On the Record vs. Off the Record: Interview Options

Anytime a source is considering speaking to the media, they should be informed of their options and understand the reporter’s expectations. One of the specifications they need to be aware of is whether the interview will be on or off the record.

Speaking on-record means that any shared information can be used freely, and the source can be quoted by name. It should be assumed that every interview is on-record unless the reporter and interviewee made a prior arrangement. Despite this, interviewees should not expect every on-record interview to reach publication. Sometimes, reporters request interviews but wind up scratching the material, and an interview does not always guarantee a quote.

For an interview to be considered “off the record,” the reporter and the interviewee must agree that the contents of the discussion cannot be used or attributed to the source in any way. Once this stipulation is invoked and acknowledged by both parties, the journalist is ethically bound to the agreement.

So why would a source want to do a background or off-record interview? There are a variety of reasons.

If the interviewee wants to establish rapport with a journalist and build credibility as a source in their field, conducting background calls can be beneficial. In doing so, they will be positioning themselves as a source for future stories and the interview assumes minimal risk.

On occasion, journalists will request an off-record call. This is often because the journalist does not yet have a story in progress, or they are genuinely seeking expert insight on the beat they cover.

Before participating in any interview, both parties should discuss their expectations and identify how information may be used. Sources should be advised to use caution in any off the record interviews, as there can still be gray areas. A good rule of thumb is, if you don’t want to see it in a story, it is best not to say it.