Comments on: Writers outsourcing interview transcriptions: lazy or smart?

By: jaydubya

jaydubya — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 01:06:37 +0000

This is an interesting one - my first thought (and I’m NOT a journalist) is to draw an analogy with film (picture) editing. In the old days, before the 90s, editing on a flatbed/Steenbeck in a LINEAR way meant that there was inevitably many points in the flow of work where you had to rewind the rolls to the beginning. This time and all the little bits like it would these days make us impatient with the technology but in fact they were really useful. This is the time in which reflection occurs, decisions analysed, possiblities imagined etc. It’s THINKING time.
So I reckon that doing it yourself would be really useful for someone doing research (as opposed to someone who might have really tight deadlines or who just needs to report what was said without much comment). The time it takes to transcribe is also the time when the other bits of your brain are really sifting through the facts, emotions and implications of what’s being said.
It’s about depth, I think. Getting deeper into what someone has said. Their voice (not the transcript) supplies some big part of that depth.
That’s it from me!

By: A Conversation With Craig Mathieson, music journalist at Andrew McMillen

A Conversation With Craig Mathieson, music journalist at Andrew McMillen — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:54:03 +0000

[...] wrote recently that Craig Mathieson wears the crown of Australian rock journalism. Allow me to elaborate. [...]

By: Tal

Tal — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:00:49 +0000

Can’t really put my finger on why, but I’m against it. Possibly because I have enough time and not enough money, possibly because I’m hyper-possessive of my work. Perhaps one day I’ll be snowed under and gaze up to the heavens and call on the gods to furnish me with outsourcing. Until then I can spare a couple of hours to do the “play-type-pause-rewind-pause-type shuffle”.

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:04:58 +0000

andrew, my two cents.

i think it’s totally fine. worth noting that this is nothing new and that many many magazines out there get interns to do the same. i worked on dazed and confused magazine in 2002 in the uk and transcribed a bunch of interviews for writers to then take to. transcribing does not the interview make.

if people are worried about losing nuance, i would think that a experienced writer who actually did the interview in the first place would find that his/her brain switches back in time to the call pretty quickly as soon as the text is back in front of you. When you are constructing the story with the quotes in front of you there shouldn’t be an issue?

if i could afford to do it i would totally. it’s dry as. once you’ve done a hundred of these it is by no means interesting to not only hear yourself speak back at you, nor to spend time doing this. most writers due to the lack of cash involved are working in other things on the side, or in the middle! so saving the time to do this is great. i’m going to check it out when next i do an interview.

nb: i wouldn’t agree with someone interviewing and transcribing to then hand over to be written of course, but that’s not the discussion. unless that person had an accident with a wheelbarrow and you were merely helping out

Darragh “It is perfectly fine to outsource. Does an architect have to actually build a structure in order to claim it as their own work?”

agreed!

By: Elmo Keep

Elmo Keep — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:05:17 +0000

The best piece of advice I was ever given by another writer was to learn to love transcribing. It’s how you get to really know the nuances and tone of the final piece, even if the resulting piece is “only” an interview.

Not to mention that transcribers are not always accurate. One incorrect letter can change the meaning of word and therefore a sentence and therefore a salient point. Punctuation is often left out, or incorrectly annotated too.

Everything that comes back to us at Hungry Beast is gone over again by the interviewer for accuracy. It’s only outsourced in the first place due to the sheer volume of material we have to get through.

But if you’re working on your own and have time, you should do it yourself. It’s quite a lovely part of writing for me.

By: Darragh

Darragh — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:12:45 +0000

It is perfectly fine to outsource. Does an architect have to actually build a structure in order to claim it as their own work?

By: Rachel Hills

Rachel Hills — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:43:12 +0000

I don’t outsource because of, er, technical difficulties, but I don’t see anything wrong with it at all (except perhaps exploiting workers in other countries for crappy rates, but my friends in development tell me it’s fine). Especially not in the writing sense.

As Stephen said, writing isn’t about the act of typing up an interview, or really even typing at all, it’s about the creative act of structuring a feature, drawing together the threads of an argument, and so on. It’s even about the way you devise your interview questions and the way you interact with your interviewee.

But while listening to and typing up an interview can be a good way to get into the headspace of drawing together those threads, not transcribing certainly doesn’t mean you’re not “writing”.

By: tamara bentzur

tamara bentzur — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:38:08 +0000

Wow! That came out of nowhere! Thank you so much Andrew for your awesome endorsement of my work. I do try my best to give you transcriptions that are accurate, while removing the unnecessary ums and ahs to make your life easier when when finalizing the content to publish. It’s a plus that I also find your interviews interesting :)

Now I would like to weigh in or if this is lazy or not, and if it diminishes your standing as a writer. ABSOLUTELY NOT! As long as the transcriptionist you choose to work with is competent, FLUENT in English, as well as “getting” the nuances of slang etc. there is no question. We’re simply giving you in print what you hear on the audio. But I agree that it is the most tedious, time consuming part. I cannot imagine worrying about meeting a deadline for multiple interviews, while having to type them all up. This way, Andrew (as well as all my clients) can rest easy knowing they’ll get a great product that keeps the integrity of the speaker’s “voice”, which only enables one to keep plugging along with additional work that brings in income. It’s a win-win all around. (BTW I’m a native English speaker too.)

Thanks again Andrew!

By: Mike Brown

Mike Brown — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:16:14 +0000

Outsourcing an interview transcription should be a resource, not the end result. In that regard I agree with Stephen about Q&As.

By: Rob F

Rob F — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:04:54 +0000

I’m fairly stunned at her attitude. Outsourcing just makes the process a whole lot more efficient, in much the same way lots of firms outsource the most tedious admin work and the like.(Ferriss ftw http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/outsourcing-life/)

Short deadlines are the biggest thing stopping me from outsourcing what I agree is easily the most tedious part of writing. It’s certainly something I’ll be doing if I get into more freelancing and feature stuff.

How many times on average is she unsure of certain phrases? Aside from the turnaround, that’s my biggest concern, especially industry-specific language.

Cheers
Rob