Information doesn't flow in just one direction. To best answer a reporter's questions, you have to ask a few of your own.

"What did you want to talk about?"
"What's your story about?"
"What kind of information are you looking for?"
"What do you need from me?"
"How much time do you need?"
"When are you writing for?"
"What's your deadline?"

Ask questions like these when the interview request is made, before the interview itself, so that you have a sense of the reporter's expectations and of the information you'll need to gather. Some reporters won't tell you what questions they plan to ask ahead of time, but some might. If access to the information you can provide is that important to the story, the reporter won't want you back on your heels. And you can't know that if you don't ask. Deadlines have trained journalists not to be frivolous with their time. Answering your questions will help the reporter ensure that the conversation will be a productive one.

Once you know what you're talking about, know whom you are talking to. Read the reporter's latest stories, especially any on the subject about which he or she approached you. This will help you understand the reporter's depth of knowledge on the subject and his or her approach to it. If a piece stands out you, don't be afraid to bring it up during the interview.

The reporter may be the one conducting the interview, but the story that he or she eventually writes will be the product of many hands, including editors, designers and photographers. Reporters rarely select the headlines and photos that illustrate their stories, which means that the tone those elements set is not always what the reporter intended. So if you don't already, get to the know publication where your words will end up. Be it web-based, TV or traditional print media, the publication provides the context for each piece it runs. And context is everything—especially when it comes to interviews.

This one seems like a no-brainer, but this is where an interview novice can fall into a trap. Nothing is more important to a successful interview than making sure you know what you are talking about.

If you've followed the first three steps, you should be able to anticipate some of the questions the reporter will ask. Know the answers—especially to the questions you'd rather not be asked. Brush up on any background materials that will inform those answers. Think of anecdotes, analogies or references to popular culture that may help illustrate your points.

Most reporters, especially those working for general news publications, don't know your subject as well as you do. You can use that advantage to inform and educate on your terms—but don't patronize. By presenting it in a thoughtful manner, you can make your knowledge base useful to the reporter.

So to be the expert in the story, you need to do your homework.

Even more important than what you have to say is what you want to say. Have a clear idea of the message you want your words to convey to the reporter and to the audience and keep coming back to that message. Think about how your answers to the reporter's questions can guide the conversation and help support that message. You are not going to avoid all the tough questions—and you shouldn't, lest you lose your credibility as a source and turn the conversation back into a confrontation. If you've done your homework, as suggested in step four, you can be ready with answers that underscore your message.

To best organize your thoughts, create a message plan. Generate a list of three key points that you want to make and that you want the reporter to include in the story. Think about what you want the audience to take away from the story and work from there. These should be written in simple, straight-forward language and ranked in order of importance. Humor, emotion and rhetorical questions can be employed effectively to make your points. Be positive and, more importantly, be concise. If it takes you longer than 30 seconds to articulate a single point, it's too long.

Above all, a good message is easy to understand and resonates with the audience regardless of their level of understanding of the subject.

Ever been to a lecture at which the speaker went on and on talking at the audience? How about one at which the speaker used visual aids, graphs, handouts and other materials? The second type of speaker is usually more effective than the first because the audience is not just listening passively but is engaged in the topic.

Interviews can work the same way. Providing the reporter supporting material, be it graphs or photos, can help underscore your message. Even if you provide electronic copies (and you should, in high resolution), print them out or send them electronically for the reporter to look at and hold while you answer his questions. The reporter may ask follow up questions based on what you have provided, helping you contain the interview within the framework of your message.

Setting is a key part of any good, positive interview experience. When time allows, take time to choose the interview location carefully. Most interviewees will simply invite the reporter to their offices or conference rooms, but smart ones consider alternatives.

One is a neutral location like a nearby coffee shop or restaurant. The relaxed atmosphere that these provide can set an informal, conversational tone that may help you address each question at a more easily controllable pace.

Another alternative can be the lobby of your office. Allow the reporter to see employees interacting with one another and with visitors. As with a coffee shop, a more public setting can be disarming and set a friendly tone as long the activity isn't too distracting.

A third option could be taking the reporter on a tour of your facility. Reporters prize access so why not provide it if it serves your message. Furthermore, a moving conversation can have a friendlier, more relaxed and dynamic tone than a static one confined to an office or conference room.

Regardless of the setting you choose, remember that anything the reporter sees or hears is fair game. In particular, reporters writing long-form features like to "set the scene" and describe the surroundings in which the conversation takes place. Put some thought into what they see.

Reporters and their publications often have rules about how they take in and present the information you offer. These can be useful as you consider how to best disseminate your message, but be sure you know what you are stepping into.

