Our approach to conducting and publishing interviews has evolved meaningfully since we started this series, and the specific changes are worth naming rather than leaving implicit.
We started recording every interview as standard practice
Early interviews weren't always recorded, relying instead on notes taken during the conversation. We now record every interview as a matter of course, specifically because we've encountered genuine disputes over quote accuracy that a recording resolved cleanly.
We became more deliberate about follow-up questions
Early interviews sometimes moved through a fairly standard set of questions without enough real-time adaptation. We've gotten more deliberate about following genuinely interesting threads a source raises, even when it means departing from a planned structure.
We got more disciplined about off-the-record boundaries
We didn't always have a clear, consistent internal standard for handling off-the-record requests early on. We now apply a consistent, clearly understood policy across every interview, communicated upfront rather than negotiated in the moment.
Why we're stating this evolution explicitly
Interview-based content depends heavily on trust, both from sources willing to speak candidly and from readers relying on accurate representation of what was said, and we think being transparent about how our practices have matured serves both groups.