Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    Blog powered by Typepad

    my first blogs

    « Print Magazine for Bloggers | Main | Dog Bites Blog »

    April 24, 2007


    Brad Linder

    It's about more than just social norms.

    An series of questions sent over email isn't an interview. It's a Q&A. The subject has time to prepare answers, might even go look up answers or ask friends to consult on the answers. And the interviewer doesn't get a chance to ask follow-up questions in realtime. "What do you mean by that?" "Would you care to elaborate?" and "Why?" are left out of the conversation entirely.

    I'm not certain that email leads to fewer misunderstandings or misquotes. In some situations, it could lead to more. On the phone, or in a face to face interview if I'm talking to someone and I misunderstand what they're saying, they'll probably notice and set me straight. This doesn't happen in email because there's no real-time feedback.

    Instant messaging lacks tone of voice and facial expressions, but at least it's real time(ish).

    I think the ultimate solution is probably what Vogelstein and Calacanis eventually agreed on. They'll do the interview, and Vogelstein will tape it and send Calacanis an MP3 which he will include in his podcast.

    While this particular story about Web 2.0 might not warrant the level of discussion taking place on the internet right now, I'd like to see more of this kind of transparency in reporting.

    The comments to this entry are closed.