Speaking on the record: Anything you say can and will be quoted or paraphrased as part of the story and attributed directly to you. This is standard operating procedure for most interviewers and their subjects. Always assume you are on the record when talking to a reporter, unless he or she indicates otherwise.

Example: "This is my message," said Joe Smith, CEO of Smith Inc.

Speaking on background: Anything you say may be paraphrased and attributed indirectly. Publications and reporters vary on the definition of speaking on background, so if a reporter asks you to speak on background or if you request to do so, be very clear on what that means to that reporter. Generally, this means that your words won't be quoted directly and your rank or position will appear but not your name.

Example: The gist of the message is something like this, according to an industry expert. Or: Approximately the message means this, said the CEO of a company.

Speaking on background may be done when the story is not about you or your company, but perhaps about the industry. In such cases, the reporter may need someone to provide context or definition. Speaking on background in such cases can help you guide the story without putting yourself in the middle of it.

Speaking anonymously: Anything you say may be quoted directly and attributed to an unnamed or anonymous source. Unlike background attribution, anonymous attribution involves more direct quotations that are not attached to your name for a specific reason. Most papers have specific rules about anonymous attribution and will only allow a reporter to employ it in certain circumstances. This is a tricky area that is best avoided.

Example: "This is the message," said a source close to the story who asked not to be identified because the message is confidential. Or: "This is the message," said a source close to the story who asked not to be identified because the negotiations are ongoing.

Speaking off the record: Nothing you say can be quoted directly or paraphrased, and the information cannot be attributed to you. Theoretically, any information provided off the record cannot end up in a story. This is another tricky area, and one that reporters and publications can interpret in different ways.

If you ask to go off the record with a reporter in the middle of an interview, make sure you know when the interview has resumed and you are back on the record. If a reporter asks a question off the record, still consider your words carefully. And keep in mind that something you offer off the record, another source may be willing to give with attribution.

Famous example: Woodward and Bernstein's famous "Deep Throat" was an off-the record-source. The stories that led to the Watergate scandal came from information Woodward and Bernstein gathered from sources other than Deep Throat. He simply told them whether he knew that what they had found through other sources was correct or not. His words or name never appeared in any story.

More than anything, speaking with a reporter on background, anonymously or off the record is a matter of trust, the kind that takes time to build. If you trust a reporter only as far as you can throw him, stick to what you are willing to say on the record and keep all other information to yourself.

If you want to make extra sure that what you say is what ends up in print, record the interview. The reporter may do it, so why shouldn't you? Digital recorders are small and can be discreet. Most smart phones come equipped with them, so the reporter will see nothing more than you cell phone your desk.

Odds are you will never need to pull out that recording. The vast majority of misattributions cause little to no damage in the grand scheme of things. If it happens, it will seem worse to you than it will to anyone else. If you feel it's absolutely necessary to call the reporter, do so calmly and state the intention to clarify what you said so that you are not misunderstood again. If factual data is incorrect or the error is so egregious that it merits a published correction, call the reporter as well as his or her editor. But proceed carefully. Calling in anger will result in a confrontational relationship that may lead to more negative stories that cause more, bigger headaches than the original misquotation. If alerting a potential reader of the offending quote (such as a client or superior) before they see it can diffuse the situation, make that call and leave it at that.

Answering questions and sticking to your message can be a tricky balance between saying too much and not saying enough.

Some interviewees like to employ the filibuster method—that is, take an extra long time answering each question in order to limit the number of questions the reporter has time to ask in the time allotted for the interview. This is not a good idea. Even the reporters who are not experts in your field will have a sense of when you are giving them good information and when you are simply trying to waste their time. Filibustering can lead to interruptions by a frustrated reporter, which can veer your conversation into confrontation territory. Focus on your message. Don't ramble in such a way that will force the interview off the rails.

Conversely, some people will simply try to avoid the question by saying they have no comment. This is also not a good idea, especially in a crisis situation. In such cases, a story may be written whether you weigh in or not, so why not present your side? As stated in the introduction, the only thing you have control over is what you say. If you say nothing, you control nothing—certainly not how your silence is interpreted by the reporter and by the audience. If you don't accept a question's premise, reframe it and answer on your own terms. It's in these circumstances that a strong message is most important.

Don't worry if you need to pause and think about the response before you give it. It's OK to think about what your answer will be before you provide it. It's better to give a good answer after a long pause than a bad answer right away.

An interview doesn't have to be a headache. It can help you get the word out about your company in a positive context. As long as you prepare, it will just be another day at the office.