Hey!
That is definitely part of the answer that they are looking for, but I'd try to expand slightly!
When interviewers ask this, they're mainly testing how you approach the story (rather than the story itself). They want to see that you keep up with commercial or legal news and understand why the story matters, and that you can then explain it clearly and concisely. Importantly, you should also be able to spot the implications for clients and, where relevant, the firm itself.
Linking it to the firm or its sectors definitely helps, but it doesn't need to be forced. A structure that I would usually follow is:
- Brief context: set out what happened in one or two sentences, focusing on the core facts rather than details. The aim is to show that you understand the story well enough to explain it clearly and concisely.
- Why it is interesting and important: explain why this caught your attention. This might be because it affects a particular industry, highlights a wider market trend, creates legal or regulatory uncertainty, or shows how businesses are responding to change
- Implications for businesses or clients: discuss the practical consequences. This could be who is affected, what risks or opportunities arise, and what commercial decisions companies may now need to think about in response.
- Relevance to the firm: if appropriate, link this back to the firm's practice areas, sectors, or client base. This doesn't need to be forced - it can be as simple as noting where the firm might advise clients navigating the issue, and what practice areas might be involved.
- Your view: you could end with a short comment that shows your own judgment on the situation (i.e. whether you think the development is positive, challenging, or uncertain - and why)
You don't need to go into lots of technical detail - simply having an awareness of how the news story will affect clients in that sector and how the firm might assist them should demonstrate good commercial awareness! I hope that helps