Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
And it depends on what you need. At our agency, the main thing is news. In other words, the goal of the interview is to get as much news as possible. Accordingly, the task is to isolate as much news as possible and cut the conversation into appropriate blocks. By the way, I like the term “conversation” as a synonym for an interview, it, imho, more accurately reflects the essence of what should happen between a speaker and a journalist.
In addition to the informational interview, which I mentioned above, there are also portrait and analytical interviews. In the first case, you simply reflect the hero, which means that the key moments are those where he reveals himself more fully and paradoxically. In the second case , you need to take the most accurate or interesting (maybe provocative) estimates.
For me, the main value of an interview is the potential for its citation. The more extreme the three points are (a) a new fact (b) a personal statement (c) a paradoxical assessment), the more valuable it is.