Writing about living subjects… wow, what a privilege, right? But it comes with a huge responsibility too. I mean, capturing someone’s life, sharing their story, shedding light on their experiences – it’s powerful stuff. But then, how do you do all that without exploiting them, or harming them, or totally misrepresenting who they are? That’s where things get tricky. So, I put together this guide to help us figure out that delicate line between writing a compelling story, respecting someone’s privacy, and staying true to the facts.
Why Ethics are So Crucial Now
Think about it: we live in a totally interconnected world. Information zips around instantly, and once something’s out there online, it’s basically permanent. That’s why being ethical when writing about living subjects has never been more important. It’s not like the old days when a story in a small local paper stayed local. Now, one article can go global, and that can really impact someone’s reputation, their safety, how they feel mentally and emotionally.
Ethical slip-ups aren’t just theoretical problems; they have real-world consequences. People can lose their jobs, get pushed out of their social circles, experience emotional distress, or even face physical danger. And for us writers, it can wreck our reputation, lead to lawsuits, and completely erode trust from readers and even future subjects. This isn’t just about avoiding legal trouble; it’s about maintaining the integrity of our craft and recognizing the inherent dignity of every single person whose life we touch with our words.
I. Before You Even Write a Word: Preparation and Intention
The ethical journey starts way before you conduct an interview or even write a single sentence. It really begins with your mindset and how carefully you prepare.
1. What’s Your Purpose? Why Tell This Story?
Before you approach anyone, ask yourself these questions:
* What’s the main story I’m trying to tell here? Is it a human interest piece, an investigative expose, a profile, or part of a bigger social commentary?
* Why is this particular story important? What value does it offer to society? Does it highlight an injustice, give insight into a common human experience, celebrate an achievement, or explain a complex issue through a personal lens?
* How does including a living person actually serve this purpose? Is their personal story truly essential, or is it just illustrative? If it’s just illustrative, maybe consider using fictional examples or composite characters to protect real individuals.
* What could be the potential effects on the person I’m writing about? Think about both the good and the bad. Are you ready to deal with the potential negative outcomes?
For instance: Instead of just deciding to write “about homelessness,” try to narrow it down to “the systemic barriers preventing single mothers from escaping homelessness in XYZ city.” That focused purpose tells you who to seek out and why their story matters, making your approach much clearer and more intentional.
2. Informed Consent: The Core of Ethical Engagement
Consent isn’t just a one-time signature; it’s an ongoing conversation built on trust and complete honesty.
- Initial disclosure: Be really clear about:
- Who you are: Your name, what publication or platform you’re with, and your professional affiliation.
- What you’re writing about: The topic, how broad it is, and the specific angle you’re taking.
- Why you want to include them: How their story fits into the bigger picture.
- How their information will be used: Will it be online, in print, broadcast?
- Potential risks and benefits: Be honest about the visibility, any possible scrutiny, and the emotional toll it might take.
- Their rights: The right to refuse, to review certain quotes (if you offer that – more on that later), to withdraw consent (within limits), and to anonymity if you grant it.
- Language and Understanding: Make sure the person fully understands what they’re agreeing to. Avoid jargon. If they don’t speak English well, arrange for a neutral, professional translator. For people with cognitive impairments, get consent from a legal guardian or appointed representative, along with the person’s assent if possible.
- Documenting Consent: A signed consent form is ideal, especially for sensitive topics or longer pieces. But it’s not always practical for every interview. For short online articles or on-the-fly interviews, confirming verbal consent via email or keeping good internal notes is essential. Always record the date, time, and specific terms of consent.
- Ongoing Consent: As the story develops, if the focus shifts or new, more sensitive details come up, go back to the person and get renewed consent for those specific points. Consent is a living agreement, not a static piece of paper.
For example: Instead of saying, “I’m writing an article,” be specific: “I’m writing a profile for The Daily Observer‘s Sunday edition about the challenges small business owners faced during the pandemic, and I’d like to feature your restaurant’s story. This would involve discussing your revenue, staffing changes, and personal struggles. Your name and likeness would be used.”
