Describe 'Face to face interviews' as a research method used by the media to investigate their stories, articles or programmes?Ensure you make reference to primary and secondary data, please.
Certainly, there is something to be said about the value of "Face to Face" interviews in the research process. For the most part, the media places a high value on such interviews. Murrow's exposure of McCarthy as a fraud only came about when direct and intense questions were put to him, and all were able to see his blustery and useless nature being presented. The Nixon/ Frost interviews hold their own place as being able to be a face to face interview that revealed a great deal about the power of media in defining oneself and how celebrities have to fully understand the role of the forum in order to ensure their point is fully across. When "60 Minutes" interviews the President or a social figure, the face to face interview method is the most revealing about both the interviewer and who is being interviewed. The idea of being able to ask a question to the source and receive an unfiltered answer is critical. It is here where the validity issue is present. There might be a difference between face to face live interviews and those which are taped, where the editing room and the idea of being able to edit out answers could be present. While this might take a bit away from its validity, the overalll nature of being able to ask questions directly on a topic to a subject provides much in way of valuable insight and research. In Tiger Woods' statement yesterday, he refuses to take questions. His fear of the "face to face" interview or question process reveals how valuable this research method is. Woods' and his handlers understood how important it is to control image and how this goes away when direct questions are offered when equally direct answers are needed.