By Brandon Penny, Emerson College
Last week, I wrote about my telephobia, and the fact that I strongly prefer e-mail and never pick up my phone at work to contact someone.
There is one exception, where I have no issue picking up a phone and dialing a number. That exception is phone interviews. And lately, I have been doing A LOT of phone interviews.
In fact, there was a four day period last week where I conducted 12 phone interviews with some of Team USA’s most accomplished athletes. Throughout this process, I gained great experience with conducting interviews via telephone, and I learned a lot about the art of the phone interview.
Before this internship, I had never been on the interviewing side of a phone interview. I have plenty of interviewing experience – in fact I think I’ve interviewed close to 100 winter sport athletes before I even got this internship – but because I am in Emerson’s Broadcast Journalism program all of my interviewing experience has been in person, because they’ve all been on-camera interviews.
It’s amazing to me how different these two types of interviews are. The first major difference I noticed is how conversational a phone interview is. During an on-camera interview you don’t want to speak during the person’s answer because you’ll ruin the SOT by having your voice in it. Instead, you creepily smile and nod to acknowledge that you’re listening to them. A few weeks ago, when I was doing my first phone interview, it took me until a few minutes into the phone call but I quickly realized I had the freedom to stop being creepy and have a real conversation – score!
My first phone interview was a breath of fresh air compared to all of the on-camera interviews I’ve done. I knew that even though I was recording the interview with an audio recorder, no one but me would ever hear it, so I was free to say what I wanted. I was able to react to what the athlete was saying, and interact (verbally) with them. In fact, you have to react to what they’re saying, so they know you’re still alive (because unlike an on-camera interview, they can’t see you). Having that ability to interact with the athlete and not worry about interrupting the sound bite made the interview much more of a conversation than an interview, which ultimately provided for some great, honest responses.
Phone interviews are also exponentially more convenient for the athlete, as well as the reporter. As a reporter, I don’t have to hope that a certain athlete lives, trains, or competes near me geographically. Instead, I can have access to any athlete in the country [as long as their agent is helpful enough]. In turn, the athlete being interviewed can agree to do an interview at almost any day or time, since all it involves is holding a phone to their ear [or using Bluetooth].
This freedom to do an interview wherever, whenever has provided for some interesting interviews. Eleven-time Olympic medalist swimmer Natalie Coughlin talked to me for close to 20 minutes while she was running with her dogs. She was slightly out of breath, but still made for a great interview. The No. 1 hurdler in the world, Lolo Jones, spoke to me while rushing to practice because her coach had just called her for an impromptu practice at the time our interview was scheduled. Silver medalist gymnast Alicia Sacramone talked to me on her way home from practice. I’m pretty sure that gold medalist swimmer Ryan Lochte was searching through his cupboards for something to eat (just speculating though).
Phone interviews can also be done from anywhere in the world. Gold medalist shooter Matt Emmons proved that to me when he Skype called me from Czech Republic, where he’s currently preparing for World Championships.
Unfortunately, phone interviews are not always ideal and can definitely be problematic. When you set up an in person interview, both parties agree to be at a certain place at a certain time, and for the most part it’s guaranteed that the interviewee will show up. Phones don’t guarantee you that athletes will always remember to expect their phone to ring. I’ve had one athlete not pick up the phone at all because they forgot about the interview. Another athlete did not realize their phone was ringing because it was on vibrate.
When I was setting up two of the phone interviews I’ve done, the athletes’ agents insisted on being on the call. This made me slightly nervous to know that their agents would be on the call, listening to everything I said. But in both cases, the agents didn’t interject at all during the interview so I’m going to assume that means they were satisfied.
After doing so many phone interviews, I’ve learned that I definitely prefer to be the one making the call, so that I have more control over the situation and don’t have to worry about someone remembering to call me. Also, as odd as this one sounds, I’ve realized I enjoy interviewing women over men. I’ve never had a preference with on-camera interviews, but when it comes to phone interviews there is a drastic difference. The female athletes I have talked to are much more talkative, interactive, and kind. While some male athletes are…much less talkative, and sometimes less pleasant, but I doubt they would be this way on-camera. I guess it’s to be expected though. Think about it, and I hate to use a stereotype, but who talks on the phone more, men or women?
While I love the opportunities phone interviews offer because of the number of athletes I can reach by phone, after doing so many, I’ve realized that they have their downfalls as well. Some of my recent phone interviews have reminded me that it often helps to connect to a person face-to-face. Do you have a preference – over-the-phone or in-person?
Print Story
Question of the Week - May 18, 2012