There’s a shocking amount of misinformation circulating in 2026 about conducting expert interviews for news. Many believe outdated tactics still work, or that new AI tools are foolproof. Are you sure your newsroom’s approach to expert interviews isn’t based on fiction?
Myth #1: Any Expert Will Do
The misconception here is that simply finding someone with a title related to your story qualifies them as a valuable expert. This leads to shallow insights and, frankly, a waste of everyone’s time. I see this all the time. We had a client last year who wanted to comment on a city council vote about zoning changes near the Perimeter. They found someone with “urban planner” in their title on LinkedIn, but this person’s actual expertise was in suburban development, not the dense urban core around Dunwoody. The resulting interview was vague and unusable.
The reality is that expertise is nuanced. You need to dig deeper to find experts with specific knowledge relevant to your story. Are you reporting on the new regulations around electric vehicle charging stations? Don’t just find any electrical engineer; look for one specializing in EV infrastructure and grid integration. Even better, find one who has worked directly with the Georgia Public Service Commission. Use advanced search operators on platforms like LinkedIn and ResearchGate to identify individuals publishing relevant research or presenting at industry conferences. Don’t be afraid to cold-call university departments or industry associations like the Technology Association of Georgia to find truly specialized sources. A quick search of the TAG membership directory will turn up dozens of potential expert sources in any tech-related field. Remember, a truly valuable expert can provide context, analysis, and unique perspectives that elevate your reporting.
Myth #2: AI Can Replace Human Experts
The lure of AI is strong. Many newsrooms believe AI tools can quickly synthesize information and provide expert-level insights, eliminating the need for time-consuming interviews. This is wrong. While AI can be a powerful research tool, it cannot replace the critical thinking, experience-based judgment, and ethical considerations that human experts bring to the table.
Here’s what nobody tells you: AI models are trained on existing data, which may be biased, incomplete, or outdated. Relying solely on AI-generated “expert” opinions can lead to inaccurate or misleading reporting. A recent study by the Brookings Institution highlights how AI algorithms can perpetuate existing societal biases. Furthermore, AI cannot provide the kind of on-the-record, quotable insights that build trust with your audience. Think about it: would you trust a news story sourced entirely from an anonymous algorithm? I wouldn’t. Use AI for research, but always prioritize human experts for authentic insights and verifiable information.
Myth #3: Interviews Are Just About Getting Quotes
This is a common mistake, especially with younger reporters. The assumption is that an interview’s primary purpose is simply to gather sound bites for the story. This approach misses the opportunity to build rapport, gain deeper understanding, and uncover unexpected angles. A quote is just a piece of the puzzle.
Interviews should be dynamic conversations aimed at exploring complex issues and developing a comprehensive understanding. Prepare thoughtful, open-ended questions that encourage experts to elaborate on their knowledge and perspectives. Listen actively, ask follow-up questions, and be prepared to deviate from your prepared script if the conversation leads you down an interesting path. For example, if you’re interviewing a cybersecurity expert about data breaches, don’t just ask about the technical aspects. Ask about the human cost, the ethical considerations, and the long-term implications for society. In 2025, I interviewed Dr. Anya Sharma, a professor at Georgia Tech, about the impact of ransomware attacks on local hospitals. While I initially focused on the financial losses, her insights into the emotional toll on healthcare workers and the potential risks to patient safety completely changed the direction of my story. Remember, the best interviews are collaborations, not interrogations.
Myth #4: Once Is Enough
Many reporters believe that a single interview with an expert provides sufficient information for their story. This can lead to superficial reporting and missed opportunities for deeper understanding. Complex issues often require multiple perspectives and ongoing dialogue with experts.
Don’t be afraid to follow up with your sources, especially if new information emerges or your understanding of the topic evolves. Consider building relationships with a panel of experts who can provide ongoing insights and context for your reporting. We have a small group of economists we call on regularly to comment on the monthly jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I routinely reach out to them multiple times when covering any story involving inflation. It’s not always about getting a direct quote, either; sometimes it’s just a sanity check to make sure I’m not missing something. Furthermore, corroborating information with multiple sources strengthens the credibility of your reporting and reduces the risk of errors.
Myth #5: All Information Is On The Record
This is a dangerous assumption. Many reporters assume that everything an expert says during an interview can be quoted and attributed. This misunderstanding can damage relationships with sources and lead to legal trouble. Always clarify the ground rules before you start the interview. Discuss whether the conversation is on the record, off the record, or on background. Explain the implications of each designation and ensure that both you and the expert are on the same page. I had an experience at my previous firm where a source believed they were speaking on background, but the reporter published their comments with attribution. The resulting fallout damaged the source’s reputation and strained our relationship with their organization. It wasn’t pretty. Respecting the boundaries of confidentiality is essential for building trust and maintaining ethical journalistic practices.
In fact, O.C.G.A. Section 16-11-93 defines the rules around recording conversations in Georgia. Make sure you’re compliant. If you’re unclear on the law, call the Fulton County Superior Court Clerk’s office and ask. Don’t risk it.
Expert interviews in 2026 are about more than just finding a talking head. They’re about building trust, uncovering insights, and providing your audience with accurate, nuanced information. Focus on finding the right experts, engaging in meaningful conversations, and respecting the boundaries of confidentiality. The payoff will be higher quality news and a more informed public.
How do I verify an expert’s credentials?
Cross-reference their claims with independent sources, check their publication history on Google Scholar, and verify their affiliations with reputable organizations. Don’t be afraid to ask for proof of their qualifications, like certifications or licenses.
What are some good questions to ask an expert?
Focus on open-ended questions that encourage them to explain their reasoning and provide context. Ask about the implications of their findings, the limitations of their research, and the potential for future developments.
How do I handle an expert who is clearly biased?
Acknowledge their perspective, but challenge their assumptions and present alternative viewpoints. Seek out other experts who can offer a more balanced assessment of the issue. Transparency is key; let your audience know about any potential biases.
What if an expert refuses to answer a question?
Respect their decision, but try to understand their reasons. If the question is crucial to your story, consider finding another expert who is willing to address it. Sometimes, a gentle rephrasing of the question can elicit a response.
How much should I compensate an expert for their time?
Compensation practices vary depending on the expert’s field, experience, and the scope of the interview. Some experts may be willing to speak for free, while others may require a consulting fee. Discuss compensation upfront to avoid misunderstandings.
Stop chasing empty quotes and start building real relationships with experts. The depth and accuracy of your news depend on it. Commit to just ONE of these ideas, and the quality of your reporting will improve immediately. Uncover the truth like a pro by committing to just one of these ideas.
