I'm happy to say that the need for multiple blog posts is lessening. You seem to be mastering the fundamentals of journalism in a way where we can comfortably start applying those skills to different mediums beyond just writing. And that's where we want to be. Good job, everybody!
A few things to note from this assignment:
Don't forget the use of "allegedly." In a lawsuit, nothing is proven yet; all is alleged. So don't skimp on using that disclaimer. One of you wroye that the kid's lack of skills was "in fact due to . . . incompetent teachers." Uh, no! No facts have yet been proven! It's allegedly due to incompetent teachers!
Make sure you have the news in the lede. The news isn't that a lawsuit was filed; it's why, right?
Use AP Style. I know the document said it was the 9th Judicial Circuit, but in AP Style that is Ninth Judicial Circuit. Remember your AP number rules.
One of you didn't name the plaintiffs. I assume it was to protect the identity of a minor. While the policies of newspapers, TV stations and Web sites widely vary on whether or when to use the names of child suspects or victims, rarely does that standard apply to lawsuits where the plaintiffs are seeking mucho dineros.
Don't be redundant. You don't need to say they are suing for compensatory damages of $5000,000; just say they are suing for $500,000. That's what the compensatory damages are; why not just cut to the chase?
Simplify things. One of you wrote that the parents "are pursuing a civil court case against the school district." Why not just say "suing the school district"? Again, cut to the chase and translate legal gobbledygook to simple English.
Watch for unnecessary fatals. One very-nicely written story idnetified the plaintiffs as the Dowells. It was the Dowdells. Nothing to add here, folks. Just pointing it out.
Watch your punctuation. This isn't a grammar class, but I'm concerned about the proper use of apostrophe s's. Lots of incorrect usage in this exercise. You can find a cheat sheet on where to put an apostrophe around an "s" in the AP Stylebook in the chapter titled "A Guide To Punctuation." Under "Punctuation Marks And How To Use Them," read the section under "apostrophe."
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Monday, October 25, 2010
Police -- Peanut Barrel
I'm kind of surprised that so few of you cited something that to me stood out like a sore thumb: the fact that the cane-wielding victim was almost 6 1/2 feet tall, while the would-be alleged robber he beat was not much over five feet tall and weighed less than half as much as the victim.
Isn't that a Peanut Barrel-type of story? Isn't that sharp contrast in size what takes an out-of-the-ordinary robbery story (unusual in that the victim beat off the attacker) and make it even more unique?
I'm not shocked that many of you didn't weave it into your ledes, because to do that is doable but a bit complex. I'm just surprised many of you didn't note that bit of interest at all.
So now we have nine students who are part of the Fatals Club. If you count time fatals, it's ten.
That means we have only one person left who hasn't fataled in any way, shape or form this semester.
Sigh.
Isn't that a Peanut Barrel-type of story? Isn't that sharp contrast in size what takes an out-of-the-ordinary robbery story (unusual in that the victim beat off the attacker) and make it even more unique?
I'm not shocked that many of you didn't weave it into your ledes, because to do that is doable but a bit complex. I'm just surprised many of you didn't note that bit of interest at all.
So now we have nine students who are part of the Fatals Club. If you count time fatals, it's ten.
That means we have only one person left who hasn't fataled in any way, shape or form this semester.
Sigh.
Police -- Fatals
Quite often, the ratio of fatals is proportional to deadline pressure; the less time you have, the more fatals you create.
Paradoxically, that wasn't the problem in this assignment.
In fact, the two people who fataled were the first two people finished with the assignment!
So it wasn't lack of time that caused the fatals. Far from it. The assignments were turned in 31 and 28 minutes, respectively, from the original 11:20 deadline that was extended another 10 minutes.
And the fatals were in the completely-avoidable category. Each person misidentified the store (one mistakenly listed the suspect's place of employment as the crime scene, the other spelled the store as Jimmy -- and not Jiffy -- Foods, another case where spell check wasn't going to catch the problem).
Then, one person spelled "DaRoza" two different ways in the same sentence, while the other claimed the robber escaped with the cash register and $80 in cash, even though the report indicated nothing was actually stolen.
