The Aerie

EDITING: When presenting opposing viewpoints, keep in mind which viewpoint best supports the goals of the corporation. Sometimes corporate spokespeople, such as Administration personnel or members of Congress, may have trouble clearly and succinctly expressing the corporation’s goals. If you hear an obvious error, offer the spokesperson the chance to correct their statement by re-filming the response.

However, you won’t always be able to catch errors in the field. That’s where editing comes in. As a journalistic editor, you can enhance the corporation’s message by clarifying those statements with your editing tools. Remove hesitations, pauses, and ‘um’s to make the message more succinct. If the answer to another question is clearer, rearrange the answer to support your spokesperson.

Contrariwise, you will frequently be forced to add “tension” and “controversy” to your interviews, in order to infotain your audience. You may find yourself interviewing persons whose interests are contrary to the corporation’s goals, such as environmentalists, Federal regulators, or Liberals. These people are very concerned that their messages be conveyed in full, and are very sensitive to editing; therefore, do not correct their statements, and do not edit their answers. If this means that you leave in footage of the subject picking their nose, or muttering obscenities and threats when they believe they are off camera, so be it.

It is as important to maintain the viewers’ interest as it is to convey the entire message that these subjects wish to convey. If a subject’s statements are boring, try adding a little whimsy by using post-production techniques to enhance the subject’s features. A boring interview can be salvaged by enlarging ears and noses, erasing lapel pins, or adding a “Yakkety Sax” soundtrack.