In our progressive time, the need for accurate and timely information, there has been increasing. No wonder that twenty-first century have called an era of mass media. By and large, the previous twentieth century has largely been such, it's hard to argue. We can not imagine a full life without television in the evenings when we arrive from work. No radio in the mornings when we drink morning coffee. No newspaper in the early afternoon to be, as they say in the know. Without all this, to live is almost impossible, and if it happens that we have - leaving for a weekend at the cottage or just a city on the barbecue - it turns out this information "field" that - coming back - feel a pressing need to know what happened in the city (country / world) during this time that we spent so wonderful, spreading campfire and sitting on Berezhkov rod. Fishing and the information needed like air. And the issue here is not only and not just about professionals, Kojima is charged with the responsibility to collect any reports and information. They, of course, it is necessary as air. Information is necessary for all, without exception, by virtue of objective and subjective reasons (who both, in other words).

We'll talk about methods of collecting information first-hand the people who "make" us the news. Print, television and radio news. In short, about journalists, for journalists, and in particular, about the interview in journalistic work . I assure you and swear: to ask people who are constantly keeping up with the idea of material (articles, reports) - the art, partly giving Mother Nature, in part - of experience. Tend that the latter often plays an even greater role than the first. Initially, when you first submitted to an interview, do you see coming in the form of a conversation or a friendly conversation, either in the form of questioning. This is already depending on the person and how close he is to the journalistic profession. Typically, chatting does not work. Actually, he can not get friendly.

Journalist - is first and foremost a journalist, he came to ask to write the answers shoot at the camera or write on the tape recorder. The man in front of you - the interviewee, not more. Thus, the main purpose and goal of the journalist, who came to the interview - make sure that the conversation took place in a more comfortable environment for both parties. In other words, you get the right information, and the person from whom you take this interview, was pleased with your work and, most importantly, the results (articles, reports, radiovypuskom). Nobody ever knows, have you ever see him ever again, and good relations - a brick in the wall of your confidence in their relationships.

What is the interview

Interviews - a technique for gathering information that can be transferred to air as a news item or enter a message, reportage, comment. Interviews can be as an auxiliary part of journalistic work on the transmission and fully independent material. If you ask some questions to some person only to clarify the details, without which your material will be incomplete - it is one. Drawn up a detailed interview as a complete program - it is quite another. In such a transfer of the audience is invited is not the result of work and its process. As already noted, in an interview with journalism has two meanings: a method and genre. Sometimes in the definitions of the interview, the two values are too categorically defined. Meanwhile, obtaining information through interviews can not aim at the creation of works of a certain genre.

On one side of the interview - informational genre of journalism, a literary retelling of the conversation with a man whose opinions and views of interest to a wider audience. On the other hand interviews - a method for obtaining information through communication with other people. In a very rough interpretation of the interview - a conversation, intended for publication. Moreover, the facts and events is not a comment on behalf of the journalist, as in other genres, but on behalf of the person interviewed. There usually plays the role of the fact that he is more competent, has more to do with the subject under discussion than a journalist (although those who have studied or studying in the faculties of journalism, can remember a couple of cases when they were told in class or on a daily interactions: " Well you a journalist, then should all know ... ") The term" interview "comes from the English word interview, meaning the same conversation. In order to optimally build interpersonal communication in the course of your work, you must meet certain technological methods. These or other procedural operations are defined as the common generic features interviews and species differences "within" him.

Every conversation (journalism - in particular) involves an exchange of views. But the provisions of the interlocutors in this case amounts to. Interview of the same - it's not an exchange of views, but getting information from one person - the interviewee. In contrast to the conversation, the role of the participants interviewed are quite different: the respondent acts as research object, the other - as a subject. Consequently, the journalist focuses on collecting information, so an exchange of views in an interview more often unacceptable. This fact is very important, especially for young journalists. The natural human desire is the desire to respond to words buddy. The reaction of a journalist can - and often so happens - in an attempt to "smuggle" into the conversation (and then into the material), their own opinions, which would be intertwined with the opinion of the interviewee's face. In the professional interview, it is unacceptable, unless the journalist does not put it in because of some reasons the task. That's why interviews can not be treated as tantamount to a conversation.

As to the submission of an interview as interrogation (question and answer "), then such things as wrong in fact, as the desire to talk about what we said above. Too rigid grid of questions to the person, the absence of any derogation was left or right will be perceived as an unwillingness to listen to the end and your only formal approach to the conversation. In such cases, the person and so it must be said, a little prepared for your questions, may do "close" and internally wroth, as a result you will receive a minimum of information, which at best is difficult enough even on a small note. The art of finding the optimal edge, a middle ground between these two beaches is the art of journalistic work in the genre of the interview. It is understandable that, as with any method, in the journalist interviewing him can be found inherent disadvantages. Interviews are sometimes unreliable tool due to announce a double subjectivity received the information: the subjectivity of their source and the perceived their interviewer.