This New York Times article on Paul Volcker's view of the financial regulation bill is clearly and proudly set around a wide-ranging, on-the-record interview with Volcker himself. But that interview, aside from a few isolated quotes, is nowhere to be found.
This is a baffling waste of good information. Reporters are endlessly interviewing newsmakers and then using, at most, a handful of lines out of thousands of words. The paper, of course, may not have room for thousands of words of interview transcripts, but the Web certainly does. Nor does it make sense for the interviewee to give on-the-record interviews that are condensed into a handful of quotes: It's safer to have your full comments, and the questions that led to them, out in the open, rather than just the lines the author thought interesting enough to include in the article. And for the institution itself, it's a no-brainer: You get a lot more inward links if you provide enough transcript that every niche media site can find something to point their readers toward. But no paper that I know of makes a habit of including transcripts of on-the-record interviews with major players.
Posted by: EarlyBird1 | July 12, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: neilinottawa | July 12, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: ohiotodc815 | July 12, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: andrew_graham | July 12, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | July 12, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: mlschafer | July 12, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: amandabee | July 19, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.