You had time to catch these errors, folks.
If you get done early, PLEASE take a few minutes to do more than your usual fact-checking. Take advantage of ALL the time you have to properly vet a story.
I know you want to get out of here. But you also want to get the grade you deserve, right?
So do the work that's necessary.
Paradoxically, that wasn't the problem in this assignment.
In fact, the two people who fataled were the first two people finished with the assignment!
So it wasn't lack of time that caused the fatals. Far from it. The assignments were turned in 31 and 28 minutes, respectively, from the original 11:20 deadline that was extended another 10 minutes.
And the fatals were in the completely-avoidable category. Each person misidentified the store (one mistakenly listed the suspect's place of employment as the crime scene, the other spelled the store as Jimmy -- and not Jiffy -- Foods, another case where spell check wasn't going to catch the problem).
Then, one person spelled "DaRoza" two different ways in the same sentence, while the other claimed the robber escaped with the cash register and $80 in cash, even though the report indicated nothing was actually stolen.
You had time to catch these errors, folks.
If you get done early, PLEASE take a few minutes to do more than your usual fact-checking. Take advantage of ALL the time you have to properly vet a story.
I know you want to get out of here. But you also want to get the grade you deserve, right?
So do the work that's necessary.
Police -- Allegedly
Some more problems with when to use allegedly.
It's not alleged that Keel entered the store. He has a face full of broken bones proving he was there.
What is alleged is whether he pulled a knife, and tried to commit a crime.
So, where does allegedly fit in here?
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and exposed a knife.
Before "exposed a knife," right?
It's not alleged that Keel entered the store. He has a face full of broken bones proving he was there.
What is alleged is whether he pulled a knife, and tried to commit a crime.
So, where does allegedly fit in here?
DaRoza walked behind the counter for the key to the restroom when Keel followed him and exposed a knife.
Before "exposed a knife," right?
Police -- Many of You . . .
. . . didn't list an address for Jiffy Foods.
You should have. It's news WHERE something happens, right?
Who, what, when, where, why, how.
You should have. It's news WHERE something happens, right?
Who, what, when, where, why, how.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
911 -- Quotes
A big part of this story -- if not the central focus of this story -- was the little girl's bravery. And you had some telling quotes in the 911 trascript, like these:
Somebody's hurting my mommy.
Hurry. My mommy's crying.
My mommy. What'll happen to my mommy?
I'm afraid. Will he hurt me, too?
Great quotes. They're telling. They set context in a special way -- they sound like things you'd imagine a 6-year-old girl would say, right?
Yet only four of you quoted the girl at all in your articles!
We've talked about the concept of showing and not just telling readers; that is, don't just tell them something happened; show them the proof.
Those quotes are the "show" part. Don't be afraid to use quotes that support and prove your key points.
Also, the quotes also humanize the story. It's not the dry legal jargon of a crime taking place; it's the quivering voice of a scared little girl. It emphasizes people, and when it comes down to it, all stories are not crime stories or business stories or political stories; they are all people stories -- stories about what happened to people, or what people did, or what may affect people.
Let the humanity shine through in your stories, when possible.
Somebody's hurting my mommy.
Hurry. My mommy's crying.
My mommy. What'll happen to my mommy?
I'm afraid. Will he hurt me, too?
Great quotes. They're telling. They set context in a special way -- they sound like things you'd imagine a 6-year-old girl would say, right?
Yet only four of you quoted the girl at all in your articles!
We've talked about the concept of showing and not just telling readers; that is, don't just tell them something happened; show them the proof.
Those quotes are the "show" part. Don't be afraid to use quotes that support and prove your key points.
Also, the quotes also humanize the story. It's not the dry legal jargon of a crime taking place; it's the quivering voice of a scared little girl. It emphasizes people, and when it comes down to it, all stories are not crime stories or business stories or political stories; they are all people stories -- stories about what happened to people, or what people did, or what may affect people.
Let the humanity shine through in your stories, when possible.
911 -- Fatals
So, somebody filed their story and noted the rape happened on Monday. Of course, for this assignment the crime date had to be Wednesday or Thursday, depending on which day you actually wrote it.
