Do what you can to make them comfortable with the interaction, and with you specifically. Tell them you want to report the story fairly and accurately, and what that means to you. Invite them to get to know you and your work. Do you have credibility with this topic? Is this something you’ve been covering over time? (If so, have a previous example handy.) Have you articulated your approach to reporting, or your goals for your beat in general? Do you have a long history with the community? Do you have something in common with them? Can you demonstrate a genuine curiosity about them and desire to do right by their story.

Working with a whistleblower?

This Trust Kit is aimed at the kind of relationships with sources that most journalists deal with day to day. If you are in the less typical position of working with someone who is putting their own career, safety and reputation on the line to blow the whistle on a powerful organization or company, additional considerations are needed. An organization called The Signals Network supports both whistleblowers and journalists as they navigate sources’ risk and the public’s right to know.

• Where will the interview take place? 
• Will you come alone or with a colleague?
• Will you be recording audio? If so, will that be for your note taking or for publication?
• Will you be taking photos or shooting video? If visuals will be involved, do you hope to capture certain things about the person’s surroundings or appearance?
• How long should they expect to spend with you?

• What are your goals with the story — what do you hope to explain, draw attention to, or just tell a story about?  What will the story *not* cover?
• What role do you hope this person will play? Explain if they are the focus of the story, or just one of several people being interviewed (and who may not even be included). 
• How much of their interview is likely to get shared? Perhaps all of it, if it’s live? Perhaps none of it? Perhaps one sentence from a 30-minute conversation?
• Where will the story appear? Don’t assume people understand that they could go both on your website, in a podcast and on TV, for example. They definitely might be surprised to know that any of the newsrooms you’re affiliated with could pick the story up.

Will you need their first and last name? Don’t take for granted that they will know that automatically. We know as journalists that being on the record is important, so the audience can know who they’re hearing from and can put the information in context. But your source might never have given that any thought. If they express surprise, try connecting your need to the bigger picture of how journalism works. 

To explain the need to be on the record, say something like: I’m sure you can understand that journalists can’t just publish stories full of anonymous comments. We ask people to be held accountable for the information and experiences they share, so our communities can decide for themselves what to think about it. That’s true for public officials or people at the center of big news events, and it’s also true for the general public weighing in on matters of public concern. In fact, we very rarely allow sources to remain anonymous in stories. 

Will you ask to make public the name of their business? Their age? Their kids’ names and ages? The part of town they live in?

Some resources that might help: 

• NPR’s guide to interviewing vulnerable sources
• The Signal Network helps whistleblower sources tell their story, even when at risk, providing everything from legal to psychological support.

Depending on the topic and the person, it can be a good idea to make sure they know they are opening themselves up to attention, online comments, etc. The story will be findable online. People might Google them, or look up their social media profiles. The more vulnerable the source is, the more important it is to take care with this step.

Will the story run later that day, or in two months? What control does the reporter have, and what decisions might an editor make that would affect the source? Could the story get spiked, or could their part of it be cut? 

Remember, the whole production process is invisible to people outside the newsroom unless you explain it. And the assumptions people make about your decision making will not usually be positive ones. If they don’t see themselves in your coverage, they might think you didn’t agree with what they said or wanted to hide their perspective. Or they might keep watching your channels, thinking they’ll be in a future story instead.

Will you call them back to double-check that you have things right? Or give them a chance to respond to points made by other sources? Have some empathy for what these new sources might be nervous about, and put their minds at ease. 

Depending on how much time they spent with you, it might be worth checking in to see how they felt about the finished product. If you appreciated an anecdote they shared but couldn’t use it, thank them for it. If they didn’t appear in the finished product at all, tell them how they helped round out your understanding of an issue and informed your reporting overall. And definitely take time to send a link to the story to everyone you interviewed.