Can I afford to say "No!"

[eScotty]

Help!
A week ago, I began interviewing one of 20 people I'm planning to profile in a non-fiction business book. He asked, before the interview began, if he could see the finished chapter. I said that would not be possible. He nodded, and everything seemed fine. We then did 2 hours of the interview. We were to do another two hours next week. But I guess later he had second thoughts about how loose his lips were. So he emailed me, saying that he would not participate further unless I agree to let him see the chapter about him prior to publication and allow him to suggest any appropriate changes--which I would be free to reject, as he would not have a veto.

So the dilemma is whether to agree to his conditions--against which every journalistic bone in my body protests--and get the remainder of the interview from him, or to refuse, and risk having him walk away from the tape-recorder. I should say that, while the first two hours were useful, the second two hours are crucial to having a full profile of his career.

But even more troubling than losing him is the concern that others may make similar demands of me. If I hold the line on "no peeking," others may walk away. I could then wind up losing participants to the point where the project would be compromised. On the other hand, if everyone who asks for a sneak peek is given one, that could be seen as selling out the integrity of the project--or would it? All my instincts tell me not to show chapters in advance of publication, but perhaps a journalist's instincts are not appropriate to an "author."

Would appreciate your comments...
Thanks,
eScotty

[Ella]

Hey eScotty.

My thoughts are to let the subjects see the work. If you are doing a profile, their reputation & business is at stake with the publication. Obviously they don't get editorial input on your writing, but if they want to check facts, or their own dialogue, that's understandable.

What are your concerns with 'peeking'? Are you worried they'll think it's crap and pull out after you've put the work into it? I personally would be more likely to withdraw from the project if I was told I couldn't see what it said, than if I didn't like how it was said.

[Cathy C]

I agree. In any article I've ever done where I've quoted people, I always offer the opportunity to read the final text to make sure that I haven't misquoted them, or put a spin on their words that wasn't intended. While most people haven't taken me up on it, one interviewee did, and made some changes to the text that made his point much clearer. If you don't want to send the whole chapter, at least offer to send the sections where he is directly quoted.

[Lauri B]

Ella and Cathy are right on. Besides, if I were your publisher, I would want to know that you've vetted quotes and have the information correct, since I'd be the first one to hear about any misquotes, misinformation, etc.

[kybudman]

If your work is integrity-driven (you have no axe to grind), you should not have a problem with an interviewee reviewing the work. Being a writer is a real ego trip.

But nothing produces more ego than being written about. "As long as they spell..."

You could have 20 publicity agents out there working for you even before its contracted! They would be significant spheres of influence in the marketing, and you could have 20 signing parties, all over the country. Depending on the book in question, you could even have built-in hosts/hostesses at rather impressive corporate digs for release parties!

If you are concerned about them pulling back, or pulling out of the work, then you must stay nailed to the rail of integrity, and take what comes.

Can you afford to say no?

Of course. It costs no more than saying yes. One or the other of them eventually pays higher dividends--it just depends on which denomination you prefer.

IMHO

Good luck! With that many personalities inside one cover, it's gonna be a war anyway!