Category: Response Papers (Feb 15) (Page 1 of 2)

Both interviews with Brandon Stanton and the IIT Institute of Design not only highlighted various techniques used to have a successful interview, but also depicts the purpose of conducting interviews.

According to Brandon Stanton, the purpose of Humans of New York and for interviews in general, is to simply present the interviewee as they are and by what they say. He steers clear from preconceived notions and biases, especially from politics. While this method of interviewing is beneficial in the sense that it prevents pre-constructed answers and makes the interviewing process more genuine and raw, I feel that it is innate to search for explanations and make connections of our experiences to larger political or societal issues. In other words, the interviewee is automatically telling their story with some kind of outside influence influencing the way they tell their story whether they know it or not.

Similarly, the IIT Institute of Design’s video also focuses on searching for the truth when conducting an interview, mostly by looking through the interviewee’s eyes. The video provides some tips for doing this such as making the subject comfortable, the importance of location, types of questions asked etc.

Overall, both videos focus on the importance of accurately representing the information given in an interview and how to get that information in its purest form and provide guidelines for how to achieve this goal which will be helpful for when I conduct my future interviews.

Brandon Stanton, the creator of Humans of New York, expressed that what’s most important in an interview is getting to the truth. Stanton explained that he wants to put out the actual story of the individual he is speaking to, not a pre-planned message about society. This has become increasingly difficult as people know about HONY and may try to sound more “purposeful” in their conversations with him. Aware of this, he knows how to move the conversation away from phony responses and get to what is real. The point is; if you’re trying to fit someone into a box, you’re not listening.

Truth was one of the main focuses in Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer as well. They emphasized that an interviewer should not write from their own perspective, but from the perspective of the person they are interviewing. In other words, don’t filter what you hear through your own frame of mind. They also mentioned that people may believe they are speaking the truth about themselves, but may not be. Similar to our reading, where the interviewer said that he speaks to the friends of the person he is profiling to get a better idea of who the person is. Sometimes our friends know more about ourselves than we do. That is why ethnographers go to their interviewee’s homes, or where they are most comfortable, so that their belongings, in a sense, can speak for them.

The best way to get to the truth is to connect with the person you are interviewing. If someone feels that they are not being judged, that they can speak openly and honestly, and that they are genuinely being heard, a much greater story may come out of your interview. Today, the question “How are you?” isn’t viewed as a genuine question, which is why everyone responds superficially and often dishonestly with “good”. Interviewing can go similarly unless it is clear that you want to know their real answer to your questions, and that you are interested in what they have to say.

Interviewing someone to learn about them can be a daunting and uncomfortable task for both the interviewer and interviewee. By creating a warm, open, and honest environment while taking steps to build rapport, a real relationship will develop, and you will find that the interviewee will begin to “sing”, as Dr. Elizabeth Tunstall puts it.

The key to a successful interview starts with treating the interviewee as one would treat any person they wish to build a relationship with. Make them feel comfortable with some light silliness, compliments, and  show true excitement to hear them talk. Brandon Stanton of Humans of New York told the Harvard Political Review that one should focus on the individual and try best to tell their story; not some bigger one. Once the person in front of you, the interviewer, is just another friend, you can hear the realness of their stories and how it makes them who they are, rather than how it fits into your larger story.

Some of the most valuable insight from these two videos, I think, are the pitfalls one can run into when interviewing. There are two I’d like to highlight. Pre-constructed answers from the interviewee and poor response/seqways from the interviewer. Brandon often encounters responses that the interviewee thinks he/she should be saying, rather that the straight up honest story. Encourage people to dig deeper and steer them away from those pre-constructed answers. Thats where the stories are. When in that zone of comfort, one can get push further. Once you get your interviewee in a place of comfort and honesty, you need to engage them but more importantly keep yourself engaged. Staying engaged is one of the hardest thing to do, and during the clip where Jeremy Alexis kept says “that’s interesting” I realized that in past interviews I have done the same thing myself. It’s a proper phrase to use, but perhaps when using it one should follow with a related question to show there is genuine interest.

