I thought that this, though intended for the more in-your-face
radical people who populated the international Buy Nothing Day
"critical mass" collaborative movement, offers useful counsel for
any of us who wishes to engage in citizen-led projects of the sort
that I personally believe to be vital to the future of sustainable
transportation and sustainable development more generally. Have
you ever engaged in an interview, thinking that your message was
somehow going to get out, only to wake up the next mourning and
find out that you and yours had devastated? It's a strange and not
altogether pleasant sensation, I can tell you.  So, though I have
no idea who "Stu" is, we do reproduce this here with his
permission.


Eric Britton

EcoPlan International -- Technology, Economy, Society
Latest action on The Commons at http://www.ecoplan.org

-----Original Message-----
From:	[log in to unmask]
Sent:	Monday, November 23, 1998 12:50 PM


Dealing with the media.
The main reason for BND is to get messages out, not just to spend
a day not spending. Thus the media is a potentially useful tool.
However, we have a paradox in today's media. BND was created to
gain media attention through a sort of shock value, because, apart
from when you have vast quantities of money to run a wide ranging
media campaign which becomes snowball-like in its collection of
media coverage, the unique, quirky, confrontational, or violent
subject is the one which will make them take notice. Well argued
ideas, debates, and serious topics are assured media turnoffs.
So like them or hate them, there's a need to deal somehow with
them.
A few tips (mainly aimed at phone interviews, live or taped):
1)	Some interviewers treat the interviewee as a potential source
of controversial opinion. Interviews are often set up with 'this
side vs. that side' in an adversarial approach. The interviewee
then baits each side to get the ball rolling and the juicy quotes
rolling, while appearing as the neutral middle person.
2)	A one on one interview often puts the interviewer in a position
of power. They ask and you answer. But there's no reason not to
ask them questions too, particularly when the questions really get
obnoxious or personal. Or just tell them its time to get back on
track.
3)	Some interviewers have planned how they want the interview to
go. They want to get certain replies from you, and steer you in a
particular direction where they then metaphorically crucify your
arguments. In a sense it is not an interview but a forum for the
interviewers ego and own point of view. Your role is to provide
specific answers for them. Consider this before each interview. If
you are aware of this, you have more chance to take things your
way rather than theirs.
4)	Personal - interviewers will often try to personalise a story.
This is a trend in all media, even most serious or documentary
areas. Work with the issue but make it personal because viewers
want that personal angle. But loss of the story, of the real issue
is often the result. So be on the lookout for this personalisation
when its not appropriate. Either ask the question back at the
interviewer ("So is that what you think?" "what do you mean by
that?") or point out to them that the question is not appropriate
for the topic and perhaps they would like to rephrase it.
5)	Interviewers will also often phrase a question in a vague or
imprecise manner in order to get a different take on the subject.
Often the answers they are dredging for are not the ones you would
give if you were asked the question straightforwardly and you fall
into the trap they set by giving them angles of attack. If you are
uncomfortable with a question, make them ask it more precisely, or
rephrase it and then give your answer.
6)	If you can, treat the interviewer as an equal in terms of
knowledge about the subject (in fact you may have much more
knowledge on certain topics)
7)	One technique of interviewers is the "drawing silence" - this
simply involves allowing a pause after the interviewee thinks they
have finished a point. Most people interpret this as meaning that
the listener wants to hear more, and they tend to fill the gap,
often with rambling, which may reveal imprecise argument that the
interviewer can grab hold of.  Don't be afraid of that silence. It
is the interviewer's job not to have silence, so they will
eventually fill it, and it will weigh on them rather than you -
after all, it is their programme.
8)	Postmodernism postulates that all information is personally
constructed (that's a definition of mine, anyway). Statistics can
be pulled out of a hat to support almost any argument. So try to
be confident with your information. Use credible sources. Don't be
drawn into issues you are unsure of. And be aware that there will
always be an opposing view (that may be argued well or badly
depending on the person presenting it).
9)	And don't be afraid of admitting you don't know something or
you'll consider a point(unless its your central argument!) rather
that, than losing yourself in babble. Imagine listening to
yourself on the radio, blundering through a bad argument, and try
not to let it happen.
10)	If you are to be interviewed on a station you don't know well,
have a listen beforehand and get an idea of how they might angle
the subject. Get an idea of their on-air personality to see how
they might address you.
11)	Listen in for 1/4 hour before you are on. Maybe the topic is
similar or a similar argument is used (or a completely opposing
one). You may be able to refer to this during your interview,
which may help bridge some boundaries both with the subject and
the interviewer. It may bolster your own argument.
12)	Maybe you can even start with a light-hearted comment or joke
with the interviewer - you'll become a little more human and warm
to them and their audience.
13)	Try not to rely on notes unless you are very good at reading
naturally.
But cue cards with particular points written clearly can be very
helpful as your mind blanks down during a question.
14)	This stuff can be incredibly manipulative, conniving and
undermining.
So much so that politicians pay lots to be trained to respond in
these ways. The counter-argument is that most of us doing
grassroots activism have no training at all, and are liable to
sound amateurish and less well informed when we stumble or argue
limply because of nervousness. So my feeling is, use these ideas
to help you sound confident, but don't set out to crucify the
interviewer or outfox the audience. Rely on good facts and
argument.




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%