Foreign Press Talk Series: Thanos Dimadis in Conversation with Dean Jelani Cobb, Columbia Journalism

In this exclusive episode of the Foreign Press Talk Series, host Thanos Dimadis sits down with Dr. Jelani Cobb, Dean of Columbia Journalism School, for a compelling conversation about the evolving landscape of journalism. Their discussion covers the urgent challenges of misinformation, the enduring importance of journalistic integrity, and the critical role education plays in preparing the next generation of media professionals. But this interview goes beyond industry trends. Thanos and Dr. Cobb also delve into the emotional, ethical, and personal dimensions of being a journalist. From navigating public scrutiny to managing failure, rejection, and the psychological toll of reporting in turbulent times, this is an intimate look at what it truly means to practice journalism — beyond the headlines. 

AFPC-USA is solely responsible for the content of this educational program. Below, foreign correspondents can read detailed takeaways about their discussion.

ON INTERVIEWING

Dimadis asked Cobb about his approach to conducting interviews, particularly whether preparing written questions is a “good or bad habit.” Cobb responded that while he sometimes writes questions as a backup, he prefers a more conversational style, focusing on the flow of dialogue and following up naturally based on what the interviewee says. He believes this approach leads to a more authentic and insightful interview.

“Honestly, for me, it's better to just think,” he said. “I think about the conversation and the things that I want to touch on, and often I'll write questions just as a backup, but for the most part I just think about what I want to know, what's important to talk to this person about? And then just let the conversation go from there.

Dimadis notes that many foreign correspondents tend to rely on pre-written questions and asks whether that might undermine authenticity. Cobb replies that while everyone should do what works for them, sticking too rigidly to a list of questions can make the conversation feel disconnected from the interviewee's mood or interests.

Cobb also recalls an early mistake he made in his career—conducting an interview without realizing his recorder wasn’t working. He had to redo the interview, and ever since, he’s made sure to use a backup recorder.

ON THE QUALITIES THAT MAKE A SUCCESSFUL JOURNALIST

Dean Jelani Cobb; Thanos Dimadis

Dimadis asks whether Cobb, given his experience working with aspiring journalists and students, can identify early on who is likely to become a standout figure in the field. Cobb responds that while hard work, motivation, and diligence are indicators of potential, it's impossible to predict with certainty who will succeed. Sometimes, unexpected factors or personal decisions shape a person’s trajectory long after their training ends. In other words, success is not always visible at the start.

“Sometimes they're kind of indescribable things that really catalyze a person that may happen after they leave here, or a person may decide that they want to go on a different route with their career,” he said. “So you never know. You don't really ever 100% know.”

Dimadis then brings up the issue of arrogance among aspiring journalists, asking if Cobb has encountered people who display overconfidence early in their careers. Cobb replies with light sarcasm—"Who, me? An arrogant journalist?"— but then affirms that arrogance is a problem in the profession. He explains that arrogance undermines good reporting because it blocks a journalist’s ability to listen, learn, and admit they don’t have all the answers. Cobb stresses that humility is essential to strong journalism: reporters must approach their work with the mindset of discovering the truth, not assuming they already know it.

In response, Dimadis shared a personal reflection, saying he recognizes moments in his twenties where he may have been arrogant in his reporting, a tendency driven by the desire to prove oneself early in a career. He asks Cobb if he’s ever felt the same. Cobb agrees, noting that he's definitely more humble now than when he started. He attributes this shift to gaining a better understanding over time of how complex the world—and journalism—really is. Early in his career, he didn’t realize how much he still had to learn.

Cobb concludes by pointing out that journalists come in different forms — some excel in a specific beat and are almost “born” to cover it, while others are generalists who can handle any assignment, from business to sports to in-depth interviews. Both types are equally valuable, and a good newsroom needs a balance of each.

He said: “There are journalists who really excel at one thing. There's one thing that they were seemingly born to cover. And then there are other people who, they used to call them generalists, who can just do anything. You can send them to cover business, you can send them to cover sports, you can send them to write a profile. They're really good at doing interviews. It really depends on that individual journalist. And I don't think either is better. The person who has this one area that they just cover or they just can do better than 95% of other journalists would is equally important. And if you are an editor, you need some of both on your staff.”