Again, a successful interview starts with a real relationship. Understanding what the person has gone threw on a real level, when possible, will make all the difference in your narrative perspective, as well as it improve your relationship.  I particularly liked the rock climbing example, and I noticed that the more successful interview clips involved physical action. One interviewer tried on different pairs of jeans. Be a participate observer, rather than a fly on the wall.

Between “Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer” and “On the Record: Humans of New York Interview”, I can say I have a better understanding of how to interview someone for a narrative piece. Both videos were thorough and clear in their messages, and I look forward to putting them into action.

     Both videos with Brandon Stanton, creator of HONY, and the IIT Institute of Design complemented and emphasized the interviewing skills learned from Telling True Stories. The importance of the subject, and especially the ethical consideration of making sure their ideas aren’t skewed or put in a larger political context without explicit consent was a significant issue raised by Stanton in his interview. Although Stanton’s ideas are very noble, I believe his intent to avoid larger political and societal issues is fundamentally impossible and perhaps a little narrow minded. As thinking, feeling, human beings we naturally use our past experiences and understandings of the world to constantly make connections between the micro and the macro. Therefore, the political and societal connections arise naturally as a product of how we observe and analyze these narrative stories, counter to what Stanton’s vision for HONY is. The lesson of greatest value from the interview, especially for the purposes of my own interviews, is to follows Stanton’s advice in recognizing and making attempts to circumvent an interviewee’s “pre-constructed answers.” It’s very understandable that the interviewee would feel uncomfortable and less willing to disclose truthful information during the early stages of the interview. I am now very aware of the importance of establishing rapport and making sure the interviewee is as comfortable as possible before asking very deep personal questions. 

     IIT Institute of Design’s video focused primarily on ethnography which was defined as seeing the world through another’s eyes. On a deeper level, it seems that ethnography is about truly connecting with the person in front of you and understanding who they are. The take away from this video was the different approaches to get others to talk and how to make them comfortable and at ease. For example, the location where the interview is taking place (busy place vs. quiet place) or even the initial question you’re asking can be instrumental in getting the best, unadulterated account from your subject.

     In summary, I think the lessons learned from both videos will prove to be very useful in my own interview journeys. I am now much more aware of how the ethnographic process unfolds in practice and more confident in my ability to steer the conversation towards clarity and truth.

The Right Way to Interview

“Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer” is a video about the proper and the best way to interview people. A lot of the strategies that are presented in the video is also suggested in Telling True Stories, A Nonfiction by Mark Kramer. Like many experienced journalists have pointed out, it is important to make the interviewee to feel comfort. Either the interview must be outside or in a kitchen, it is necessary to let the interviewee feel no pressure. The opening of “Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer” shows that not many people are comfortable talking to a stranger on the streets. Many people just ignore the interviewer or reject the invitation. When the interviewee once feel comfortable, the interviewer can start to ask basic questions to warm up. one of the experts has noted that you want to connect with the interviewee so he or she can open up to you. The questions can be easy question, but the ultimate goal is to allow the interviewee to tell the interviewer a story relating to the subject. It is crucial to stay focus and interested as an interviewer so the interviewee can feel the need to tell something more. However, it is not good to overreact to certain story because it might scare the interviewee and eventually lose the connection between interviewee and the interviewer. The expert also has said that it is good to see the interviewee more emotionally because it is a sign that they are trusting you and telling you everything they know.

Harvard Political Review on the other hand is a different type of interview. The setting is intimating because it is in a conference room of Institute of Politics at Harvard College. The interviewer introduced herself or himself and jumped straight into the questions. The body language of the interviewees often to be very stiffen at the beginning of the interviews. The questions allow the interviewees to tell stories, but the questions are very specific. This type of interviews is what I have often watched on television or internet. The format is very rigid and intense to watch. The audience does not feel like connecting with the interviewee, but rather like a short session to know about the interviewee. The audience will not learn much about the life and the motive of the interviewee, but more on the topic of subject.

