> Hi Martin,

> Thanks, that was another very insightful
> interview!

Thank you very much. But, as always, the insight comes from the interviewees, not the interviewer!

> Martin, I was wondering if youy had any
> comments on this - on the value of surprise?
> It seems to be a different approach from the
> one which focuses on BENEFITS in the
> headline, for example....

I hope that Linda will see your post and offer her insight. But for now, you'll have to put up with mine...

Personally, I don't see any distinction. A great benefit is also a lovely surprise. Linda had a great example (which didn't make it into the final interview) and I will ask her to post it here. But it clearly illustrates that surprise and benefits are not separate issues.

If the benefit doesn't come as a surprise, then perhaps the wrong benefit has been chosen.

Sometimes the headline is purely used to shock or jar the reader into paying attention. But even then, a strong benefit must follow up pretty quickly in the subhead.

The approach to copywriting that you describe is what I call 'cascade writing.' Every line is like a tributary flowing into a river that by the end cascades into a torrent of positive emotion. Anything else just doesn't get the business.

> And also (this kind of relates to the
> copyright discussion elsewhere here).... In
> an interview, who owns the copyright?

> For example, I know with photos, the
> photographer owns the copyright (not the
> subject).

> So, if it is an AUDIO recorded interview,
> does the person making the recording own the
> interview? Or does the person being
> interviewed partly own it (since it's their
> words)? If you know more about this, I'd be
> grateful if you could shed light on this
> topic....

Phew! That is a big question and one that I'm not 100% certain of the answer to. I believe that there is a split of ownership. The interviewee owns copyright of their own specific words, where they have been used verbatim (ideas can't be copyrighted, so the concepts in an interview are not covered). However, the recorder owns the copyright of the piece that is published under his/her name.

Also, by agreeing to be interviewed, and, presumably voluntarily participating in the process, the interviewee has conferred the rights to the specific words written to the recorder.

There you are ... clear as mud.

> Again, thank you for these fantastic and
> enlightening interviews!

You are very welcome. There is another great one next week.

Best wishes,

Martin.




Success Story #8: Linda Caroll