| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Editors who want your notes? |
Topic: Editors who want your notes?
| Author | Message |
| megmuck | Posted – 3/22/2008 5:16:01 PM | show profile Hi folks - I just looked over my contract for a 300-word piece for a regional magazine. The editors want my original notes, plus a legible copy of those notes. Well, I started typing up my notes from a phone interview with a guy who talks *very* quickly. They're incomprehensible if you weren't part of the conversation. I jotted down a few exact quotes, but most of what I took down is code words to jog my memory. What should I do? I could reproduce what I remember of the conversation in brackets, which would make up about 90% of the text -- and they're not paying me that much. What should I do in the future for this mag? Thank you, m. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 3/22/2008 6:59:17 PM | show profile I often ignore stuff like this and don't produce it unless they specifically ask for it, and they often don't. If they do, I usually just send them a Xerox of the notes, and only transcribe the actual quotes I used, often cutting and pasting them from the article, rather than all of them. No one ever complained. |
| writesonwater | Posted – 3/22/2008 7:09:15 PM | show profile I'd transcribe what I put in the article. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/22/2008 9:27:04 PM | show profile is it for fact-checking, or do the editors want them to rewrite your piece? |
| megmuck | Posted – 3/22/2008 10:53:00 PM | show profile I dunno I haven't spoked to the editor about this -- I just got the contract in the mail from his assistant today, which specifies that I must submit my notes on the same day as mu final article in order to get paid. It *sounds* like fact-checking, but who knows? If they're *really* concerned about accuracy, I suppose I should tell them that my source offered to check over the piece for me before publication. I'm sure he'd correct his own quotes. m. |
| Chamsah | Posted – 3/23/2008 12:11:43 AM | show profile hope not! Meg, You wrote: If they're *really* concerned about accuracy, I suppose I should tell them that my source offered to check over the piece for me before publication. I'm sure he'd correct his own quotes. Please, please don't do this. If this is a good pub, they'll have someone fact check the piece for you, independently. Fact-checkers never read back quotes or let the source see the piece and neither should you. Your sources will ALWAYS want to change what they said to sound better/smarter/funnier, etc.... a sort of natural reaction. Your reporting is your own and a source should never be allowed to vet a story. If you type out your notes or do a basic transcript, I am sure that will be fine. Good luck. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/23/2008 2:04:12 AM | show profile You never ever show your story to a source before it's published. Asking for notes is perfectly reasonable, though for a 300 word story is odd. The fact checker could go over facts within the quotes with the source, but never read quotes back (also a big No No). Just type the notes and hand them in, or hand over the noes--reading them is her problem, no one expects notes taken during an interview to be all that legible or organized. |
| onmyown | Posted – 3/23/2008 2:19:13 PM | show profile Reading back quotes I have, on very rare occasions, read a source's exact quotes back to him/her to make sure they are accurate. I have never had anyone try to change them to make them sound better. And they usually appreciate it. I do not show entire stories in advance. But in a touchy situation where accuracy is paramount--and you don't want to burn or lose a source--I see nothing wrong with reading back their own quotes to them. |
| writesonwater | Posted – 3/23/2008 3:06:33 PM | show profile I have checked over facts etc. with people, but don't let people read things. When they ask, I say it's not company policy for the company I'm writing for, because it puts subjects in the uncomfortable role of being an editor. I have no problem with providing phone numbers for subjects, etc. which I think is a lot of the "notes" thing. With all the fudging that has gone on, sloppy journalism gone amuck with made up sources, most magazines are asking for the capacity to verify things. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/23/2008 6:54:45 PM | show profile I have been fact checking since 1987 and there are always notes provided. The purpose of which is that you have ample evidence of things the subject has said without having to ask the subject directly. The notes hold up in court as reference for the magazine having gone to the trouble of verifying factual information in the story--including quotes. The fact checker has a right to see notes. Writers do not always provide them, which is unfortunate for the writer, as all sensitive material then MUST be run by the interview subjects, and if such subjects are VEERY powerful and make too much of a fuss, the story can be altered or killed if the EIC is contacted (or the publisher) before the story ships. This has happened with story subjects including Alex Cox, Jesse Jackson, Michael Dukakis, and Rory Kennedy. SO I would suggest just handing over the stupid notes. If it's in the contract you signed., the editor can kill your story and not pay you a kill fee for your failure to comply. |