The interview with Humans of New York creator Brandon Stanton and the IIT Institute of Design’s “Getting People to Talk: An Ethnography & Interviewing Primer” video detail the techniques involved in ethnography and the qualities needed to become a good ethnographer. I feel that Brandon Stanton really got the message behind ethnography through when saying that he didn’t want to be the best at “telling the story of humanity”, but instead wanted to be the best at telling the story of the person in front of him. As an ethnographer, it is important to construct the truth of the story accordingly but not to twist it like the media often does. You will want to leave the politics out of it, because if you start asking questions molded by your own views in order to construct some political message, you won’t get to know your subject very well.

For instance, if you were part of a political group conducting a study and you asked a simple question to your subject about what their thoughts were about the group, the subject will likely be intimidated into giving a positive constructed response instead of a real response. You could conduct a whole study but not have meaningful information in the end. Therefore, as an ethnographer it’s important to be able to get your subjects to speak truthfully to you. If they give you a constructed response and you do not call them out on it, your study won’t be telling you much about who they really are, how their experiences have shaped them, or how they truly feel about something.

Just like the IIT video showed, there are many tips for novice ethnographers regarding what to do and what not to do. The first thing you might want to do is to make sure your subject is relaxed. If they are in a noisy or busy location, then they are not going to feel comfortable and will likely not be able to give you a good response. Another thing to do is re-examine the question you are asking – is it likely to illicit a positive response or will it simply be ignored. In a place like New York, getting your message to the subject quickly and as accurately as possible is important, and is something that novice ethnographers can work on by learning from their mistakes and by practicing.

At the start of his interview, Brandon Stanton asks a very simple yet powerful question. “…Are you truly listening to the person in front of you or are you trying to fit them in to some view of the world or some sort of message you’re trying to preach?” It is not rare in this day and age to find a person or community’s story twisted to fit a political agenda. Stanton discussed how the essence of Human of New York is to take the story for its face value without the political twists, to the point where if he feels someone is purposely trying to change their story, he will call them out on it. The Harvard Political Review video pinpointed what HONY is about and what Stanton’s vision for it is. There is a lot of truth and good in wanting to get the story for what it is and not the bells and whistles that are supposed to come along with it. I think that is extremely valuable considering the society that we live in, a society where the basic story is often lost.

ITT Institute of Design defined the term ethnography as seeing the world through the eyes of different people. On a deeper level, it is trying to understand who people are and why they do what they do. They described the correct and incorrect ways to interview a subject to extract the best information possible. As simple as it sounds, it is important to remember that all verbal and non-verbal communication can have a huge impact on the flow of the conversation. I appreciated the way that the ITT Institute of Design broke down the process to digestible pieces. One thing they stated that stood out to me was the difference between being a fly on the wall versus a participant observer. The ide of the fly on the wall is false because in reality we act differently when people are watching. The term participant observer is acknowledging that being there has an impact on the actions of the subject. This is something that I will take with me as I interview people, as the tone and mood are the difference between a good and bad interview.

Both videos delved into the importance of focusing on the subject for who they are and what their story is. Keeping the focus on the story that is presented and not necessarily the bigger political issue is vital to truly capture what each person has to offer. Before I walk into an interview, I am going to keep Stanton’s question in the back of my mind.

In watching these two videos, I consider myself fortunate that I watched the Harvard interview before that of the video explaining ethnography, in that it allowed me to better understand the concepts which Brandon Stanton was speaking of.

The main takeaway I took from the Harvard interview was that it s necessary, when interviewing someone, to take one’s own agenda out of the equation.  The way Stanton thought of it, if he was trying to mold an interview to conform to a political message he wished to spread, he would be pruning potentially crucial facts away even as they were being said.   This idea coincides with a large portion of the general theme of Ethnography, and that was to try to better understand people, and do so from their own perspective.  The overarching narrative results in Stanton appearing to be the prime example of all the skills presented in the Ethnography video at their zenith.  He gives off this impression as he tells of his ability to mull out honest versus doctored information.  The essence of the Ethnography video was effectively describing the most efficient ways to obtaining this useful information.  Those provided included gain rapport, keep emotions at a normal level and to choose a non-intimidating environment.  My impression was that by mastering these skills, Stanton had mastered the art of gaining rapport, so that his subjects would speak truthfully to him.

