The best spokesperson for an interview isn’t always the one who knows the most about the subject. In practice, being prepared to speak to the press means being able to translate your expertise into a clear and relevant perspective for the conversation, confidently answering the journalist’s questions, and adapting your message without sounding forced—skills that can be developed and refined through good media training. But there’s one more important question to ask before you even begin preparing:

Does this executive have something relevant to add to that story, or are they being chosen simply because they know their own company well?

This is an important distinction because, in public relations, authority isn’t limited to one’s job title or technical expertise. A good spokesperson must also be able to contribute to the story the journalist is crafting—whether through analysis, data, personal experience, or insight that helps place the topic in a broader context.

This ability to translate expertise into accessible conversation doesn’t always come naturally. An executive may have in-depth knowledge of their market, master the company’s numbers, and have years of experience in the field, yet still struggle to synthesize ideas, avoid overusing technical terms, or respond objectively to the questions being asked.

The difference becomes even more evident when the interview doesn’t follow the expected script exactly. A more specific question, a sudden change of subject, or a query about a sensitive topic can cause even an experienced spokesperson to lose objectivity or resort to overly corporate responses. It is at this moment that preparation ceases to be an operational step and becomes part of the communication strategy itself.

The journalist doesn’t just need the company’s response

It’s always important to emphasize that an interview is not a corporate presentation, and the journalist isn’t necessarily looking to repeat the messages the company would like to convey. In a conversation, the reporter’s goal is to find information, context, analysis, or a perspective that will help them build their story.

This distinction is particularly important when commenting on issues that are already on the media’s agenda. In the PPO (Proactive Press Office) format developed by LatAm Intersect, for example, the goal is precisely to offer an executive’s perspective on a news story or trend that is already being discussed. The value of the source lies in their ability to interpret the subject and add something to the conversation, rather than simply repeating corporate statements.

That’s why, before offering a spokesperson for an interview, here at LATin we always ask a question that is quite simple but fundamental to the success of a PPO: does the spokesperson have something relevant to say about this topic, or just information about the company itself? The difference can determine the quality of the opportunity.

A good spokesperson can explain a complex topic without turning the interview into a technical lecture, defend a position without sounding like they’re reading from a pre-approved script, and answer a difficult question without completely losing control of the conversation. They also understand that they don’t need to have a ready answer for everything. Knowing how to say that certain information needs to be confirmed can be much more effective than trying to fill the silence with an inaccurate answer.

Preparation does not mean memorizing answers

Journalists do not work from scripts, and even when they send questions in advance, the conversation can take unexpected turns. The goal of a good briefing should be to prepare the spokesperson for the interview: what topics are most likely to come up, what messages need to be conveyed, what data supports those messages, and which questions may require extra caution.

Media training fills precisely this gap. It allows you to test how that person reacts when they need to think on their feet, simplify an explanation, answer an unexpected question, or get back to the main point after being steered toward another topic.

And the outcome of this process won’t always be the conclusion that the executive is ready for any interview. Sometimes, the training reveals exactly the opposite—and that isn’t necessarily a problem.

It may mean that another company expert is better suited for that topic, that the executive needs more preparation before taking on certain opportunities, or that this simply isn’t the best time to put them in front of the press. Recognizing this is also part of the PR job.

How do you know if they’re ready?

There’s no single test, but some signs are quite clear. The first is the ability to explain the subject to someone who doesn’t work in that industry. If the answer relies on a series of acronyms, technical terms, or internal explanations, the message likely still needs work.

The second is the ability to answer the question that was asked—not just the question the executive would like to hear. It seems basic, but it’s one of the most common challenges in corporate interviews.

The third is naturalness. A well-prepared spokesperson doesn’t need to sound rehearsed. On the contrary: the better they know the messages and the context of the conversation, the greater their freedom to respond spontaneously tends to be. And there’s a fourth element, perhaps the most important one: the executive needs to understand why that interview is relevant beyond the company itself.

When they can connect their expertise to a larger issue—a market transformation, consumer behavior, a regulatory change, a technological trend, or an ongoing debate—they cease to be merely an institutional source and instead take on the role of an expert. It is this transition that transforms a one-off interview into a means of building authority.