| megmuck | Posted – 3/23/2008 10:22:44 PM | show profile Sorry - that was a joke ... about having the source check the story. I know better than that. My apologies! I just wish the editor had mentioned that the magazine would need my notes for this FOB piece *before* I talked to the guy. I've seen him do his standard slide show on the article's topic twice in the last three months addition to the interview, so I'm pretty sure I understand what he's talking about - but heaven knows what the fact-checker is going to make of my sketchy notes. m. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 3/24/2008 12:32:13 AM | show profile Well, I figure I've written about 1,000 newspaper and magazine articles, and I'd say the number of the times I've been ask to give my notes to the publication number in the single digits. --Posted ? 3/23/2008 6:54:45 PM | show profile I have been fact checking since 1987 and there are always notes provided. The purpose of which is that you have ample evidence of things the subject has said without having to ask the subject directly.-- |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/24/2008 12:59:39 PM | show profile newspapers have never asked for notes (unless a libel accusation is made). But magazines always do. At least, monthlies. Those that don't aren't as careful with their fact-checking or aren't doing sensitive stories. Most just ask for backup andassume you are giving them your notes. SOme assume that you refuse to turn them over if you don't include them (some writers do this). But that means all material will have to be run by the source, and if you are accused of libel it reflects badly on the magazine that you had notes and did not show them to the magazine researchers, whose job it is to go over all backup and verify information. What they make of your notes is not really imperative. If the reseacher has questions he or she will contact you. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 3/24/2008 1:07:21 PM | show profile Actually, they don't. I've written for dozens and dozens and dozens of monthlies -- some of the biggest in the industry -- and I am hardly ever asked for my notes. Generally, for fact-checking purposes, I am asked for contract info of my sources and any supplemental material I used, like press releases. But never notes. --But magazines always do. At least, monthlies.-- |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/24/2008 1:33:54 PM | show profile Well, I don't know what to tell you, dribble drive, I have fact checked and written for many many many magazines (national, too, biggest in the industry, too!) and I have factchecked for as many magazines as I've written for, and we used notes from the interview and transcripts when available. Always. At two magazine, when they weren't provided, we were told to ASK for them (Rolling Stone, Vanity Fair). I have also written for Big! National! Newspapers and those notes were requested once. I'm pretty sure it was the writer's notes that got The New Yorker out of a lebel case back in the nineties (I wanna say the Janet Malcolm piece but I'm not positive.) It's possible the people who are factchecking your stories are assuming you won't turn over your notes (as I said, some writers don not), and aren't told by their editors to ask for them. Either way, why would you not give them up with your backup? What's the big deal? |
| onmyown | Posted – 3/24/2008 1:46:59 PM | show profile Yeah, Stephen Glass turned his notes over to fact-checkers too. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 3/24/2008 2:40:53 PM | show profile The only reasons I could think of for not wanting to give the notes tend to be related to low-paying pubs: 1. They aren't paying enough for you to want to pull together your notes and prepare them in a legible way (which was the original posters example). 2. The magazine is a little sleazy, and you don't want to give them the extra material you didn't use, because you're afraid they'll take it and use it without additional compensation. Overall, though, this thread is too long and too much ado about nothing. --Either way, why would you not give them up with your backup? What's the big deal?