Another interesting thing which these videos provided was a contrast between Ethnography done correctly versus incorrectly.  The man in the Ethnography video who kept pointing out his own flaws, such as being patronizing, uninterested, or asking leading or compound questions, provided a contrast to the skill spoke of by Stanton.  This illustrated to me what the incorrect actions that Brandon had managed to weed out were, so that he could be confidant that he would be capable of obtaining the true story of his subjects.

The primary takeaway from these videos is that the goal of this line of work, be in narrative journalism or ethnography, is to faithfully represent the information obtained in the manner in which the subject would like it to be presented, so that one’s own opinions or impressions or agendas are not the primary focus of the work being done.

In both videos I have learned different ways to go about with ethnography that will be comfortable for the person that I am interviewing. My favorite types of interviewing are the expert view and participant observation. I like the expert interview because it allows me to ask questions that pertain to the topics that I am interested in, sand get that persons point of view without making them feel like I am prying too much into their personal lives. The downside of that type of interview is that I may not be able to fully understand how those topics affect the persons daily life because they can give a manufactured answer that the think I want to hear.  Completely opposite of the expert interview, I like the idea of participant observation, because you are able to physically experience the person’s daily life, therefore getting a better understanding on how the topics that I am thinking of allow them to function. By physically seeing and participating in their routine, you see them in their comfort zone, which may make them more comfortable to open up to you. The downside of participant observation is time to get to know their life.

Some pointers that I have gotten from both of the videos that I would like to implement in my own interviews are to be over prepared with questions so that I am more relaxed thus making my interviewee more relaxed with me.  I also will do my background research on the topic, so that I am not asking the person anything that is already written or may make them feel uncomfortable. I will start a conversation with the interviewee so that they do not feel nervous, which will help the interview flow naturally. I will use a location that they are pleased with and be charming, that way they can warm up to me and maybe even push the conversation themselves. I also will make sure that I am not political with the conversation that way they can give me an honest answer rather than one that may sound politically correct, or get a negative emotion out of them. I also will make sure that I keep my reactions neutral and stay engaged that way the person that I am interviewing feels invested in it. Overall, Both videos have showed me different ways to get a good interview that gives me great information to use and help me find the right topic.

Both the interviews with Brandon Stanton and the IIT Institute of Design touched on the importance of the subject and emphasized on telling their stories to the greatest accuracy possible.  In the beginning of Stanton’s interview, he placed a particular stress on the individual and the need to separate their personal stories from a grander over-arching theme. Personalization of stories are what make them unique and their independence from the larger society keep their individual meanings alive. However, while he doesn’t do so himself, it’s very difficult to ignore the context of the story and acknowledge its relevance to the rest of society. As the concept of the “social imagination” explains, society influences the individual and the individual contributes to society. After all, its individual people who make up a society and their differences are what construct the grounds for the tugs and pulls of a population. This begs the question of how does one tell the tale of a single person while taking into account the context to which it exists, but still treating it independent of it?

Moreover, Stanton mentions the need to get down to the realistic stories of his subjects rather than their “pre-constructed answers.” While I do understand the necessity of doing so especially when your work is renowned, but doesn’t that counteract placing control in the hands of the individual? If you want to take the person’s responses at face value, doesn’t it require some level of subjectivity to dictate whether they’re saying what they are in order to get more recognition and likes or if they actually do mean it? And so, wouldn’t that in some way be indirectly connecting someone’s response to a subjectively universal understanding of society and the people in it? To possibly counter some of that subjectivity, one can turn to ethnographic work such as participant observation as touched on by the IIT interview.

In addition, I found the part about letting the subject choose the place to be interviewed because it can say a lot about what and where they find comfort. This is something that has never crossed my mind, but is very relevant to any subject matter because as stated in the video, the more your subject is comfortable with you, the information you can get.