Dear WordCount is a weekly advice column answering your questions about writing, blogging and running a freelance business. Got a question? Ask me at wordcountfreelance@gmail.com.
Dear WordCount: A publicist wants to know who else I’m interviewing for a business trend piece, saying, “I’m sure Joe Smith will want to know.” I’m tempted to tell her that I’m still determining my line up of sources, because this potentially seems like a minefield. For instance, if Joe Smith doesn’t like the CEO of X company will he decline to be interviewed? Would you tell the publicist or keep that information to yourself? Thanks! — S.
Dear S.:
Agreeing to an interview does not give a source license to know who else you’re talking to — ever. Some publications have policies covering these situations, so if something comes up, ask your editor how he or she prefers that you handle it.
If you’re working on a story for a publication that doesn’t have a policy, it’s up to you to decide. Generally speaking, I advise against sharing the names of my other sources. Sometimes a source or their PR representative wants to know just to be nosy. Sometimes a PR rep will use the information to advise their client not to talk — after all, why should they when their biggest competitor is or isn’t? I could even envision circumstances in which one source finds out who else a reporter has talked to, then contacts those sources to (a) chew them out (b) ask that they recant what they said in an interview (c) otherwise make their lives miserable.
When It’s OK to Share Who You’ve Talked To
There are some instances where you might want to divulge who else you’ve talked to with a source. Some of those times include when:
1. You’re having trouble getting a potential source to agree to an interview. In this case, sharing the names of some or all of your other sources could help convince someone who’s on the fence to go on the record. In this case, if you’re writing about anything that could be deemed controversial I’d check with a source to make sure it was OK before sharing their name. But if it was an industry trend piece and I’d talked to several high-profile analysts who get quoted all the time, I might trot their names out in order to get other sources to agree to be quoted.
2. You’re trying to land a VIP. Say you are trying to convince a company president, head of a local civic group or other person in some position of power to take an interview. Knowing that other VIPs have already contributed might make them more comfortable agreeing to do the same.
3. You’re working on a news story or anything controversial with two or more sides. If you’re trying to present both sides of a story, opinion, disagreement or other controversial subject, you need to talk to sources from both sides. In this case, you might not necessarily have to share the specific name of the source you’ve talked to. But you might want to let a source know that you’ve been in touch with the police, corrections department, Securities and Exchange Commission, lawyers, accountants, etc. It’s a way of letting all sides know you’ve done your homework and also are trying to be fair.
How do you handle it when sources want to know who else you’ve talked to for a story?
After 30 years in journalism, I couldn’t agree more with Michelle’s advice, both on when to do it, and more important, when not to do it.
It’s frankly none of PR’s business who else is in the story — they’re not your editor. They do do it to be nosy, or to otherwise wreak havoc. As Michelle so rightly notes, only reveal sources when there’s some value to you or the story itself.
Thanks for backing me up on that Howard!
Michelle R.