3. Anonymity and Pseudonyms: When and How to Use Them
This is a really important decision that you need to make early and discuss openly with the person.
- When to consider anonymity:
- Risk of harm or retaliation: If the person fears losing their job, being ostracized, physical harm, legal consequences, or danger from an abuser.
- Sensitive topics: If they’re discussing sexual assault, domestic violence, mental health struggles, addiction, undocumented immigration status, or illegal activities.
- Protecting others: If their true identity would accidentally expose vulnerable family members or associates.
- They ask for it: If the person explicitly requests anonymity.
- Types of anonymity:
- Complete anonymity: No name, and identifying details are significantly changed or removed.
- Partial anonymity: First name only, or a pseudonym is used, but some context or general descriptions remain.
- How to implement anonymity:
- Pseudonyms: Choose names that won’t accidentally identify the person. Avoid super distinctive names or names of local public figures.
- Change details: Alter non-essential details like jobs, exact locations (e.g., “a small town in the Midwest” instead of “Oakwood, Ohio”), family configurations, or timelines. Be careful not to change so much that the core truth gets lost or the story becomes unbelievable.
- Explain the trade-off: Anonymity can sometimes lessen the impact or credibility of a story. Discuss this with the person. Are they comfortable with that?
- Commit to it: Once you promise anonymity, you must honor it. Even in casual conversation, do not reveal their identity.
For instance: For a story on survivors of domestic abuse, you’d almost always offer a pseudonym like “Sarah” or “Maria,” and instead of saying “from a red brick house on Elm Street,” you’d specify “from a quiet suburban home.” This protects the individual while allowing the narrative to highlight the broader issue.
II. During the Writing Process: Keeping it Truthful and Respectful
The ethical principles you set up in preparation need to be woven into every draft, every word choice, and every editorial decision you make.
1. Accuracy and Veracity: Staying Committed to Truth
Truth isn’t just about avoiding outright lies; it’s about painting a complete, nuanced, and accurate picture within its context.
- Fact-checking: Verify every verifiable detail: names, dates, places, job titles, statistics, quotes, and descriptions. Don’t just rely on the person’s memory for objective facts. Cross-reference with public records, official documents, and other reliable sources.
- Contextual accuracy: Present facts within their proper context. A quote taken out of context can completely change its meaning. Provide background information that’s necessary for the reader to understand the person’s perspective, actions, or circumstances.
- Balance and nuance: Avoid portraying people as purely good or purely evil. Humans are complex. Acknowledge the shades of gray, internal conflicts, and opposing viewpoints when they’re relevant. If the narrative focuses on a challenging period, make sure you also acknowledge their strengths, resilience, or efforts to improve.
- Beware of confirmation bias: Actively look for information that challenges your preconceived ideas. Don’t go into an interview just looking for quotes that fit a story you’ve already written in your head. Be open to the story changing as you learn more.
For example: If someone says, “My business dropped 50%,” try to independently verify this with sales records if possible. If the actual drop was 30% but they felt like it was 50% due to immense stress, accurately report and attribute it: “While official figures indicated a 30% decline, the owner described the impact as feeling like a devastating 50% loss, highlighting the emotional toll.”
2. Crafting Narrative: Empathy, Not Exploitation
Stories should create empathy, not pity or disgust. Your word choices are super important.
- Avoid sensationalism: Resist the urge to inflate drama, overemphasize tragic details, or use emotionally charged language just for shock value. Focus on the genuine human experience.
- Respectful language:
- Person-first language: For individuals with disabilities, addiction, or illness, use person-first language (e.g., “a person experiencing homelessness” not “a homeless person”; “individuals with disabilities” not “the disabled”).
- Avoid stereotypes: Don’t rely on clichés or tropes when describing individuals or groups. Challenge your own biases.
