by Linda Rodriguez
This
coming week, I'm scheduled to do an interview to publicize my new
book of poetry. I've done a lot of interviews—on radio, television,
and in newspapers and magazines—in my lifetime, both in recent
years as a writer and in earlier years as an administrator at a large
public university. Of course, as a writer, you always welcome a
feature article or interview. It's the kind of publicity you can't
buy—and usually can't just get whenever you want or need it.
Even
with all my experience, however, I have nightmares about each of
these interviews after I finish them. I always do with interviews
anymore. I go into them promising myself I’ll be careful and
remember the disaster I once encountered, but then I get involved in
the conversation and tend to forget. After it’s over, I suddenly
remember that I wasn’t careful, and I try to remember everything I
said and how it can be twisted and misused against me. And there’s
a good reason for my fear.
Before
I got sick and had to leave my career of many years (which really
opened the doors for my writing), I was the director of a university
women’s center, one of the oldest and largest in the country. I
often had to give radio, TV, and print interviews or was asked to
write opinion pieces by newspapers and magazines on women’s issues.
I had become sort of an old pro at it. One day the brand-new network
TV station in town, Fox, called and asked for an interview the next
day about pornography’s effects on women. I agreed and set about
research to be able to give an up-to-date, informed opinion on the
matter and to back it up with facts. (Fox hadn’t developed the
reputation it now has. It was still flying under the radar at that
point.)
The
next day I was dressed in my nice red wool suit (better for TV), and
the Fox reporter and I were sitting in my beautiful women’s
center’s library with built-in walnut bookcases surrounding us
while a cameraman filmed and recorded us. We talked for over an hour.
To my surprise, the reporter was very knowledgeable about the issue
and some of the latest research, and his questions were appropriate
and insightful. He told me at the end that they would need to edit it
down drastically, and I said, “Of course.”
When
it appeared on the newscast a week later, it became clear that
another reporter had wanted a junket to a porn-maker’s convention
in Las Vegas, and that was what the whole thing was about. It ran ten
minutes and was like an infomercial for porno films. I was the only
woman in the segment who was over 30, fully clothed, and not
surgically enhanced, and they gave me one line, which was not only
ripped out of context, but edited, snipping the middle out of it, to
make it sound like the dowdy, old feminazi had condemned all porn
(which I hadn’t) and, by extension, all sex. Of all the many times
I’d been on TV or radio or in the paper, this was the one the most
people saw—my neighbors, my son’s gastroenterologist, my
hairdresser, the checker at the grocery store, strangers everywhere I
went. And then, because it was a highly rated segment, they replayed
it six months later during sweeps and twice more the next year.
So
I’ve learned the hard way to beware of interviews, especially those
where we’re having intelligent, nuanced discussions. I know how my
own words can be turned against me. I really don’t expect this
upcoming interview to be horrible. Even when I did an interview about
my second novel with the huge and sometimes controversial magazine,
Cosmopolitan,
I
should have had confidence because the interview was done by a person
I knew whose work I respected. But I have to admit I had some bad
nights over that one. I’d remember some of the things we talked
about and worry, “Oh no, think what he could do with that statement
if he took it out of context.” And then, of course, there was the
fact that it was Cosmo.
Would this be another case of being made out to be the stodgy, old
feminazi sandwiched in among the sexy girls?
Actually,
I was sort of sandwiched between “The Joys of Hangover Sex” and
“Hot Sex Tips,” but the Cosmo
profile
was very nice—and I’m grateful to have had that opportunity to
connect with all those potential readers. Nothing was taken out of
context, and the reporter did a lovely job.
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/cosmo-latina/blog/author-linda-rodriguez-interview
But
I never forget what it could have been. Fox-TV scarred me for life
when it comes to interviews.
Have
you had sad or maddening experiences with interviews or being
misquoted or misrepresented somehow? How do you feel when someone
wants an interview (other than a written Q and A where it’s so much
easier to have some control)?
