Interview, Document or Data Table: Start with the Question
Choose whether to read an interview, document or data table first by matching the source to your question, so you can check what it can actually tell you.
Which source should you open first: an interview, a document or a data table? For news stories, the best starting point depends on the exact claim you want to check—not on which format looks most authoritative. Match the source to the job, then notice what it cannot answer.
Match the source
An interview is useful when the question is what a person said or how they described an experience. A full recording or transcript lets you read the exchange around a quotation: the question asked, the answer given and any qualification that follows.
A document is the direct route to what an organisation recorded, published or formally decided. Its status matters. A draft, summary, signed agreement and set of meeting minutes are different records, even when they concern the same issue.
A data table helps when the question concerns how information is grouped or compared. Its headings, definitions, date range and notes set the boundaries of what it describes. Like labelled drawers in a filing cabinet, its categories help organise information while shaping what becomes visible.
Read the source closely
Before interpreting an interview, check whether you have the full exchange or only a short quotation. Listen for a correction, a condition or a shift from personal recollection to opinion. The interview can establish what the speaker said; it does not, on its own, establish that every part of the account is accurate.
For a document, identify its title, issuing body, date and status. Read the relevant passage with nearby definitions, footnotes and appendices. A report may repeat another person’s claim, while minutes may record a decision without giving a full account of the discussion. Treat the document as a record with an origin and a scope.
For a table, start with its title and column headings, then check the notes and source information. Ask what each row represents, how categories are defined and whether entries are missing or revised. A table of complaints, for instance, describes complaints recorded under that system; it does not automatically describe every incident behind them.
Follow the claim
News reports often combine a quotation, a summary of a document and figures from a table. Pick one claim at a time and ask which source actually supports it. A reporter’s account of a report is not the report itself, and a chart may show only part of a larger table.
Open the linked material where possible and compare like with like: the quoted words, the relevant passage or the table’s labels and notes. If the link leads only to a press release or summary, treat it as an account of the underlying material, not a substitute for it. If the original is unavailable, keep that limitation visible rather than filling the gap with an assumption.
Then ask whether another source can address what remains unsettled. A written record may clarify whether a promise became a formal decision; a method note may explain how figures were counted. Several articles repeating one press release are not several independent checks. Trace who made the claim, who recorded it and who is interpreting it.
Make the next choice
Say you are reading a local report about a proposed change to bus routes. Your starting inputs are the report’s claim that an officer promised a revised service, a linked interview, council minutes and a table grouping affected routes by neighbourhood.
First, open the interview and read the full answer. It shows the officer promised to review the routes, not to adopt a specific change, so the promise alone does not establish approval. Next, check the minutes: they record that councillors approved a review, not a new route plan. Finally, inspect the table’s labels and notes; it groups routes by neighbourhood but does not explain why the proposed boundaries were chosen. The result is a narrower reading: a review was approved, the officer described its intended scope, and the table shows the grouping—not a final service change. Each source answers a different part of the story.
Which source should you open first?
Is an interview enough to verify a claim?
It can establish what the interviewee said in that exchange, especially when the full recording or transcript is available. Claims about events, formal decisions or figures may need a document or data source too.
Does an official document settle what happened?
It can show what an institution recorded, published or decided, depending on its status and scope. It may not capture every relevant event or settle the truth of claims repeated within it.
What should you check in a data table?
Read the title, headings, units, notes and source information, then check how categories are defined and what period they cover. Those details show what the table can reasonably describe.
What if the original source is unavailable?
Use the clearest accessible account, while distinguishing its description from direct access to the source. Check who attributes the claim and whether a separate record supports it.
Keep the question clear
Before opening a link, put the question in plain words: “What did she say?”, “What did the council record?” or “How are the figures grouped?” If a story makes several claims, give each its own question. That keeps one vivid source from being asked to prove something outside its scope.
The best first source for news literacy is the one suited to the claim in front of you. If the answer changes your question, change what you read next; a source should guide the next check, not close off curiosity.