- Describe precisely, don’t label: Instead of labeling someone as “deviant” or “troubled,” describe their actions, circumstances, or feelings.
- Focus on impact, not just description: Instead of just stating a fact, show its impact. “He lost his home” vs. “The eviction forced him to sleep in his car, showering at public libraries and living on instant noodles – a stark contrast to the life he’d built over decades.”
- Mind the gaps: Not every detail needs to be revealed. If a detail is gratuitous, prurient, or doesn’t serve the story’s purpose, leave it out. Ask yourself: “Does this detail contribute to the story, or does it just make it more sensational?”
For instance: Instead of “The drug addict spiraled into despair,” write, “Struggling with opioid addiction, Maria described a relentless cycle of craving and withdrawal, pushing her deeper into isolation despite her desire for sobriety.” This humanizes her experience and focuses on the struggle, not the label.
3. Quotes and Attribution: Words Really Do Matter
Direct quotes are incredibly powerful, but you have to handle them with care.
- Verbatim quotes: Aim for exactness. While minor grammatical corrections are fine (like removing a stutter or “um”) to make it readable, don’t change the meaning or intent. If you’re unsure about a quote, reconfirm it.
- Attribution: Always attribute every direct quote. This builds credibility and prevents misrepresentation.
- Paraphrasing: When you paraphrase, make sure you accurately convey the essence of what the person said. Still, attribute the paraphrase (e.g., “She explained that…” or “He clarified that…”).
- Contextualize quotes: Never drop a quote in isolation. Provide the necessary context so the reader understands why the person said it and what they meant.
- “Off the Record” and “On Background”: Understand and respect these journalistic rules. “Off the record” means information cannot be published or attributed. “On background” means the information can be used but not attributed to the source by name (e.g., “a source close to the investigation said…”). Always clarify these terms before the information is shared. If you don’t agree to the terms, say so upfront.
For example: Someone might say, “Well, like, you know, it was really hard, like, I mean, the hardest thing ever, but I got through it.” You’d edit that to: “It was the hardest thing I’ve ever experienced, but I got through it.” Do not edit it to: “Despite the immense difficulty, I found strength and ultimately triumphed,” because that adds an interpretation not present in the original.
4. Dealing with Sensitive Information and Vulnerable Subjects
You need to take extra precautions when writing about people in distress or those with diminished capacity.
- Minimizing harm: Your primary ethical duty is to “do no harm.” This means weighing the public interest against potential negative consequences for the person. If telling the story causes significant and unjustifiable harm, rethink your approach or even the story itself.
- Trauma-informed approach: If someone is discussing trauma, be prepared.
- Pace the interview: Allow pauses, offer breaks.
- Listen actively: Validate their feelings and experiences.
- Do not re-traumatize: Avoid unnecessarily digging for graphic details that don’t add to the story’s purpose. Focus on the impact, not just the event.
- Provide resources: If appropriate and helpful, gently offer information about support services (e.g., helpline numbers, counseling referrals), but do so in an optional, non-pressuring way.
- Protecting children:
- Parental/guardian consent: Always get informed consent from at least one parent or legal guardian for minors.
- Child’s assent: If the child is old enough to understand (generally 7+), also seek their assent. They should be willing, not pressured.
- Prioritize child’s well-being: The child’s best interests always come before the story. Anonymity is often the safest choice.
- Context of vulnerability: Be acutely aware if the child is in a vulnerable situation (e.g., foster care, abuse survivor) and adjust your approach accordingly.
- Mental health context: When writing about individuals with mental health conditions, avoid pathologizing their experiences. Focus on their lived reality, challenges, and resilience. Consult with mental health professionals if you need to understand specific conditions and their appropriate terminology.
For instance: If writing about a survivor of a car accident, focus on their recovery, their struggle with PTSD, and how they rebuilt their life, rather than dwelling on the gory details of the crash unless absolutely necessary to illustrate a medical point or legal outcome.
III. After You Write: Review, Reflection, and Recourse
Your ethical responsibility doesn’t end with the final draft.