Linda Rodriguez's Dark Sister: Poems
has just been released. Plotting the Character-Driven Novel, based on her popular workshop, and The World Is One Place: Native
American Poets Visit the Middle East, an anthology she co-edited,
were published to high praise in 2017. Every Family Doubt,
her fourth mystery novel featuring Cherokee campus police chief,
Skeet Bannion, will appear in August, 2018, and Revising the
Character-Driven Novel will be published in November, 2018. Her
three earlier Skeet novels—Every Hidden Fear, Every
Broken Trust, and Every Last Secret—and
her books of poetry—Skin Hunger
and Heart's Migration—have
received critical recognition and awards, such as St. Martin's
Press/Malice Domestic Best First Novel, International
Latino Book Award, Latina Book Club Best Book of 2014, Midwest Voices
& Visions, Elvira Cordero Cisneros Award, Thorpe Menn Award, and
Ragdale and Macondo fellowships. Her short story, “The Good
Neighbor,” published in the anthology, Kansas City Noir, has
been optioned for film.
Rodriguez is past chair of the AWP
Indigenous Writer’s Caucus, past president of Border Crimes chapter
of Sisters in Crime, founding board member of Latino Writers
Collective and The Writers Place, and a member of International
Thriller Writers, Wordcraft Circle of Native American Writers and
Storytellers, and Kansas City Cherokee Community. Visit her at
http://lindarodriguezwrites.blogspot.com
Oh, Linda, how awful! Easy to see how that could scar you.
ReplyDeleteFortunately, I've not had anything so awful happen. I admit to preferring print or face to face interviews over radio. There is something comforting about visual cues, don't you think.
I haven’t had those opportunities, so haven’t been burned. However, in today’s news environment, it’s especially easy to see how someone can twist words to their own purpose.
ReplyDeleteAs someone on the other side of the table -- doing the interviews and writing the profiles -- I agonize over getting it right. I never want my interview subjects to regret talking to me!
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm so sorry you had that horrible experience, Linda. Although we edit interviews here on WWK, I always allow the author final say. Print is better. I wouldn't even attempt a voice or in person interview. Words on the page--it's what we do!
ReplyDeleteOf course, you need to do those interviews, but I can't help but think that maybe you could assert yourself to control those interviews more. But there isn't a thing you can do about edits--so you know what to do--if you can't control it, forget it!
Kait, I actually like radio interviews--if I know the interviewer. That's mostly because I have a really good radio voice and the camera leaves me looking even fatter than I am. But I've done enough of either to be comfortable with them--until afterward when I worry about what the editor can do with what I've given them.
ReplyDeleteJim, yes, and you wouldn't think they'd bother to do it with interviews that have nothing to do with partisan politics, but it happens.
ReplyDeleteJulie, I suspect this Fox interviewer was a pro like you. They had just come into the KC market and taken over a reputable station. It was all in the editing.
ReplyDeleteElaine, actually, I've had very good luck with most interviews. That's what such a shame about it--one horrible experience can tar a whole field. I know how useful such things are in book promotion, so I try to keep my own fears out of the equation. But sometimes it's hard.
ReplyDeleteWhat a horrible experience, Linda. So far most of my interviews are at book clubs or other groups so it has all been positive. One of my nicest interviews was with a group of nuns in a library at Sisters of Notre Dame where I knew one of the many nuns who live there either still working or retired. I had donated all my books to them through Sister Mary Cora who used to be active at my church and still comes to visit our home bound bound parishioners. I once did a radio interview, too, and a local TV not local to me, but closer to the Sinc Chapter I'm in. They gave me a CD of the interview. I never watched it on my TV.
ReplyDeleteAwful. I'm so careful what I say and commit to in a public forum. But it's all in the editing, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteHas the event made it into your writing yet?
ReplyDeleteGloria, it's nice when you can keep it all with people you know.
ReplyDeleteMargaret, yes, we can be so careful, but they can do amazingly awful things with editing.
Warren, no, but my first Skeet novel had a situation where Skeet had been ambushed in the media that drew on it emotionally.
How awful for you, Linda. I'm so sorry that happened to you. It goes to show you, like statistics, things can be skewed the direction the writer wants a story to go. The tragic thing is that peoples' reputation can suffer. That's why I think so many very good people don't go into politics.
ReplyDeleteAnd when I think of all the people I know who take Fox News as unbiased, gospel truth...
ReplyDeleteGlad yo didn't let the bad experience cripple you.
Good grief, Linda! I'm so sorry that happened to you. Yet another example of the way deceitful, agenda-driven "news" stifles the truth.
ReplyDeleteGrace, it certainly would make a political career less than enticing, wouldn't it?
ReplyDeleteKM, it's funny to remember back then when Fox was brand-new and had just moved into our market, taking over another reputable station. We had no inkling then of what "news" could become.
Shari, yes, and it causes so much harm.