The person realized their mistake and sent in a corrected copy. I'm sorry to say that the original copy holds. We have to get it right the first time we turn something in, especially on deadline. There's no stopping the printing press unless it's a real emergency, and you can't restart the 11 o'clock news at 11:03.
This one especially pains me because this was my most common type of fatal when I was a pro: I couldn't get the day of the week right to save my life. Thursdays would feel like Tuesdays, and I'd type in the wrong date like an idiot.
So I got into the habit of religiously checking the date before I turned in a story; even asking peers to take a quick check and see if I got the date right.
I learned that lesson the hard way; after a couple of fatals found their way into the paper. So my heart goes out to you, but I wouldn't be doing you a favor by acting like it's no big deal when in the real world, it is.
Sorry, folks.
We now have eight members of the Fatals Club (nine, if you count me). Three more to go.
The person realized their mistake and sent in a corrected copy. I'm sorry to say that the original copy holds. We have to get it right the first time we turn something in, especially on deadline. There's no stopping the printing press unless it's a real emergency, and you can't restart the 11 o'clock news at 11:03.
This one especially pains me because this was my most common type of fatal when I was a pro: I couldn't get the day of the week right to save my life. Thursdays would feel like Tuesdays, and I'd type in the wrong date like an idiot.
So I got into the habit of religiously checking the date before I turned in a story; even asking peers to take a quick check and see if I got the date right.
I learned that lesson the hard way; after a couple of fatals found their way into the paper. So my heart goes out to you, but I wouldn't be doing you a favor by acting like it's no big deal when in the real world, it is.
Sorry, folks.
We now have eight members of the Fatals Club (nine, if you count me). Three more to go.
911 -- Identification
Probably the hardest thing about this exercise for you was identification. You had competing interests at work here.
First, you should have been operating under the general journalistic premise that we do NOT name rape victims in almost all cases.
Yet FOUR of you named the victim. Why?
Then, there is the concern of making a virtual identification; that is, giving so much other information that it is easy for anybody to identify the victim.
Two of you named the victim's daughter. A daughter only has one mother, right? So that's real easy to narrow down. One of you even listed the exact home address. Only one family lives in a home, right? Again, you virtually identified the victim.
Even though an exact address would expose the victim, don't readers deserve to know where a crime took place? I mean, a story is much more relevant if it happened on your street or in your neighborhood than if it didn't. Some location is necessary to establish relevance.
One of you handled it in a smart way: you simply said the incident happened on Wilson Avenue. No street address included. That gave readers enough information to better set proximitry, without giving away the victim's home and creating a virtual identification.
I also thought important to the story was noting that Caspinwall was a neighbor of the victim. Readers need to know if this crime was totally random or if there was some sort of link between the victim and attacker. Readers have more reason to worry if someone is willy-nilly breaking into random homes, as opposed to attacking a neighbor, right?
But only five of you noted the link.
One of you took a different tack in noting the connection but trying to minimize virtual identification: you didn't name the suspect, either. Uh, don't you think that people deserve and need to know the name of somebody who allegedly breaks into homes and rapes people?
Admittedly, this was a confusing exercise. You had many different factors tugging at you. It's really a tough situation for a young reporter to find himself or herself in. In a real-world setting, you'd definitely want to bring an editor in the loop to help make the best judgments that give the readers the most information while at the same time minimizing harm to the victim.
But here, I wanted to test your judgment and see how you responded. And I figured you''d appreciate the lesson much more if we did it this way, as opposed to just lecturing about it.
This is how I would have handled it: I WOULD name the victim or the girl. I WOULD name the suspect and even use HIS home address. I'd say the victim limed nearby, but I wouldn't say they were direct neighbors.
That way, readers know who did this (and know exactly where the sicko lived) and the general area where the crime occurred and that it wasn't a random crime, while at the same time limiting the ability to identify who the victim was.
First, you should have been operating under the general journalistic premise that we do NOT name rape victims in almost all cases.
Yet FOUR of you named the victim. Why?
Then, there is the concern of making a virtual identification; that is, giving so much other information that it is easy for anybody to identify the victim.