1. Accuracy Review (The “Pre-publication Conversation”)
While it’s not always standard journalistic practice (especially in breaking news), offering someone the chance to review certain elements can be an ethical safeguard, especially for sensitive profiles or long-form narratives.
- What to offer for review: Usually, only direct quotes, potentially sensitive factual details, or very specific circumstances that could be misinterpreted.
- What NOT to offer for review: Your narrative framing, analysis, opinions, or details you got from independent verification. The person is not your editor.
- Clear terms: Be explicit about what they are reviewing and the purpose: fact-checking and accuracy, not editorial approval.
- Caveats: This step can slow down publication and open the door to people trying to control the narrative. Use your judgment based on the person’s vulnerability and how sensitive the story is. For investigative journalism, this is generally not done to prevent people from changing their story or interfering.
For example: “I’ve included several direct quotes from our conversation about your battle with depression. Would you be willing to review those specific sentences to ensure I’ve captured your words accurately and respectfully?”
2. Editorial Responsibility and Gatekeeping
You’re often not the only gatekeeper. Editors, publishers, and legal teams play a vital role.
- Internal review: Advocate for your ethical choices during the editorial process. Explain why certain details were altered for anonymity, why specific language was chosen, or why you believe a particular quote is essential.
- Legal counsel: For stories with significant legal implications (defamation, privacy invasion), legal review is non-negotiable. Proactive consultation can prevent costly errors.
- Transparency with publishers: Keep your editors informed of any promises you’ve made to people (e.g., anonymity, quote review requests) so they can factor this into production timelines and policies.
3. Post-Publication: Managing Impact and Feedback
The story isn’t over when it hits print or goes online.
- Monitor impact: Be aware of the discussion around your piece. Are there unintended interpretations? Is the person facing unforeseen negative repercussions?
- Address inaccuracies (rare): If a clear factual error is identified after publication, correct it promptly and transparently according to your publication’s corrections policy. This builds trust.
- Offer support (limited): While you are not a therapist or social worker, if you promised resource information, make sure the person received it. For highly sensitive subjects, a follow-up call to check in after publication (not to ask for more material) can be a gesture of care, but manage expectations.
IV. The Traps to Avoid
Even with the best intentions, ethical missteps can happen. Staying vigilant is key.
1. The “Good Story” Trap
The allure of a compelling narrative can sometimes make us overlook ethical concerns. Don’t sacrifice privacy or truth for a more dramatic story arc. If the story requires exploiting someone, it’s either not the right story to tell, or you’re telling it the wrong way.
2. Unverified Assumptions
Never assume consent. Never assume someone’s perspective. Never assume a detail is true. Always verify.
3. The “Gotcha” Interview
Approaching someone with the intent to expose wrongdoing, without revealing that intention, is manipulative. While investigative journalism often relies on tough questions, it shouldn’t rely on deceit. Inform people of the general nature of your inquiry.
4. Over-identification with Your Subject
Maintain professional distance. While empathy is crucial, becoming too emotionally involved can cloud your judgment, leading to biased reporting or an inability to make tough editorial decisions about what to include or exclude.
5. Ignoring Your Gut
If a situation feels wrong, unethical, or uncomfortable, pause. Seek advice from mentors, colleagues, or your editor. Your internal compass is a powerful ethical tool.
Conclusion: The Enduring Responsibility
Writing about living subjects is a deep act of translation – taking lived experiences and shaping them into powerful narratives. This power brings with it an immense and lasting responsibility. By being meticulous in your preparation, writing, and reviewing, you show respect for the individuals who share their lives with you and your readers. You uphold the dignity of the human experience. You safeguard privacy not as a burden, but as a moral imperative. And in doing so, you don’t just tell a story; you build trust, you illuminate truth, and you contribute to a more ethical, empathetic, and informed world. This isn’t just about avoiding legal challenges or bad press; it’s about honoring the very essence of human connection through the power of words.