Acknowledging that our current information environment can feel confusing and saturated, Dimadis asked if it's better for young journalists to become generalists or to specialize in a specific field. Cobb responded that early in a journalist’s career, it’s valuable to try a wide range of subjects and formats. Even if someone eventually specializes, experimenting with different beats—like writing, audio, or photojournalism—helps develop a more well-rounded skill set and ultimately makes them better at their chosen focus.

Dimadis then suggests that generalists might more often become commentators. Cobb disagrees, saying that many generalist reporters he knows actually avoid commentary and opinion writing, preferring to focus strictly on reporting.

ON JOURNALISTIC ASPIRATIONS AND SUCCEEDING IN THE BUSINESS

Dimadis asks whether journalists have a greater impact on the public through reporting or commentary. Cobb firmly emphasizes that "commentary is subordinate to reporting," explaining that truthful reporting should be the foundation of any journalistic influence. He tells his students that their role isn’t to push agendas but to “influence the public to be more knowledgeable” through information—not persuasion. “We should never put our thumb on the scale,” he asserts, stressing journalistic neutrality.

Dimadis follows up by asking whether younger journalists are often driven by the desire to be influential. Cobb acknowledges that “some do,” noting ambition is common among both young and older journalists. However, he clarifies that ambition manifests in many ways: some may find success and happiness in long careers at small local papers, while others only feel fulfilled by high-profile roles like CNN anchor or White House correspondent.

When Dimadis asks how he mentors students to discover what kind of journalism will fulfill them, Cobb shares that he encourages experimentation. He recounts the story of Molly Ivins, a journalist fired from The New York Times who went on to thrive at the Texas Observer. “What really was right for her was something different,” he says, using her story to illustrate that success doesn’t have a single definition and happiness may come from unexpected places.

Dimadis then shifts to the idea that journalists must balance personal fulfillment with serving the business side of journalism, arguing that many forget the industry is also a business. Cobb counters that younger journalists today are more aware of this reality than their predecessors. “They’re more knowledgeable about the business side,” he says, citing concerns like circulation, online traction, events, nonprofit models, and overall newsroom economics. Unlike 20 years ago, journalists now “have to be concerned” about how their work fits into the business model.

Dimadis also raises a concern voiced by some critics: that awareness of the business side of journalism could compromise the objectivity and reliability of a journalist’s reporting. He questions whether the pressure to consider revenue or business priorities might erode journalistic integrity.

Cobb responds confidently, rejecting that assumption. He says, “I don’t necessarily think that being knowledgeable about the business that you're in... gets in the way of you being a good journalist or even a great journalist.” For Cobb, understanding the financial structure of the media industry doesn't inherently conflict with journalistic ethics or objectivity. Instead, he implies that journalists can be both business-aware and uphold high standards of reporting.

ON NAVIGATING FAILURE AND CAREER GROWTH

Dimadis states that being a great journalist must include the ability to cope with failure, asking Cobb whether he’s experienced setbacks in his career. Cobb answers immediately: “Absolutely.” He explains that failure is inevitable in journalism and that one of the benefits of aging is developing perspective: “Sometimes things go really well, sometimes they don’t. And that’s how life is.” He recalls working hard on stories that either didn’t meet his expectations or didn’t satisfy editors. Over time, however, his understanding shifted: “Sometimes there’s just not a story where you thought there was a story.” What once felt like failure he now sees as part of the process.

On the topic of rejection, Dimadis suggests it can feel like a failure, especially early in one’s career—like being turned down for interviews or essential sources. Cobb agrees: “At the beginning, brutal. Now you get rejected from something, it’s just Tuesday.” The normalization of rejection, he says, comes with experience.

Dimadis then asks whether Cobb ever envisioned a different career path. Cobb shares that in addition to journalism, he has also been a historian and a history professor—roles that have significantly shaped his professional identity. Outside of academia, he once considered becoming a lawyer or a doctor, but concludes: “I think I found the career field that was best for me.”

The conversation then shifts to Cobb’s current role as Dean of Columbia Journalism School. Dimadis asks about unexpected challenges of the position, particularly in administration. Cobb laughs and says it’s not a “darker side” but definitely a “very demanding job.” He discusses the stress of navigating complicated political situations and high-stakes responsibilities, but emphasizes the job’s rewards—especially the opportunity to shape students’ experiences and futures.

