E-mail Debate   

Inbox Interviewing

R EPORTERS COVERING MARK CUBAN are never left wanting for stories. The billionaire owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks has been fined more in his first year as owner ($505,000) than legendary basketball bad boy Dennis Rodman was in his 14-year career ($193,500).
But any reporter seeking comment from Cuban on his latest infraction might not want to bother picking up the phone. Cuban prefers to use e-mail.
"It's the easiest way to get ahold of him. It's great as far as in knowing you'll get a response," says AP Texas Sports Editor Jaime Aron. "But it's still not as good as a one-on-one phone or in-person conversation."
E-mail has become a vital newsgathering tool for reporters and editors around the country, but many still shy away from using it in place of the telephone to interview sources. Instead, they say e-mail is best used to complement the phone, such as in making initial contact with sources or getting quick responses under tight deadlines.
While more and more people are comfortable with the electronic word, there are plenty of concerns. For instance, most reporters are wary of e-mails because it is easy to hide an author's true identity.
"You have to be absolutely sure that the person who's typing it at the other end is the person you think it is," says Jon Ham, director of digital publishing of North Carolina's Durham Herald-Sun. It's not unusual for reporters at the Herald-Sun to use e-mail while writing their stories, Ham says.
Of course, phones present the same problem. "It's the same way you should treat any information," says Stephanie Miles, a reporter covering e-business for Wall Street Journal Interactive. Reporters must double-check all of their sources, whether they reach them by phone or e-mail, Miles says.
E-mail lacks the back-and-forth dialogue, and all the verbal cues, important in any interview. Aron recalls a story about Cuban matching his fines with donations to charity. Aron sent Cuban his questions, and the Mavs owner responded quickly and thoroughly to each, even adding a few extra details.
But while watching a telephone interview with Cuban on local Fox affiliate KDFW that night, Aron learned the owner had made a donation to a charity affiliated with prostate cancer, the disease that Mavericks coach Don Nelson is battling. It was a minor detail, but an illuminating one.
"Had we been talking, it probably would have come up," Aron says. E-mail "is a one-way conversation. That's what you lose."
But, he adds, "I would rather have in my third paragraph, 'Such-and-such said in an e-mail,' than 'Such-and-such did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.' "
And e-mail does have its advantages. For one thing, it's practically impossible to misquote someone. Andrew Leonard, editor of Salon.com's technology and business section, also believes some sources are more forthcoming or express stronger opinions in writing, contrary to the idea that written responses are stilted or more measured.
"Some people might be more candid when they're typing," agrees Tim Cowlishaw, a sports columnist at the Dallas Morning News, when they aren't being grilled by an unfamiliar voice over the phone.
Perhaps most important, e-mail is often the fastest way to get ahold of someone, particularly with the rise of wireless e-mail pagers. Aron says he's never waited more than two hours to get a response from Cuban. "To have that kind of access is incredible," he says.
Of course, there are those who are against any sort of e-mail interviewing. Miguel Helft, a senior writer covering online retail for The Industry Standard, flatly says, "I don't do e-mail interviews." And Jim Amoss, editor of New Orleans' Times-Picayune, calls the practice "a last resort."
Reporters who do use it also face questions about attribution. Ham likens e-mail to letters or memos, and reporters at the Herald-Sun identify when material is taken from e-mail in their stories. And Miles says to do otherwise would be misleading. "If you're quoting someone by e-mail, I don't think you should leave the impression that you've had an intimate chat," she says.
Not everyone agrees. After internal discussions, both Salon and the AP's Dallas bureau decided against specifying quotes that come from e-mail (the bureau communicates only with Cuban this way), unless a story is potentially inflammatory or controversial.
"We went back and forth with this about five years ago," Leonard says, adding that since Salon made its decision, "We haven't really had a reason to revisit it."
But whatever the questions about e-mail, its use is bound to increase, as both reporters and sources become more familiar with the technology, says John V. Pavlik, a journalism professor and the executive director of the Center for New Media at Columbia University. A whole generation of reporters is now being weaned on electronic communication, he says.
Pavlik himself is a strong proponent of e-mail, provided the author's identity can be confirmed. But he doesn't think it should be the exclusive method of interviewing. "Face to face is still the best way."