Far too many people just waffle on when talking to reporters, rarely getting to the point. Journalists are under a lot of time pressure and if they cannot see what you are going on about they will quickly make their excuses and move on to the next person. Lawyers and academics tend to marshall the evidence, put the case on either side then reach a conclusion – but this is not the approach to follow. It sounds pretty logical, but journalists tend to put their stories together the opposite way around – headline first, with a first paragraph summarising the key findings – followed by evidence and detail only so far as space allows. This is the approach you should follow. Too often the reporter asks the ‘expert’ a question, then has to listen for what seems like several minutes before they get to the nub of the issue – by that time they may have lost interest.