One of the more interesting things about working with recorded interviews is seeing what happens after the conversation ends. Most spokespeople think the challenge is answering questions well. In reality, there is a second challenge that often receives less attention: answering questions in a way that survives editing. Once they’ve left the interview – that’s when the editor takes control.
Whether the final destination is a podcast, a broadcast interview, a video clip or an online article, editors are constantly making decisions about what stays and what goes. And many interviewees make those decisions far easier than they need to.
The first issue is the rush to start speaking. A question ends and the response begins immediately.
“Umm…”
“So…”
“Look…”
Most people barely notice they’re doing it. The problem is not that these filler words sound unpolished. The problem is that they create uncertainty about where the answer actually begins. An experienced editor can solve that easily enough. The filler gets removed and the quote is tightened. But in doing so, the editor is making decisions on the interviewee’s behalf. They are deciding where the answer starts and what constitutes the core message.
Most spokespeople would prefer to retain that control themselves.
Retaking control of interviews
A better approach is to pause briefly before answering. A fraction of a second is often enough. That pause allows the speaker to decide where the answer will begin, what point they want to make and how they want the quote to sound. It also tends to make them appear more thoughtful and authoritative.
The second issue is a small word that causes surprisingly large problems.
“And.”
Many spokespeople answer a question perfectly well. The answer is complete. The point has landed. Then they hear themselves say:
“And…”
Now they have a problem. Nobody can stop at “and”. The sentence demands continuation. What follows may be useful. It may even be interesting. But it is often less important than the answer that came before it.
From an editor’s perspective, this creates options. If the second point is stronger than the first, the edit may focus on that instead. If time is limited, the original answer may disappear entirely. The interviewee has unintentionally shifted control over the narrative into someone else’s hands. This is why our media training often includes an unusual recommendation: learn to think like an editor. Ask questions such as:
- Would this quote work as a standalone clip?
- Does it make sense without the previous answer?
- Could an editor remove half of it without changing the meaning?
- Is the key point obvious in the first sentence?
The strongest spokespeople instinctively consider these questions. They shape answers that are complete, self-contained and easy to use.
At first, this can feel unnatural. People become aware of every word and every pause. Over time, however, a degree of self-editing becomes second nature.
The result is not a more cautious spokesperson. It is a more effective one.
Because the less work an editor has to do, the more likely it is that the audience hears exactly what the speaker intended to say.
