3 ms·
No ad-lib, too much opportunity for PR rewrites, spin, etc. People are much more interesting in a conversation. Yes, IM is much better.
by far33d 19y ago
No ad-lib, too much opportunity for PR rewrites, spin, etc. People are much more interesting in a conversation.
Yes, IM is much better.
- Goladus 19y agoHuh, that depends on what you're looking for, I guess. In a live interview, you can be asked a question you weren't prepared for, and if you lose composure even a little it doesn't matter what the truth is nor what your answer is, what people will remember is that you got flustered. With email, you can relax and take your time. I'm not saying email is superior, but one should recognize the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Live interviews (and to a lesser extent, IM) are a place where the glib win. http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/04/when_only_the_g.html http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/0...
- far33d 19y agoI was referring to the experience as a reader - emailed interviews and the stories that result from them are usually boring and formulaic, and don't differ much from a stock press release.