You Helped Me Sort The Dilemma

THANK YOU :pray:t3: Team!!!

I sent the transcript of a podcast episode to an author and asked her to correct any misspelled words that were German or Yiddish.

Instead, she rewrote the entire transcript, including my dialogue.

I’m speechless and expletive deleted. This is the first time it’s ever happened and I don’t know how to handle it delicately.

I am not rewriting my dialogue. I want to have a transcript but I’m considering leaving it out.

What to do?!

My episode is ready to publish. I’m postponing publication until I gather my wits. I’m dealing with she who must be obeyed.


…did they write you an article, based on the transcript you sent her?
…or is what she sent back, still looking like a transcript?

1 Like

@Lovelace, what a drag.

Would it be possible to combine options? Publish the episode now, without the transcript, then when you’ve cooled off a bit and decided how you’d like to proceed, add the transcript back in? That way you stay on schedule without having to address the angry-making part.

Regarding the transcript, I will often just bracket something like [Yiddish word] if I don’t understand what was said. You could, perhaps, publish the pre-guest-edited transcript without the [German word] updates?

And, for dealing with the guest’s activity directly, I can’t tell from your OP, but from the amount of angst expressed it seems something more than “rewriting transcript” may have happened? If not, if she really just re-wrote the transcript, perhaps she simply misunderstood. In that case, could you just write back and say, “Thank you. You did a ton of work on this. A transcript, however, needs to be an accurate representation of what was actually spoken in the podcast. So I’ll use the Yiddish and German words you offered, but will leave the rest as is.”

And, honestly, even if she did more than just re-write the transcript, you could probably say something like the above anyway and move on?

Good luck. :four_leaf_clover:

With friendliness! :sunflower:


I agree with postponing publication.

Once you’ve gathered your wits, and maybe punched a pillow or two for a safer anger release, then you’ll be able to see more clearly.

I’m really sorry to hear this, @Lovelace , that’s extraordinarily unpleasant.


Wow, @Lovelace, that is peculiar. She clearly doesn’t understand the point of a transcript, so I would ignore her reworked version. But you know who you are dealing with and I don’t. Best of luck on your decision here!


This sounds so stressful, @Lovelace . (The closest I’ve come to this is two different professors I interviewed who edited their entire respective transcripts for grammar, etc. :rofl:)

Two thoughts for you:

  1. Do you otherwise have explicit approval from her (written or verbal) to release this episode? If yes, then dont sweat it. If not, then I think you need to clarify things with her.
  2. Is it possibly she just mis-understood what the transcript is and its purpose? Regardless, you might send her a gracious email, apologizing for the confusion and the time she spent editing. Explain that the transcript represents the interview. Your objective in sharing it with her was to ensure correct spelling of German and Yiddish words.

Hope this helps!


She returned the transcript in which the time stamps and our names remain. She rewrote/corrected the transcript as if it were an article in which she changed our conversation to read as she wished.

She is a writer and contributes to art journals, academic journals, etc.

I may query her and ask if she intends to use the transcript as a journal article. I’m not sure I’m 100% comfortable with that but I’ll read through all the changes she made in my part of the conversation to ensure the intent of the question is the same.

I’m not as freaked out this morning. I’ll deal with it later today.

Thank you for your insightful question.


I’m particularly glad to hear this. :slight_smile:


I think my angst stems from her multiple requests throughout the podcasting process and I send transcripts as a courtesy. She’s been difficult and I haven’t been Zen about it :roll_eyes:

Publishing the podcast without the transcript now may be the best course of action.

Telling her, as you suggest ‘Thank you, you did a ton of work on this… needs to be said.

1 Like

I think you nailed it. She’s written for journals and academic publications for 40 years and she has a business in which she researches and writes.

It appears she edited the entire transcript and rewrote our conversation deleting what she didn’t like, changing sentences, including information that wasn’t in the recording…

When I saw she changed my dialogue, I couldn’t believe it. I don’t think she understood my request and I thought it was clear: check for misspelled words in German and Yiddish, and proper names of people and towns in Poland.

It will probably be best to publish the episode without a transcript for now.

I also think I’ll ask her if she rewrote our recorded conversation to use as a journal article.

Thank you for your thoughts.

It is unpleasant! Fortunately time and experience taught me to WAIT 24 HOURS to respond instead of reacting immediately and regretting it.

Least said, soonest mended. I’m trying that approach for now. :relaxed:

1 Like

You’re right. It’s odd and I’m pretty sure she doesn’t understand the point of a transcript.

I’m not sure why she didn’t get it because I explained I’d provide the transcript of our recording for people who were hard of hearing.

Lesson learned!

1 Like

One of life’s most valuable lessons.

Hahaha, I remember that from Little House on the Prairie, and I think instead “Most diplomatically said, soonest discovered.” Because when you’re able to approach such a situation diplomatically, then you’ll find out a lot of information, for example what she actually thought you were asking, or perhaps if she thought it was her right to change it, or perhaps even something altogether different!


Honestly, if this happened to me, I might not even publish the episode. I certainly wouldn’t publish the transcript.


That is very Zen and I applaud your recovery from Angst-land. :)))

You’ve got this. :sunflower:


@Lovelace I so get it. It’s your baby, it’s coming from your heart. It’s difficult when someone doesn’t see how beautiful your baby is.

I had something similar happen a few years ago with a course I created. I spent months, did beta sessions, received input from others on the tools, etc. I decided to ask the coaching team to look at my work for any tweaks, misses, etc. My work was ripped to shreds before my eyes. I ended up walking away from coursework.

I recently opened the files of my coursework, including the criticisms. I realized the criticisms were providing me with another perspective, they truly felt they were contributing. Now I am better able to see this. It’s unfortunate the coaching team was not skilled in giving feedback.

I’m not sure I’m ready to pick the course baby backup. But, I have pulled the files out and have included them in my active work, instead of dead work.

Didn’t mean to rattle on, and on. As you look through what she provided, is there a perspective that may be of value? Throw out the rest, and thank her for contributing her perspective.


LOL @GermanWithNicole
Live and learn, right?


I’m sorry @Lovelace this made me laugh. I always say to my son, “have you got your listening ears on?” (because most of the time he doesn’t// LOL)

This is a prime example of someone who doesn’t/didn’t listen. Take a breath. You’ll do what is right for you and your show. I have faith in you.


Jayne, if she wants to use her revision as a journal article, that’s fine. I don’t think of the transcript as my possession but what she wrote doesn’t sync with the recording. I compare it to CC (closed captions) … if someone gets creative and strays from the dialogue on screen, it becomes a royal Mess :joy::see_no_evil:

I’m laughing thinking about it!


I’m so glad you see the funny side @Lovelace! It’s beyond ridiculous.

I hope you will go ahead and publish your original transcript. After all, we serve our audience, not our guests. To interfere with the integrity of the transcript serves our listeners poorly. Especially those hard of hearing who are not able to compare the audio with the transcript.