Two of you named the victim's daughter. A daughter only has one mother, right? So that's real easy to narrow down. One of you even listed the exact home address. Only one family lives in a home, right? Again, you virtually identified the victim.
Even though an exact address would expose the victim, don't readers deserve to know where a crime took place? I mean, a story is much more relevant if it happened on your street or in your neighborhood than if it didn't. Some location is necessary to establish relevance.
One of you handled it in a smart way: you simply said the incident happened on Wilson Avenue. No street address included. That gave readers enough information to better set proximitry, without giving away the victim's home and creating a virtual identification.
I also thought important to the story was noting that Caspinwall was a neighbor of the victim. Readers need to know if this crime was totally random or if there was some sort of link between the victim and attacker. Readers have more reason to worry if someone is willy-nilly breaking into random homes, as opposed to attacking a neighbor, right?
But only five of you noted the link.
One of you took a different tack in noting the connection but trying to minimize virtual identification: you didn't name the suspect, either. Uh, don't you think that people deserve and need to know the name of somebody who allegedly breaks into homes and rapes people?
Admittedly, this was a confusing exercise. You had many different factors tugging at you. It's really a tough situation for a young reporter to find himself or herself in. In a real-world setting, you'd definitely want to bring an editor in the loop to help make the best judgments that give the readers the most information while at the same time minimizing harm to the victim.
But here, I wanted to test your judgment and see how you responded. And I figured you''d appreciate the lesson much more if we did it this way, as opposed to just lecturing about it.
This is how I would have handled it: I WOULD name the victim or the girl. I WOULD name the suspect and even use HIS home address. I'd say the victim limed nearby, but I wouldn't say they were direct neighbors.
That way, readers know who did this (and know exactly where the sicko lived) and the general area where the crime occurred and that it wasn't a random crime, while at the same time limiting the ability to identify who the victim was.
911 -- Allegedly
Lotsa confusion on what was alleged here.
Is it alleged that the woman was raped? No. She was raped. Someone broke into her house and raped her. That much was clearly established.
What is alleged is who raped her. A man did, obviously. But it's alleged that it was Andrew Caspinwall.
So you should say Caspinwall allegedly raped the victim. Or the victim was raped, allegedly by Caspinwall.
Is it alleged that the woman was raped? No. She was raped. Someone broke into her house and raped her. That much was clearly established.
What is alleged is who raped her. A man did, obviously. But it's alleged that it was Andrew Caspinwall.
So you should say Caspinwall allegedly raped the victim. Or the victim was raped, allegedly by Caspinwall.
Rescue -- Was it . . .
. . . a fort the kids were building?
Or a tunnel that was a kind of play-fort?
It's the former, right?
So, why call it a fort when it was really a tunnel?
One of you hit the description just right: in the first reference, you called it a make-shift fort; then in the second reference you called it a tunnel.
Or a tunnel that was a kind of play-fort?
It's the former, right?
So, why call it a fort when it was really a tunnel?
One of you hit the description just right: in the first reference, you called it a make-shift fort; then in the second reference you called it a tunnel.
Rescue -- Attribution
In this exercise, your source was the incident report.
Not Lt. Chenn. Not neighbors and witnesses, The report!
You saw the report, but you didn't talk to anybody yourself, right?
So it was " . . . Chenn said, according to the report."
Or "In the report, Chenn said . . . "
Or " . . . neighbors told Chenn, according to the report."
Make sure you understand your attribution, and that you offer PROPER attribution!
Not Lt. Chenn. Not neighbors and witnesses, The report!
You saw the report, but you didn't talk to anybody yourself, right?
So it was " . . . Chenn said, according to the report."
Or "In the report, Chenn said . . . "
Or " . . . neighbors told Chenn, according to the report."
Make sure you understand your attribution, and that you offer PROPER attribution!
Rescue -- Watch For Illogical Things
Like when you said:
The Okemos attorney of fence and the Zoning Board have been notified.
This is what you were paraphrasing:
Notify City Attorney of fence and Zoning Board of possible hazard for children.
What it meant was, the city attorney should be notified about the fence, and the zoning board should be notified about the possible hazard for children.
