# Journalist wants to interview me about a story: what to do

A journalist wants to interview you about a story: what to do in the first 24 hours. Verify them, choose a response, set terms, correct facts, document.

---


When a journalist wants to interview you about a story, do not answer on the spot. Confirm who the reporter is through the outlet's own channels, ask what the story is and when it runs, and decide within hours whether to respond, who speaks for you, and on what terms.

A reply that is accurate, documented and made on terms you understood can leave you with more control than silence or a rushed call. Whatever you decide, the finished story is likely to appear in search results under your name.

This guide follows the first 24 hours in order. It is about accurate, lawful engagement, not about avoiding reporters, pressuring them or stopping a story that is true.

<div class="box"><b>The short version</b>
<ul><li>Verify the reporter through the outlet's masthead or switchboard before you click a link, answer questions or share a document.</li><li>You can respond, respond in writing, decline, or hand the request to a spokesperson or lawyer. Choose on purpose, before the deadline, not under pressure.</li><li>Treat everything you say as on the record unless both sides agreed otherwise before you said it.</li><li>Correct facts with short written statements and documents, not with arguments. Keep a copy of everything you send.</li><li>Expect the story to rank under your name. Plan the search and AI answer consequences on day one.</li></ul></div>

## Verify the reporter before you reply to anything

Confirm the reporter exists, works for the outlet they name, and is the person who contacted you, using a channel you found yourself. Do this first, because impersonation of journalists is a known way to deliver phishing links and to extract information.

CoinDesk published a warning that scammers were posing as its journalists on social media, asking for an "interview" and sending a malicious link made to look like a scheduling tool. Its advice: check that the link comes from the correct domain, check the masthead for the person and the handle they contact you from, and get a listed employee's contact details from the masthead if unsure. It adds that being cold-called is not in itself a sign of trouble, and that its journalists do not ask to be paid to write stories.

<figure class="fig">
<figcaption><b>Verify a reporter before you reply</b></figcaption>
<ol class="fig-steps">
<li><b>Use nothing they sent</b>Do not click a scheduling link, open a file or join a call yet, however polished the message looks.</li>
<li><b>Find the outlet yourself</b>Type the outlet's address into your browser or search for it. Look for the reporter on the masthead, staff page or author archive.</li>
<li><b>Compare the details</b>Match the email domain and display name against the outlet's real domain and the reporter's listed address. Look for lookalike domains, extra words or a free mailbox for a major outlet.</li>
<li><b>Reply on a separate thread or phone the desk</b>Use the newsroom number from the outlet's own contact page, or start a new email to the listed address. Ask the switchboard or an editor to confirm the reporter and the assignment.</li>
<li><b>Write down the result</b>Note the time, the channel you used and who confirmed. This is the first line of your record.</li>
</ol>
</figure>

Verification does not insult a real reporter. If the person pushes you to skip it, uses urgency as a lever or asks for sensitive documents before any conversation, that tells you what you need to know. A verified reporter is still not a story you must co-operate with: verification only answers who they are.

## You do not have to respond, but choose on purpose

A journalist's questions are a request. A subpoena, court order or regulator notice is a formal demand and is different: a lawyer should read those before anything is said to anyone. Whether to answer a press request is your decision.

The real question is what each choice does to the story. Reporters can publish with or without you. If you do not respond, your side is whatever other sources say it is. If you do, your words become part of the indexed record.

The Society of Professional Journalists code asks journalists to give subjects of news coverage a fair opportunity to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing. That gives you a defined moment to supply facts, and no duty to take it. The [SPJ Code of Ethics](https://www.spj.org/spj-code-of-ethics/) is a professional code, not a law, and outlets set their own standards.

<div class="tablewrap"><table><thead><tr><th>Response</th><th>Best when</th><th>What you gain</th><th>Main risk</th></tr></thead><tbody>
<tr><td><strong>Full interview, on the record</strong></td><td>The topic is favorable or neutral and you know the facts</td><td>Your voice and context in the story</td><td>Loose phrasing is quoted exactly</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Written answers only</strong></td><td>The topic is detailed, technical or sensitive</td><td>Exact wording and a record you control</td><td>Reads as formal, and may be trimmed</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Short written statement</strong></td><td>You need to be on the record but cannot discuss details</td><td>A stated position that the story can carry</td><td>May be used without context</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Spokesperson or counsel responds</strong></td><td>Legal exposure, a dispute, or an employer is involved</td><td>Consistency and legal review</td><td>Can read as distance</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Decline</strong></td><td>You have nothing to add, or a legal reason not to speak</td><td>No new quotes to manage</td><td>The story proceeds without your facts</td></tr>
</tbody></table></div>

A decline can still carry a sentence: "I have read your questions and I am not able to comment while the matter is open."

