This turned out to be the case with Chancellor Gene D. Block of UCLA, so I decided I was going to make this happen. And it turned out going to his house with a letter would be the successful way to do it.

My investigative reporting class and I worked on an extensive multimedia piece looking into the budget cuts and tuition hikes in the University of California system this semester. Rivalries aside, UCLA was our focal school because of its nearness to USC. Interviewing Chancellor Block was essential.

With vast cuts in courses, scholarships, financial aid, staff and library hours one would assume - and rightfully so - the chancellor would be willing to speak to the community openly about what was going on. It turned out he was willing to sit down for an interview, but it took some unconventional persuasion.

What's been going on at UCLA (and most other UC schools) is serious. Some staggering statistics include a 7 percent increase in class size and the cutting of 110 courses and more than 570 positions. The UC system announced in March that it would propose offering 3-year bachelor degrees and enrolling more out-of-state students after already cutting its freshman enrollment. Changes, and layoffs and cuts! Oh my!

The Pursuit
Dan Doperalski, managing editor of the Daily Trojan, first tried to arrange by e-mail a meeting with Block beginning in February. Doperalski e-mailed the office of media relations letting them know our class would be at UCLA on the 4th of the month and asked if a brief interview could be granted. He was told the chancellor was out of the country.

Doperalski sent a couple of more e-mails to the chancellor's office repeating the request for an interview but was repeatedly told nothing could be done. Apparently, it would be "impossible" to accommodate his request.

My own efforts by e-mail were met with similar replies. Nothing could be done, I was told. It was also "impossible" to accommodate my request.

Our professor proposed in class that - if needed - the class would go to the chancellor's office, or even his house, to demonstrate to the chancellor the true need for this interview.

Meanwhile, I received one final e-mail from the media relations office with links to various online documents and press releases that they said would give me all the information I needed. Instead of going to those sites, I searched for and found the chancellor's address.

Documents are not interviews; this investigation needed the interview.

I wrote a handwritten letter explaining the efforts my classmates and I were going through to get Block to sit down with us. I wrote that, as a student journalist, I would assume he, as a public official in education, would be willing to speak with me because we both were in the same community - academia. I also mentioned how not speaking with us would not stop us from writing about his refusal because we had spoken to almost all of the other UC chancellors. I again requested a brief interview and left the letter in his mailbox.

The Answer
I received a response the next day. I had been granted an interview the following week. Moments like those make being a journalist exciting. There was a catch - no video or audio recording would be allowed.

The interview ended up including not just the chancellor and me, but also Steve Olsen, vice chancellor of Finance, Budget, and Capital Programs and Carol Stogsdill, senior executive director of the Office of Media Relations.

Stogsdill said during the interview, "We don't want things being quoted verbatim and then taken out of context." Although in my opinion, considering our intended format for the interview was a question-and-answer one, a recorder would do anything but take anything out of context. However, because I wasn't able to record the interview, that was no longer possible.

Why could I not record? It's a tough question to answer because I don't think UCLA's response justifies it, but I had to work around it.

The interview revealed little more than was already available online. But that isn't the point.

Sure, there are available documents, but nothing says, "I care and this is what I'm doing" more than a face-to-face interview with a journalist. It's not the same as a press release, and that is why even getting this interview was so important.

The Interview
In the interview, the chancellor and vice chancellor spoke about cuts being "unfortunate but necessary." UCLA had $130 million less to work with this year and even an increase in student fees is only helping cover $72 million, Olsen added. 

Block mentioned he is personally trying to use his power to help the situation but also that we'll have to be patient for change.

"Well, we visit [legislators] fairly frequently in Sacramento...a number of us have had continual visits to explain the impact the budget cuts are having on universities. We do make an effort and our message is clear: the UCs are a place for access, many students are not well-to-do and we want to keep education accessible."

UCLA is hoping a proposal for additional federal funding will be passed. The additional funding would be given to the UCs that provide the most access to low-income students and conduct substantive research in certain areas.

The Journalism
Thirty minutes later - 15 past my allowance - I left with two things: the notes I rapidly took and feelings of both happiness and dissatisfaction. Why could the interview not be recorded? Although this is not uncommon in interviews, it is still difficult to justify.

Public officials, as I've been taught in journalism school, are supposed to be available to the media - it's part of their responsibility. If they aren't talking to the taxpayers they need to be questioned. If journalists don't bridge the gap between officials and the public, who will?

That's what my class and I tried to achieve with the UCLA administration and specifically Chancellor Block. I appreciate his office being responsive to both Doperalski and me, and I am well aware the Chancellor is a busy man. Getting necessary interviews is never easy. Nevertheless, getting a recorded interview should not be this difficult. Without going to his house, I don't think the interview would have even been possible.

My investigative reporting class and I did this story for the people who need, want, and should hear him speak. Like all other journalists, we are looking to seek the truth and display it to those who cannot seek it for themselves - no matter how difficult - one public official at a time.