Your first tip-off that maybe you read it wrong should be been the title of attorney of fence. That makes no snese, right?
If it makes no sense, don't assume. And don't just go with what you have. Check it out!
That example is kinda funny. This next one is not:
The collapse happened at 4:40 p.m. and Lo was freed at 3:24 p.m.
Obviously, you can't be rescued before you get into trouble. So if you were adequately fact-checking what you wrote, that should have tipped you off that you had an incorrect number in there somewhere. (In fact, it was the latter number that was wrong. It should have been 5:24 p.m.)
Sadly, that was a fatal.e you get into trouble.
The Okemos attorney of fence and the Zoning Board have been notified.
This is what you were paraphrasing:
Notify City Attorney of fence and Zoning Board of possible hazard for children.
What it meant was, the city attorney should be notified about the fence, and the zoning board should be notified about the possible hazard for children.
Your first tip-off that maybe you read it wrong should be been the title of attorney of fence. That makes no snese, right?
If it makes no sense, don't assume. And don't just go with what you have. Check it out!
That example is kinda funny. This next one is not:
The collapse happened at 4:40 p.m. and Lo was freed at 3:24 p.m.
Obviously, you can't be rescued before you get into trouble. So if you were adequately fact-checking what you wrote, that should have tipped you off that you had an incorrect number in there somewhere. (In fact, it was the latter number that was wrong. It should have been 5:24 p.m.)
Sadly, that was a fatal.
e you get into trouble.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Meeting -- Ledes
Really good work in this exercise by everybody. Lots of strong ledes and good story structure. Everybody scored at least a 3.0. One person got the first 4.0 of the semester. Congrats!
Let's look at some examples:
In an effort to address the growing problem of housing the city's homeless population, the Grand Ledge City Council voted 6-1 yesterday to donate city land to build a new homeless shelter.
It's to-the-point and direct. Here's a good lede/nut graf sequence:
The Grand Ledge City Council voted Monday in favor of donating land on Garland Avenue proposed by the Coalition for the Homeless Inc. as the site for a new homeless shelter.
The city council's 6-1 vote will turn the location of an old fire station valued at $5090,000 into a $1.5 million homeless shelter which the CHI will raise money to construct and provide the working staff.
One of you had your interest drawn to how the vote came about:
The Grand Ledge City Council approved a proposal Sunday by the Coalition for the Homeless Inc. to construct a homeless shelter on Garland Avenue, despite angry opposition from Council Member William Belmonte.
Though Ida Levine, the president of the coalition, assured the council her organization would raise the $1.5 million needed to construct the shelter, Belmonte was not convinced. In an angry outburst, he questioned the ability of the coalition to raise the funds and the effect their failure to do so would have on taxpayers in Grand Ledge.
"Why should taxpayers suddenly start paying for this, people who work hard for their money and are struggling these days to support their families?" he said.
Is this approach better or worse than the others? Or is it just different? Is this the right way to do this story, or are there several "right" ways?
This lede was atop a story that was structured very well, except for the lede. Here it is:
Organization leaders gathered at the city council meeting Monday night to discuss the idea of expanding the First United Methodist Church's basement, used as a homeless shelter that has recently become overwhelmed.
In the fifth graf, it first mentions the plan for a new shelter. And only in the last graf is the council's approval of the plan noted.
In this case, you essentially end the story with your lede: the ultimate outcome. Don't forget that, unlike traditional linear writing, in journalism you START with the ending.
Finally, if you're wondering if your lede is jumbled or is clear enough, do this: read it out loud. Does it sound jumbled? Then unjumble the word order. Does it sound like a complete sentence? If not, add the necessary words.
Read this one out loud:
A triumph for the newly-formed Coalition for the Homeless Inc. Sunday night, as the Grand Ledge City Council affirmed the donation of property on Garland Avenue for a homeless shelter.
What's missing? Perhaps a "There was" at the start?
Let's look at some examples:
In an effort to address the growing problem of housing the city's homeless population, the Grand Ledge City Council voted 6-1 yesterday to donate city land to build a new homeless shelter.
