SashaB

The Times

43 posts in this topic

I have an interview tomorrow morning with a journalist from the Times. Call me ignorant but I only browse the Daily Mail and dont have much experience of the other main papers. The interview has been arranged by the ECP and will focus of the equital of Claire Finch bringing in my case as an example of how police attitudes are putting women in the industry at risk. Im never short of something to say but not having any experience of this paper Im not sure weather I should be going in on the defensive.

Any times readers out there that could help point me in the right direction as to what will go down best with its readers. Do I need to be defending my position or are the Time more sympathetic in thier view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an interview tomorrow morning with a journalist from the Times. Call me ignorant but I only browse the Daily Mail and dont have much experience of the other main papers. The interview has been arranged by the ECP and will focus of the equital of Claire Finch bringing in my case as an example of how police attitudes are putting women in the industry at risk. Im never short of something to say but not having any experience of this paper Im not sure weather I should be going in on the defensive.

Any times readers out there that could help point me in the right direction as to what will go down best with its readers. Do I need to be defending my position or are the Time more sympathetic in thier view?

Sasha, I think you should check out the journalist. Don't worry about the Times having a line; it's the journalist who will take the line. Read his/her articles on the Times website is my advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont read the Times all the time but generally whenever the subject comes up they seem to take a fairly neutral view and just report the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make your own recording of the interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an interview tomorrow morning with a journalist from the Times. Call me ignorant but I only browse the Daily Mail and dont have much experience of the other main papers. The interview has been arranged by the ECP and will focus of the equital of Claire Finch bringing in my case as an example of how police attitudes are putting women in the industry at risk. Im never short of something to say but not having any experience of this paper Im not sure weather I should be going in on the defensive.

Any times readers out there that could help point me in the right direction as to what will go down best with its readers. Do I need to be defending my position or are the Time more sympathetic in thier view?

Just be careful what you say.

The journalist is not your friend, so don't be too casual with him/her.

Their job is to sell papers, not put your story in the best light for you.

Consider nothing to be "off the record" and don't say anything that you would not want them to print. This includes anything you say before the interview starts and after it ends...or after YOU think it has ended. Remember what they did to Gordon Brown when the microphone was still on.

Don't make any jokes either since they could be taken "out of context" to make you look bad.

Good luck. As you may have guessed, media interviews are not a favourite activity of mine. As Jack Nicholson once said "I'd rather stick needles in my eyes."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule one of press work.

Think carefully what your 3 key points are and keep bashing away at them and turning the conversation back to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck Sasha. We were invited to take part in a local radio programme recently but declined recorded interviews and a live phone in, despite the assurances of neutral and non-judgemental reporting. Listening to the programme going out we were glad we did; all the usual confrontational trafficking, drugs, pimps stuff etc etc. The best we could do was contribute an email response, which they did at least read out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Make your own recording of the interview.

I strongly second that.xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to do is what Tony Benn does and record the interview, so that you are subsequently able to write to the paper and correct any distortions that the article contains.

WW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ask them what there expect to get from the interview, this should give you an idea of how cagey to be. if you;re not sure of the question then simply don't answer. focus on what we want from the interview and stick to your guns.

if you feel its not going well them just walk, you can always get i touch with them. finally try to be in control of the situation.

GoodLuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just be careful what you say.

The journalist is not your friend, so don't be too casual with him/her.

Their job is to sell papers, not put your story in the best light for you.

Consider nothing to be "off the record" and don't say anything that you would not want them to print. This includes anything you say before the interview starts and after it ends...or after YOU think it has ended. Remember what they did to Gordon Brown when the microphone was still on.

Don't make any jokes either since they could be taken "out of context" to make you look bad.

Good luck. As you may have guessed, media interviews are not a favourite activity of mine. As Jack Nicholson once said "I'd rather stick needles in my eyes."

I second these points. Journalists want sensationalism. Keep your cool. And be on your guard. Never trust a journalist until they have earned your trust. The trustworthy ones are few and far between.

Google this journalist. If you don't like their tone, just decline the interview.

If you go through the media coverage for the Ipswich murders, you may be able to find journo's that wrote sympathetically and consistently about the industry. Send them a concise paragraph or two of the nuts and bolts of your situation, and let it be known that even the Times have expressed an interest.

On the whole, I've got a lot of time for the Times as a paper. But as someone else said, it's about the individual that will be interviewing you and writing it.

xxx

Pru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree it depends on the journalist. Some, like Janice Turner and Libby Purves, can be a bit moralising. Others are a lot more liberal. Then there are people like India Knight, who are a bit judgemental, but when she was sought out by BdJ after asserting BdJ didn't exist, melted and did a volte-face.

The paper itself isn't moralising, but like most nationals now, it's become opinion-led, for better or worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone that is interested the interview went well this morning. I hope to have made a few key points but how much of the interview or what parts they use remains to be seen.

The main journalist is Alice Fishburn, she seemed very nice and was very friendly, I just hope they manage to make the article hard hitting enough as the independent article in December was more than a little watered down, it was almost translucent.

The article all going well should be in the Times this Friday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For anyone that is interested the interview went well this morning. I hope to have made a few key points but how much of the interview or what parts they use remains to be seen.

The main journalist is Alice Fishburn, she seemed very nice and was very friendly, I just hope they manage to make the article hard hitting enough as the independent article in December was more than a little watered down, it was almost translucent.

The article all going well should be in the Times this Friday

Well done Sash, and thanks for the info. I hope the piece comes out well. I'm looking forward to reading it. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well done and good luck. Hope it's good enough to frame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have an interview tomorrow morning with a journalist from the Times. Call me ignorant but I only browse the Daily Mail and dont have much experience of the other main papers. The interview has been arranged by the ECP and will focus of the equital of Claire Finch bringing in my case as an example of how police attitudes are putting women in the industry at risk. Im never short of something to say but not having any experience of this paper Im not sure weather I should be going in on the defensive.

Any times readers out there that could help point me in the right direction as to what will go down best with its readers. Do I need to be defending my position or are the Time more sympathetic in thier view?

Hi Sasha, just to say good luck with that hon :rolleyes:;) xxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad it went well for you and you put your beliefs through Annaxxxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the article on line. Very positive piece. Well done Sasha, it was a brave thing to do. Hope it helps sort out your problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes,good article,left a comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Claire Finch has done an outstanding job and really deserves any priase. Im just pleased they mentioned my case and in brief the circumstances that led to it. Its nice to see they actually included that it was a 999 call that led to my arrest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an excellent article and well done for being brave enough to take part. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good article and well written. Remarks by Laura Vaverages made me want to stick my head in the oven. Fucking idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laura Vaverages wrote:

These women were obviously trafficked in from elsewhere (Cambridgeshire or Bucks?) and brainwashed into making deluded mistatements abouthow relaxed they felt. As were their friends and neighbours. And the Judge and Jury. Disgraceful think that this kind of thing can be allowed to go on in 21st Century Britain - as Harriet Harmann pointed out only yesterday, it only goes to show what has happened as a consequence of failing to vote Labour in the recent General Election!

Personally, I think the hint that she occasionally cared for peopl's children "in an emergency" warrants further investigation - was she registered as a Childminder with the Local Authority and does her boudoir comply with Health & Safety standards? I bet she doesn't recycle her rubbish either, or use green lightbulbs. A disgrace and a sad indictment of current morality amongst the bigoted proles!

I think it was tongue in cheek - surely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah. sorry I am not fully awake this morn and my SOH has gone awol along with my mojo. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now