## Find out what the story is before you agree to talk

Send a short reply that commits you to nothing. Confirm you received the request and ask:

- What is the story about, and what is my role in it?
- What specific claims or documents do you want me to respond to?
- Is this an interview, a written exchange, or a background conversation?
- When is your deadline, and when do you expect to publish?
- Will you share the questions or allegations in writing before we speak?

The answers show whether the story is about you, a third party or a wider trend, and how long you have. A reporter's deadline is their schedule, not yours. Asking for a few hours to check facts is a reasonable request. If the deadline is an hour away for a serious allegation, say you want to respond accurately and ask for the questions in writing, and point to the fair opportunity to respond that the SPJ code describes.

Until terms are agreed, say nothing you would not want quoted. A call that begins casually can still produce a quote.

## Decide who speaks: you, a spokesperson or a lawyer

Pick one voice, because two voices create contradictions a story will quote side by side.

You should speak yourself when the subject is simple, you know the facts, and the story is not about legal exposure.

A spokesperson or communications lead should speak when you represent an organization, when the subject touches colleagues or customers, or when several people could be asked the same question. If you work for someone, tell your employer or communications team before you reply, because a media policy may apply.

A lawyer should be involved before you speak when the story concerns an allegation, a dispute, a regulatory matter, a lawsuit or an investigation. Counsel can say what you can say, and legal and communications advice should be coordinated so the two positions do not contradict each other.

A scenario with invented parties: a reporter emails the finance director of a mid-size firm about a supplier dispute that has reached a regulator. The director cannot confirm details and could say something that conflicts with the company's filings. The sound path is to acknowledge the email, say a representative will reply in writing by a stated time, brief the communications lead and counsel the same hour, and send a short statement limited to what is confirmed and documented. No phone interview.

## On the record, on background, off the record: agree terms before you speak

Treat every word as on the record unless both you and the reporter explicitly agreed otherwise before you said it. These terms come from newsroom practice, and they are not legal categories. Outlets use them with slightly different meanings, so confirm what the specific reporter means.

<div class="tablewrap"><table><thead><tr><th>Term</th><th>Common meaning</th><th>What the reporter may do</th><th>Your exposure</th></tr></thead><tbody>
<tr><td><strong>On the record</strong></td><td>Everything is attributable to you by name</td><td>Quote and name you</td><td>Highest</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>On background</strong></td><td>Usable, but attributed generically, such as "a person familiar"</td><td>Use the information without your name</td><td>Medium: you may still be identifiable</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Deep background</strong></td><td>Usable with no attribution to a source at all</td><td>Use the information as the reporter's own</td><td>Lower, but the facts are out</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Off the record</strong></td><td>Not for publication in any form</td><td>Nothing in the story, though it can guide further reporting</td><td>Depends entirely on trust</td></tr>
</tbody></table></div>

Agree before, not after. Saying "that was off the record" after a sentence has been said changes nothing. Ask the reporter to confirm the terms and begin only after they say yes. If they decline, do not give the information.

Off the record rarely helps. A reporter who learns something can try to confirm it elsewhere and publish it from another source. The SPJ code says to reserve anonymity as a last resort for sources with information of substantial public interest, and to consider a source's motives before agreeing not to identify them. Publications set their own rules.

<aside class="callout">
<span class="callout-label">Limit</span>
<h4>You cannot take a statement back after you have made it</h4>
<p>Terms must come first. If you realize mid-call that you said too much, say so immediately, explain what you want to withdraw, and ask the reporter what they will do. Do not assume they will agree.</p>
</aside>

## Choose the format: written answers, a call or a live interview

Written answers give you the most control, and a live exchange gives you the most warmth. Choose by how complex and sensitive the subject is.

Written answers let you check dates, figures and wording, share a draft with counsel, and keep a copy of exactly what you said. They suit allegations, technical subjects and numbers. The cost is formality, and a single sentence may be quoted out of context, so make each answer self-contained.

A call suits a subject where tone matters and you know the facts. Prepare three points and one sentence for questions you cannot answer. Take notes, then send a brief follow-up email repeating your key points and figures.

If you want to record the call, check the law first. In the United States, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press explains that federal law is a one-party consent regime, that about 11 states primarily require the consent of all parties, and that for calls across state lines you should assume the stricter state law applies. The detail varies by state, and rules in other countries differ. Read the [Reporters Committee recording guide](https://www.rcfp.org/introduction-to-reporters-recording-guide/). The safe course is to tell the reporter you intend to record, ask whether they agree, and expect they may record you too.