-- |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/24/2008 3:04:37 PM | show profile Yeah, I said that might be one of the reasons the editors ask for the notes (to put stuff in the 300 word piece). But assuming you'd have to OK final copy, I'm not certain how that would happen. (I know all magazines don't do this). And I agree, low paying pubs do not generally have good fact checking, if any at all. So an editor might be checking the veracity of the material him/herself. Maybe someone challenged something in the story and that's why the editor wants the notes. I don't know. But at the bigger magazines and when stories are sensitive, providing your interview notes is generally a matter of course (I'm looking over three of my fact-checking guidelines from Hearst and Conde nast right now and all three request "All backup...including notes taken from all interviews, in person and over the phone..." As for Stephen Glass, he also made up sources and web sites and had friends pose as sources for fact chekers. So it doesn't surprise me his notes were pieces of fiction as well. When you are inventing sources and interview subjects, notes are irrelevant. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/24/2008 3:06:22 PM | show profile And "prepapring" your notes can make them suspicious in a court of law. You simply hand them over. REading them is the fact checker's problem, not yours, as I have already stated twice. The less authentic the notes appear, the suspect your story becomes. |
| coastalwriter | Posted – 3/24/2008 3:23:06 PM | show profile In ten years, I have NEVER ONCE been asked for my notes from any newspaper or magazine client and I have written for major monthlies as well as the top daily newspapers in the country. I suppose it happens -- I've seen it mentioned in some of my contracts, but have never been formally asked. I *do* give fact-checkers thorough lists of names, numbers, etc. with every article, which hopefully, makes their life easier. |
| roxannekkb | Posted – 3/24/2008 3:27:30 PM | show profile Actually, I have only been asked for notes on one occasion. And like another poster here, I have written hundreds of articles for consumer and trade pubs. I have been asked to provide contact information of sources who are quoted in the article, and any supplemental info, such as a scientific study. The one pub that asked for notes was a women's mag, and I told the editor that I didn't have notes--that I had taped interviews. I asked her if she wanted the tape and never heard back. |
| seeattleme | Posted – 3/24/2008 3:34:51 PM | show profile Good fact checkers ask for notes. Notes are requsted in fact check guidelines from most major magazines. Not all factcheckers are good fact checkers, and fact checkers do assume writers simply don't provide them . Magazines won't let you get away with this if the subject matter is libelous or sensitive. If you are not writing about subjects that are or could be litigious, it doesn't surprise me that no one has asked for your interveiw notes. Youa re not asked for interview notes if you provide transcripts, unless, as I stated, there is sensitive material that needs to be verified. If you are writing about a suicide, or a lawsuit, or a profile about someone that mentions or takes note of undesirable characteristics (the person has bad breath, or is wearing a dirty shirt at the time of the interview) the fact checker uses the notes to get around having to ask the subject, "Is it true your shirt had a stain on it? Is it true your breath stinks? Is it true you hit your child during the interview? Can you tell me the details of your mother's suicide? Did you begin to cry during the interview?" If you are writing about subjects of this nature and no one is asking to see your notes, I would mention it to your editor. This is not a good policy. The notes are there to protect you. SOmone else should see them, see that they exist, before a story ships to print and is on the stands. It's proof you documented material during the interview, as oppsed to afterward, when a lawsuit is filed or a challenge is made about something you wrote. |
| Metro Writer | Posted – 3/24/2008 6:17:01 PM | show profile Never give your full notes to an editor - just the part that relates to the story you submitted for that publication, and that's only in the case of a problem that may lead to a lawsuit. In the future, strike out any clause in a contract that demands your notes. Why? Because you can use those notes for another article. |
| Mr. Biggles | Posted – 3/25/2008 12:10:11 PM | show profile >If you are writing about a suicide, or a lawsuit, or a profile about someone that mentions or takes note of undesirable characteristics (the person has bad breath, or is wearing a dirty shirt at the time of the interview) the fact checker uses the notes to get around having to ask the subject, "Is it true your shirt had a stain on it? Is it true your breath stinks? Is it true you hit your child during the interview? Can you tell me the details of your mother's suicide? Did you begin to cry during the interview?" IMHO, f you're talking about material this sensitive or potentially fraught with legal issues, then either you want a tape of the interview or the fact-checker is going to have to bite the bullet and confirm as diplomatically and skillfully as possible with the source. Notes can be fabricated from whole cloth (as an earlier poster alluded to), or things can get transcribed incorrectly. |
