"Unethical" to record a phone interview?

I went back and reread, and I indeed missed the point, particularly in posts subsequent to your first one, I think.

Maybe all the wildfire smoke in the area made it hard for me to read well.

Apologies.

 

California's one of those states you need permission to record a phone call in. Even if you're a reporter.

I just got a new recorder last week (Olympus WS-200S, and I love it) and was hooking it into my phone when the managing editor walked over and reminded me to ask permission. Thanks to my girlfriend (a J-grad herself) I already knew that and looked all smart in front of the boss.

But it even says in the recorder's directions book that it's illegal to tape phone conversations in some states.

I don't understand how ethics are a part of any kind of debate here. Sure a subject should realize that talking to us puts their comments into the public domain, that doesn't give us the liberty to break a law. Maybe it's not unethical for me to park on a public street without feeding the meeter. I pay taxes, it's partially my street. Yet, it's still against the law to park there without paying.

And, respectfully, I disagree with 21 about slipping in the fact that you're recording a phone conversation. That's bush. You need to ask.

 

But then again I'm just an effing newbie cocksmoker. I'll go back to my corner and be quiet.

 

that's more like it.

maybe it helps that i'm an experience guy most folks i talk to already know my physical limitations and understand our interviews are taped. and yes, the subject matter is not one that's about to land anyone in court.

which is why i was so eager to join the toy department after a year covering the mean streets on n.y. in the early '80s. that serious crap sucked! and i wanted to really write, which is better suited for sports, too, imo.

 

This is how I prefer to do it. I usually don't ask, to tell you the truth. I just tell them what I'm doing as if it's standard operating procedure. That way they're not as inclined to say no.

I agree that it's smart to change the subject a bit or start slow, not to trick them into letting their guard down, but to let their heartbeat slow down a bit. An interview is no good if they're too nervous or distracted.

Summary:
I think we have the legalities pretty much settled, but I still think it's much better to tell them they're being interviewed. I'm personally tired of having my profession annually rated somewhere between attorneys and car salesmen. I try to make the process as clear and transparent as possible.

I treat people how I would want to be treated and if I found out someone taped me without my knowledge I would feel angry and tricked. Maybe that's just me.

 

I think it's unethical only if you don't ask the source if he/she minds being recorded because there are going to be people out there who are uncomfortable with being recorded.

Having said that, in the time I've interviewed sources, I've only ever had one who raised any kind of objections to being recorded and that was when I was doing a story for my community college newspaper about a dozen years ago. However, that guy spoke slowly and he repeated what he said verbatim so that I wouldn't get his quotes wrong.

I'd think it's only common courtesy to ask most sources if they mind being recorded. Usually, most reasonable people would not object if they're told it's to ensure accuracy of a quote. It's useful to have the recording though because if someone calls and bitches that you misquoted them or "I never said that," you can play it back to them word for word and then they realize "oh shit... I DID say that."

 

Furthermore, the original question in this thread was "is it unethical?" not "is it illegal?" Somehow, the conversation morphed into the latter.

I would still maintain that even where recording might be illegal under the letter of the law, it's not "unethical" once you've identified yourself as a reporter.

I also can't believe I'm arguing about something I don't do. Other than group teleconferences, I can't even remember any instances I didn't let the interviewee know I was recording. I just don't think it's unethical if I didn't.

 

I'm going to clarify again for posters coming into this late in the game:

No one is arguing that it is unethical to tape someone. It's not. Myself and some others argued that it's not ethical to tape them without their knowledge.

 

ONE MORE "LAST THING:" no interview subject, in a phone interview, has EVER to my knowledge requested NOT to be taped. again, this whole subject has gotten waaay out of hand. why would any interview subject prefer no tape?

it's silly, in my eyes. sorry to be so repetitive. just blame it on the 'roids. 'roids rage, ya know?

 

what states is it illegal to record without permission?

 

Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Washington, California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada and New Hampshire

 

In clarification, I was one of the posters referenced at the top of the thread. I also meant that it's unethical to do it without letting the person know. You wouldn't record a conversation with someone face-to-face with a tape recorder hidden in your pocket — barring some particular, investigative-type circumstance — so you shouldn't do it on the phone either. If you let them know, though, I'd say you're fine. If you're in a one-party consent state, just telling them would suit me, though you run the risk of losing the source if they say "no, don't," and you do it anyway.