In the Classroom: A Turn in the Hot Seat.
The camera was rolling, and the interview—on how home births are perfectly safe under the right conditions—was going well. Then the reporter, without changing tone, asked the researcher if she was familiar with a specific study showing 30 percent of home births are actually unsafe, and that two-thirds of home births are attended by midwives without proper credentials: “So is it completely honest to say that home births are safe?”
The researcher was Jennifer Stevens, a doctoral student in PH866 Public Health Leadership, taught by Professor of Community Health Sciences Eugene Declercq, director of the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) program. The reporter was Michael Saunders, previously of the Boston Globe and now the multimedia director in the SPH communications office.
Saunders was visiting to prepare the seven DrPH students for interacting with media as researchers and practitioners. He began the class with tips, from gesturing to preparing notes to finding the best way to stall for time (“That’s a great question…”), how to handle a surprise ambush by a reporter out on the street, how to pivot out of rabbit holes, and how to avoid the temptations of a swivel chair when on camera.
Next, the students got to test their skills in the hot seat, on camera, with Saunders conducting different kinds of interviews. “Some of you are going to get the basic informational interview,” Saunders said. Others got contextual interviews, where a reporter needs background information on a topic.
Then there are adversarial interviews. “You have to defend yourself, defend your organization, and perhaps an entire field of research,” Saunders said, “without getting angry, without being offended by the reporter’s questions, and without losing your message.”
Stevens, a certified nurse-midwife and former director of a Pennsylvania birthing center, found herself in an adversarial interview—but she didn’t miss a beat.
“You’re right,” she said. “That study pointed out what we just said: in a system where you have licensed professionals in an integrated healthcare system, you’re going to have great outcomes. I have seen that report and some other reports that have said similar things, and what I find interesting is when you dig down into the report that’s what you’ll find.”
Saunders asked a few more questions, trying to steer toward the dangers of home birth, but Stevens kept control, sticking to her points about the specific conditions under which a home birth is safe, and outlining the evidence to support it.
“That was a very good pivot,” Saunders said after the interview.
“And you kept smiling,” Declercq said. “You didn’t say that that study had serious methodological flaws—which by the way it did.”
“I thought if I was a woman reading this article,” Stevens said, “would I want to hear about this study? No, I would want to know what I can do, whether my midwife is legal, and whether the health system is integrated.”
In an increasingly polarized media landscape, Saunders said, it’s important for the interviewee to know beforehand what points they want to hit, and what message they want to stick to.
Another key piece of preparation, especially for public health leaders and researchers of politicized topics: research the interviewer. “It helps to know who the reporter is, know their outlet, and know what they’re going to do,” Saunders said. “You always need to know who’s interviewing you and why.”