Interpretative Reporting

Interpretation: the particular way in which something is understood or explained.

Though interpretation is required here and there in almost every story, there are certain stories
that are basically the result of interpretation of events, circumstances or various kinds of data
available from different sources. Such stories are called interpretative stories.
Requirements of an interpretative reporter:
1. Strong background of the subject.
2. Checking, re-checking and cross-checking of all the sources of information before
writing such a story.
3. Editorializing should be avoided. Attempt in the interpretative story should be to use
logic and background knowledge. Conscious efforts should be made to keep personal bias
away from the report.
4. Opinions can be expressed based on the analysis of facts but distortion of facts to suit
one's bias should be avoided.
5. The reporter should have an open mind. He may have a hypothesis to begin with, but if
the facts do not support it, he should change the line of interpretation or drop the idea. He
should never try to mould facts to do a big story.
Data interpretation and reporting:
Responsible conclusions rely on sound datathe facts disclosed through observation and
experiment, survey, or the records and reports supplied by others. The way a reporter presents
and explains such data obviously affects the success of his report.
Much of the supporting data in a report may appear in tables, graphs and other non-verbal
devices. But in whatever form the reporter displays data, these must be interpreted with clear
exposition (explanation).
Interpretation of numerical data generally involves the following steps:

A summary simplification of data deserving attention.

A critical evaluation of data.
A logical explanation of what data signify.

A summary simplification of data deserving attention.

1.) The first need is usually to present the really usable evidence in a way the reader will
understand and not with overcrowding the report with masses of raw data.
Example: In an opinion poll of 450 voters who have been carefully selected to represent about
20,000 voters of a constituency, your reader has no interest in learning that 227 voters believe X
party will come to power.

His interest is in the 20,000 or in the percentage or fraction of the 20,000. The reporter must
translate or project the raw data to make the meaning clear: "Our opinion poll shows that about
50% of voters favour X party."
The report should not force the readers to do the arithmetic. Thats the report writer's job. Once
the reader understands what the data really say, he can give attention to their possible
significance.
2.) Sometimes the task of simplifying involves complicated tables and charts. The elements of
possible significance must be extracted for special attention.
Example: Out of the total last 20 innings of Sachin Tendulkar, it may be sufficient to call
attention to just 8 representative inningsthe eight that emphasize the general trend (getting out
in 90s).
A statistical table gives equal emphasis to every item in it; the writer's job is to provide the
comparative emphasis that different items deserve.
3.) A summary of data frequently requires definitions. The average reader often gets false
impressions from statistical statements that he does not fully understand. The statistical unit
the thing counted or weighed may be misinterpreted. Perhaps a short phrase will serve as
definition, but if longer explanations required, it must be included.
A report citing figures on "unnecessary accidents" must obviously point out the distinction
between those counted as "unnecessary" and those counted as "unavoidable".
4.) To simplify essential evidence as much as possible, the writer often translates totals into rates
or percentages.
The number of accidents in Delhi can't be compared with that of in Dehradun, but the accident
rates or percentages in the two cities.
When a simple expression can be both colourful and accurate, that is exactly the one to use.
Critical Evaluation of the Data:
The report writer is of course responsible to his reader for the reliability and validity of what he
reports.
Evaluation of evidence and sources of evidence, wherever it appears, is an important
responsibility of the report writer.
For sources, some tests to be taken:
1. How well qualified is the source (the agency, the man, the publication, or the group
supplying the data.)?
2. Is the source sufficiently unprejudiced? A labour union's statistics on the relation of
wages to corporation profits must be received as cautiously as similar statistics from the

association of manufacturers. Simply view the evidence with more critical attention than
might otherwise be necessary.
For internal evidence, test is suggested
How consistent is the evidence:
1. Within itself
2. With other evidence
3. With established physical laws
For example: A report may say, "Workers dislike the system intensely." Yet also show that fewer
workers are leaving their jobs--- here one statement contradicts another.
If tables show an increased number of hours lost for repairs but a decrease in the cost of repairing
the apparatus, discrepancy calls for explanation.
Logical Conclusions:
The conclusions stated in a report, should of course, be logical outcomes from that data.
Interpretations of statistics are sometimes illogical because key terms are ambiguous.
For example: Average is a frequent source of confusion. In statistics it has three different
meanings: the arithmetic mean, the median or mid point on a scale and the "mode" or typical
number. The report about the "average drivers", for example, should make the meaning clear as it
applies to this report.
If it says that "the average driver travels about 12, 000 miles in his car each year," does that
represent the arithmetic mean, the median, or simply the miles driven by a typical driver?
Sometimes these three differ widely.
Some conclusions are based on reasoning that involves some general principle of control. If two
alloys are to be compared for use in construction, the rule of logic is the same: All conditions
must be identical for both alloys.
Conclusion:
The interpretative report writer should have something of the scientific spirit in his nature. He is
expected to raise valid questions, to use intelligent methods, and to check carefully. He is
expected to arrive at reasonable conclusions that he can defend.