In a humorous but telling anecdote, Cobb recalls being asked to choose a carpet during a renovation, underscoring how the role involves unexpected tasks: “Everything in the building somehow crosses your desk at some point, from the color of the carpet to the number of faculty we have to how our course offerings are.” Despite the weight of administrative responsibilities, Cobb embraces the job's challenges and sees it as a meaningful continuation of his commitment to journalism and education.

ON THE LIMITS OF INSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION

Dimadis posits that journalism education can keep up with the rapid changes in the media landscape—new technologies, shifting political dynamics, and evolving professional demands. Cobb explains that Columbia Journalism School constantly revises its curriculum to stay relevant. The rise of artificial intelligence, for example, has directly influenced how classes are taught. “We’re always shifting and changing and adding things and subtracting things,” he says. Yet amid that change, one core element has remained: reporting. “That has been the nucleus,” Cobb emphasizes, tracing the school’s foundation in 1912 to its current mission in 2025.

Dimadis then raises a timely concern: in the current political climate, especially for international students, is there a limit to how much a young journalist can stand up for truth without risking legal or personal consequences? He notes the ambiguity international students face in balancing press freedom with the realities of immigration law. Cobb responds with clarity: “Reporting has to be protected… but that’s not where we are.” He stresses that journalism inherently involves risk, and his comment that “no one can protect you” was not to discourage but to instill awareness and responsibility in his students. “That’s why it’s important that we follow our protocols… because it is dangerous.”

Dimadis agrees that young journalists must be clear-eyed about the risks they face and not assume institutional protection—particularly in a country moving toward authoritarian tendencies. Cobb adds that even journalists at major outlets are not immune: “Reporting is inherently dangerous… every year we have a memorial for journalists who’ve been killed in the line of work.” Ultimately, the best safeguards are ethical rigor, situational awareness, and professional discipline.

Dimadis presses further, asking whether Cobb sees the current political environment as more authoritarian than before. Cobb responds candidly: “We’re at a moment that is more authoritarian and more autocratic in our politics.” Still, he insists, this reality only reinforces the necessity of journalism: “That doesn’t change anything about the necessity of us doing the work.”

The conversation closes on a philosophical note as Dimadis asks how journalists can help restore public trust in their profession. Cobb offers a striking answer: “I don’t think we should ask the public to trust us.” Instead, he advocates for transparency: “We should show our work.” That means posting raw interviews, source documents, and all relevant materials—“so the public doesn’t have to deal with the question of trust… If you don’t believe us, you can investigate this yourself.” In an age of disinformation, he argues, accountability is the antidote.

ON HOW JOURNALISTS CAN CONNECT WITH SOCIETY

Dimadis asks a broad, reflective question—what is the greatest societal concern right now, beyond the realm of journalism? Is it the distraction and overload from digital information and misinformation? Or the loss of attention due to constant technological engagement? Cobb answers with a clear concern: “the loss of connection.” He notes that society is not only polarized politically but fractured within communities. Basic respect and empathy for people of different backgrounds, beliefs, and neighborhoods have diminished. For democracy to work, he says, we need to be able to look at someone different from us and still see shared humanity: “I see this other person… and I also see something in common with this person. So much so that I’m willing to govern with this person.”

Dimadis adds another layer, pointing out the erosion of human connection in a more literal sense—particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic. He observes that many young people are uncomfortable with face-to-face interaction, which affects how they engage with journalism itself. Cobb agrees, but notes the trend existed even before the pandemic. Younger generations, he says, often need more guidance and encouragement to approach strangers, conduct in-person interviews, or simply engage in unscripted dialogue. “It takes a lot of effort,” he says, to get students comfortable with that part of the craft. He suspects screens and digital life may be partly to blame, though he stops short of a definitive explanation.

The conversation turns personal when Dimadis asks whether Cobb has ever considered himself an introvert or extrovert. He replies quickly and with a smile: “Very much an introvert.” But that hasn’t hindered his career. While he began as a historian in academia, he’s an introvert who has learned to operate in public. “I probably prefer the quiet of an empty room,” he admits. Yet when asked about the best part of his day, he offers a warm and telling answer: “When I see my children in the evening… they’re usually really excited to see me when I come home.”

To close, Dimadis poses one final, introspective question—how does Cobb evaluate someone he meets for the first time? His response reflects both his journalistic instincts and his values: “I observe how people treat other people.” Especially those without power. Titles and status can shape how someone treats him as a dean, but it’s in how they interact with others—those who can offer them nothing—that he finds the truest read of character.