## Correct facts without arguing

Give the reporter accurate facts, with documents, in short sentences. A reporter can use a date, a contract, a filing or a record. A reporter cannot use "that is unfair".

Keep four kinds of statement apart. Facts you can prove (dates, titles, amounts) come with the document or public record. Context (what came before, what has changed) is short and plain. Opinion, such as "misleading" or "unfair", is your view and should be labeled as such. Things you do not know are said as such: "I do not know, and I would not want to guess" is a good answer.

When the story is about an allegation, answer each point, not the whole theme. If a claim is wrong, say which and why, with the document. If another is accurate, do not dispute it, because that costs you credibility on the points you can prove.

Do not make approval of the story a condition: outlet policies on this vary, and many reporters will not agree. You can ask the reporter to check specific facts with you, such as spelling, titles, dates and figures. If a question contains a mistake, correct the premise before answering: "That date is not right, it was in March, and here is the document."

### If an error appears after publication

Contact the reporter first, then the editor if needed, with a short email that names the sentence, states what is wrong, and attaches the evidence. Many outlets publish a corrections policy, and the SPJ code tells journalists: "Acknowledge mistakes. Correct them promptly and prominently."

In the United Kingdom, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) applies the [Editors' Code of Practice](https://www.editorscode.org.uk/the_code.php) to the publications that are its members. Clause 1 says a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion "must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence", and that a fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given when reasonably called for. IPSO's complaints FAQ says it regulates most UK newspapers and magazines, not all of them, so check whether a given outlet is a member. Other countries have their own rules. IPSO's complaints process page says it asks you to correspond with the publication before it begins an investigation, so raise the error with the publisher first.

Emphasis and tone are not errors. Keep the request to wrong dates, figures, titles, quotes or claims the documents contradict.

## Document everything in the first 24 hours

Write it down while it is fresh, in one place. Keep:

1. The original message, with headers, and the time you received it.
2. The verification steps you took.
3. Every question asked, in writing or in your call notes.
4. Everything you sent, with the exact time.
5. Any terms agreed, confirmed by email if they were verbal.
6. The stated publication date.
7. Screenshots of the live story, with URL and capture time.
8. Correction requests and replies.

Do not delete your own posts, emails or documents related to the subject. If a dispute, legal action or an investigation is possible, ask a lawyer before removing anything, because rules on keeping records vary.

<div class="tablewrap"><table><thead><tr><th>Window</th><th>What to do</th><th>What you have at the end</th></tr></thead><tbody>
<tr><td><strong>Hour 0 to 1</strong></td><td>Do not reply. Verify the reporter. Tell your employer or adviser if relevant.</td><td>A confirmed identity and outlet</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Hours 1 to 3</strong></td><td>Reply briefly. Ask for the subject, questions, format and deadline in writing.</td><td>The shape and timing of the story</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Hours 3 to 8</strong></td><td>Decide who speaks, and on what terms. Gather documents. Brief counsel if there is an allegation.</td><td>A decision, a spokesperson and a file</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Hours 8 to 20</strong></td><td>Send written answers or hold the interview. Confirm the terms in writing. Send a follow-up.</td><td>A record of what you provided</td></tr>
<tr><td><strong>Hours 20 to 24</strong></td><td>Check the reporter's confirmed facts. Draft your search and AI answer plan.</td><td>A plan for what happens after publication</td></tr>
</tbody></table></div>

These are working windows for a normal deadline. With a shorter one the order stays the same and each window shrinks. Verification is never skipped.

## What the published story will do to your search results

The story, and anything you said in it, is likely to be indexed and can rank for your name. Search engines index a news article like any other page, and a page from a well-known publisher can rank well. Your quoted words travel with it, and AI assistants that answer questions about people can draw on web pages. Three consequences follow.

**An accurate story is not removed because it is unflattering.** In its post on [when and why Google removes content from Search](https://www.blog.google/products/search/when-and-why-we-remove-content-google-search-results/), Google says it removes content that is against local law and offers removal for highly personal information such as financial or medical information, government-issued IDs and intimate imagery published without consent. It also says that content may still exist on the web, and only a website owner can remove it entirely.

**A false factual claim can be addressed, in a set order.** Google's help page on defamation removal asks for the exact URLs, an explanation of why the statements are untrue, and a valid contact. It says the most effective way to have content removed is to contact the person who posted it, because removing a page from Google Search does not delete the original. It also says it is not in a good position to evaluate whether claims are true, and that a court ruling in your favor will be taken into account. So the order is: correction request to the publisher, then legal advice on whether a legal route is justified, then the search engine's process if a court has ruled. The wording is on the [Google defamation help page](https://support.google.com/legal-help-center/answer/16833565?hl=en), and policies change.

