? Tell us your emotions...This
question accords well with the news value of personalization and
it is very common when 'ordinary people' are involved.
- Isn't It...?
This is the question designed to let the interviewee get on with
the statement of his or her case, in their own terms. Used for
'experts' who have been wheeled in to explain a particular issue.
- But surely...?
The classic 'tough' question, which is put 'on our behalf' to
public figures who are trying to make their case in their own
terms, but are reminded by the interviewer of other priorities,
other ways of looking at the issue."
- John Hartley, Understanding News (London: Methuen, 1982).
Questions to Consider
- Based on this typology, watch some news interviews and identify
the different approaches to questions which are used. What kinds
of questions surface in which contexts and in regards to which
interview subjects?
- Is there a shift over time in the kinds of questions which get
asked and the kinds of information and opinions which might be
solicited?
- Are there times when the news media's focus on the emotional
responses of "ordinary people" becomes intrusive or insensitive?
Are there some experiences or emotions which are difficult to
put into words? Can you point to examples where an inarticulate
response may actually be more persuasive or compelling than a
carefully worded one?
- Are there moments when political figures or "experts" display
the kinds of emotions which the newscasters most often solicit
from "ordinary people"? If so, what kinds of impact does this
have on our perceptions of these people? Do we want our political
leaders to respond "emotionally" or "personally" to events or
do we expect them to adopt a more "statesmanlike" tone?
Back to interpretations
|
