Methods to conduct meaningful interviews

A cornerstone method shared by ethnography and journalism is the interview.

However, the two disciplines approach this method in different ways. Here are some ethnographic interview methods that can assist journalists in conducting meaningful interviews.

An open-minded approach

“Anthropology demands the open-mindedness with which one must look and listen, record in astonishment and wonder that which one would not have been able to guess.”

Margaret Mead

The biggest difference between the ethnographic interview and the journalistic interview is approach. The ethnographic interview has no “angle.” The interviewer is there to learn something new, not to get the quote they need. A good litmus test of open-mindedness: If you can guess what your source is going to say, then you are asking the wrong questions. View your interviewee as a teacher.

Ethnographic vs. Journalistic Interview

Here are some key differences between the ethnographic interview and journalistic interview:

EthnographicJournalistic
Interviewer as “traveler”1Interviewer as “miner”1
Interviewees are informantsInterviewees are sources
Driven by curiosity(often) driven by story angle
InductiveDeductive
Judged on:2
1. Quality of the product (full/rich data)
2. Quality of process (was rapport maintained?)
Judged on:2
1. Quality of product (Usable quotes? Interesting/entertaining for listener/viewer?)
2. Quality of person (Informative? Do they provide a balanced p.o.v. missing from the article?)
Takes notes on statements as well as emotions – what you feel (etic) and informant feels (emic).3Takes notes on statements from the source (emic) with a view to fact-check later.
Structured or semi-structured (Structured interview=same questions in the same order. This allows you to compare and look for trends)Semi-structured

Shared challenge: Engagement, not extraction

Both the ethnographer and the journalist face the same challenge: to avoid being extractive in their interviewing. Here are some ways ethnographers engage rather than extract:

  • Build relationships first. Visit the spaces you’re reporting on before conducting any interviews. Called “participatory observation” in ethnography.
  • Show empathy. This can be done in body movements, comments (share a bit about yourself), transparency (an introduction that includes what you’ll be talking about, when and where the article will come out/air, etc…). Set a tone at an emotional level that is empathetic. Instead of: “What is your kid’s age and name? Can you spell it?” Ask perhaps: “I’m really interested to hear more about your child… and how old is Bobby? Do you spell that with a ‘y’ (repeat spelling back to interviewee)?”
  • Show gratitude. If in an interviewee’s home or otherwise their sacred or personal space, show gratitude. In a way, they are hosting you. Compliment things in your surroundings, point out things you like, or notice, in a positive way.
  • Come back to your sources as many times as your deadline will allow. Anthropologists rarely interview an informant only once.
  • Your interview should be driven by curiosity, not agenda (or story angle).
  • Ethnographic interviews are a back and forth. Let your interviewee ask questions. Ask them if they have questions.

Getting Deeper Answers

There are a few cultural reasons why people give short answers that ethnographers have identified. Here are some methods they use to get deeper responses.

  1. Awareness of abbreviation | When you interview someone who shares your culture, your conversation will be filled with references that hint at things. Partial information is given all the time in friendly conversations, as well as in journalistic interviews (keep in mind shared “culture” could mean a police beat reporter speaking to an officer, or a political reporter interviewing an elected official). Why? it’s an economy of words; each person avoids filling in all the details on the assumption that the other person will fill them in. However, this can result in short and shallow answers. When ethnographers study a culture completely different from their own, they don’t encounter abbreviation very often. However, many ethnogaphers study cultures that are close to home, or subcultures within their own, and have developed ways to minimize the normal practice of abbreviating, and instead encourage informants to expand on their answers. But first, they must be aware of abbreviation. One way is to identify the language being used. A crime reporter would come across many different “languages”: courtroom, police, medical, even journalistic4. Being able to identify language on the spot can help you see where abbreviations are happening and where you could ask for expanded answers.
  2. Be less of an expert |  Ethnographers are trained in techniques that reduce the influence of their presence on others. Instead of being an “autonomous professional”1 try acting as a “socially acceptable incompetent” or “selective competent”5 as a technique for gaining access to groups without altering their behaviour. In this sense, you’re looking to approach an interview almost like a student and less like a peer, in terms of understanding and expertise. Questions are phrased and rephrased, encouraging the informant to tell more and go into more detail. The interviewer also regularly admits “incompetence” in an area, to remind the source they’d like more detail. As mentioned above, simply being aware of abbreviation when interviewing someone who shares your “culture,” will help you notice the areas where you could ask them to elaborate. And journalists as well as ethnographers, know sometimes the key to getting deeper answers is simply keeping someone talking…
  3. Get/Keep them talking | “The most important thing is to get informants talking”4. Descriptive questions are especially useful to get someone freely talking. This flow of conversation also helps to gain their trust (a little more on that below)…
  4. Reduce apprehension | When people are interviewed they first feel some apprehension about it. If you can help your source get over that apprehension, then you’ll have a much better interview overall. Getting them to talk helps, and it doesn’t usually matter what a person talks about at first. As long as they are talking this gives the interviewer opportunity to show interest, and to respond in a nonjudgmental way. These kinds of responses help reduce an informant’s apprehension. They communicate acceptance and engender trust (more on gaining trust here!).

Further Reading

  1. Janet Cramer and Michael McDevitt offer insight about the differences between traditional and ethnographic reporting in their chapter “Ethnographic Journalism” in Qualitative Research in Journalism: Taking it to the Streets, edited by Sharon Iorio.
  2. James Lett’s insight about being a trained ethnographer working as a TV journalist is excellent. Read more in his chapter “The Anthropologist as Television Journalist” in Media Anthropology, edited by Susan L. Allen.
  3. “Emic” and “etic” is anthropology jargon used to talk about whose point of view is being expressed at any given moment. Emic = the insider’s. Etic = the observer’s. Cynthia Allen offers a good understanding of these terms (and more) in context of journalism in her chapter “The Anthropologist as Magazine Writer” in Media Anthropology, edited by Susan L. Allen.
  4. The “language identification principle” is discussed by James Spradley in his book The Ethnographic Interview.
  5. John and Lyn Lofland, Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis, fourth edition (p69-71 discusses “acceptable incompetence” and “selective competence”).