**A correction changes the page, but the old snippet may linger.** Google's defamation help page says results update after the next crawl of the site once material has been removed, and the same logic applies to a corrected story: until a search engine recrawls the page, older text can still appear. Keep a record of the date of the correction.

Your strongest tool is accurate material you own: a clear page about who you are, up-to-date profiles, and your own account of your work. It gives search engines and AI assistants something accurate to cite beside the story. This is lawful suppression: better, truthful content that outranks, not tricks. Our [suppression page](/suppress-negative-results) describes the service.

Watch the results for the weeks after publication, in search engines and in AI answers. [Monthly monitoring](/reputation-monitoring) does this, and you can do a rough version yourself by searching your name and asking AI assistants what they say. If an assistant states something false, our [AI search page](/ai-search-reputation) explains what we do.

## What not to do

Some responses make a bad situation worse, and a few can create legal problems of their own. Avoid these.

<aside class="callout">
<span class="callout-label">Warning</span>
<h4>Do not threaten, pressure or intimidate a journalist</h4>
<ul><li>Do not threaten to sue to stop a story you have not seen.</li><li>Do not contact their employer to complain before you have raised a factual error with the reporter.</li><li>Do not offer money, access or favors in exchange for coverage.</li></ul>
</aside>

Threats can become part of the story. Also avoid replying in anger, publishing a long counter-post before the story runs, leaning on other sources to change what they say (give the facts to the reporter instead), and creating fake accounts, reviews or comments, which break platform rules and are often the real story. If accurate information about wrongdoing is in the public interest, the work is to add context and plan the response, not to prevent it appearing.

## The next step: write down your decision in one page

Before you reply, write five lines: who the reporter is and how you verified them, what the story is about, whether you will respond and in what form, who speaks, and the terms you will propose. Then send the reply. If the story concerns an allegation, a dispute or a leak, get legal advice before speaking.

<div class="box hot"><b>If this is happening to you now</b>
<p>A reporter has already contacted you and the deadline is close. Reputation Partners mobilizes its crisis desk within two hours to help you verify, respond and plan for what search engines and AI assistants will show. Start with the <a href="/crisis-management">crisis management page</a>.</p></div>

## Questions people ask

### Should I talk to a journalist who contacts me?

Not before you verify them and know the subject. After that it is your choice. Speak when you know the facts and the story is neutral or favorable. Respond in writing when the subject is sensitive. Decline, or let counsel respond, when there is legal exposure. A short, accurate statement can serve you better than silence, because it gives the story your position.

### Is it safe to speak off the record?

Only if the reporter agrees before you speak, and even then it depends on trust. The terms are newsroom practice, not law, and outlets vary. Anything not clearly agreed is treated as on the record. Off the record also rarely stops the information appearing, since a reporter can confirm it from another source. If you would not want it published, do not say it.

### How do I know the reporter is real?

Find the outlet yourself, locate the reporter on its masthead or author page, and contact the newsroom through its own published number or a new email thread to the listed address. Do not use links they sent. Look for lookalike domains and requests for payment or urgent file sharing. CoinDesk says its journalists do not ask to be paid to write stories, so treat any such request as a warning sign.

### Can I ask to see the story before it is published?

You can ask, but outlet policies vary and many reporters will not agree to it. A better request is for the reporter to check specific facts with you, such as titles, dates, figures and quotes, and to give you the allegations in writing with enough time to respond.

### What if the story has a mistake after it runs?

Email the reporter, then the editor if needed. Name the sentence, say what is wrong, and attach evidence. A correction is for a factual error, not for tone. In the United Kingdom, the Editors' Code applied by IPSO calls for significant inaccuracies to be corrected promptly and with due prominence by its member publications. Check the outlet's own policy first.

### Will the article show up when people search my name?

Often yes. A published article from a known outlet can rank for your name and be drawn on by AI assistants. An accurate article is not removed for being unflattering. Plan owned, accurate pages and monitoring in advance, and pursue a correction or legal route only for something false or unlawful.

### Do I need a lawyer before I reply?

If the story involves an allegation, a dispute, a regulator, a lawsuit or an investigation, yes, before you say anything substantive. For a neutral profile or an expert quote, usually not. A lawyer can also read any subpoena or formal notice, which is a different matter from a press request. This article is information, not legal advice.