It's to-the-point and direct. Here's a good lede/nut graf sequence:
The Grand Ledge City Council voted Monday in favor of donating land on Garland Avenue proposed by the Coalition for the Homeless Inc. as the site for a new homeless shelter.
The city council's 6-1 vote will turn the location of an old fire station valued at $5090,000 into a $1.5 million homeless shelter which the CHI will raise money to construct and provide the working staff.
One of you had your interest drawn to how the vote came about:
The Grand Ledge City Council approved a proposal Sunday by the Coalition for the Homeless Inc. to construct a homeless shelter on Garland Avenue, despite angry opposition from Council Member William Belmonte.
Though Ida Levine, the president of the coalition, assured the council her organization would raise the $1.5 million needed to construct the shelter, Belmonte was not convinced. In an angry outburst, he questioned the ability of the coalition to raise the funds and the effect their failure to do so would have on taxpayers in Grand Ledge.
"Why should taxpayers suddenly start paying for this, people who work hard for their money and are struggling these days to support their families?" he said.
Is this approach better or worse than the others? Or is it just different? Is this the right way to do this story, or are there several "right" ways?
This lede was atop a story that was structured very well, except for the lede. Here it is:
Organization leaders gathered at the city council meeting Monday night to discuss the idea of expanding the First United Methodist Church's basement, used as a homeless shelter that has recently become overwhelmed.
In the fifth graf, it first mentions the plan for a new shelter. And only in the last graf is the council's approval of the plan noted.
In this case, you essentially end the story with your lede: the ultimate outcome. Don't forget that, unlike traditional linear writing, in journalism you START with the ending.
Finally, if you're wondering if your lede is jumbled or is clear enough, do this: read it out loud. Does it sound jumbled? Then unjumble the word order. Does it sound like a complete sentence? If not, add the necessary words.
Read this one out loud:
A triumph for the newly-formed Coalition for the Homeless Inc. Sunday night, as the Grand Ledge City Council affirmed the donation of property on Garland Avenue for a homeless shelter.
What's missing? Perhaps a "There was" at the start?
Meeting -- Write With (AP) Style
Is it Lieutenant Luis Rafelson or Lt. Luis Rafelson?
It's Lt. AP Style, under "military title," offers a list of such titles that should be abbreviated. Lieutenant is on that list.
Additionally, it offers a subhed of "firefighters, police officers" which says this:
Use the abbreviations listed here when a military-style title is used before the name of a firefighter or police officer outside a direct quotation.
It's Lt. AP Style, under "military title," offers a list of such titles that should be abbreviated. Lieutenant is on that list.
Additionally, it offers a subhed of "firefighters, police officers" which says this:
Use the abbreviations listed here when a military-style title is used before the name of a firefighter or police officer outside a direct quotation.
Neutral Experts -- Imagine This Story . . .
. . . if you didn't have one. Or two. Here's a link, and here's the text:
O'Donnell questions separation of church, state
WILMINGTON, Del. – Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware on Tuesday questioned whether the U.S. Constitution calls for a separation of church and state, appearing to disagree or not know that the First Amendment bars the government from establishing religion.
The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.
Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.
When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"
Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.
"You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp," Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone said after the debate, adding that it raised questions about O'Donnell's grasp of the Constitution.
Erin Daly, a Widener professor who specializes in constitutional law, said that while there are questions about what counts as government promotion of religion, there is little debate over whether the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from making laws establishing religion.
"She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise," Daly said. "It's one thing to not know the 17th Amendment or some of the others, but most Americans do know the basics of the First Amendment."
O'Donnell didn't respond to reporters who asked her to clarify her views after the debate.
During the exchange, she said Coons' views on creationism showed that he believes in big-government mandates.
"Talk about imposing your beliefs on the local schools," she said. "You've just proved how little you know not just about constitutional law but about the theory of evolution."
Coons said her comments show a "fundamental misunderstanding" of the Constitution.
The debate, their third in the past week, was more testy than earlier ones.
O'Donnell began by defending herself for not being able to name a recent Supreme Court decision with which she disagrees at a debate last week. She said she was stumped because she largely agrees with the court's recent decisions under conservative chief justices John Roberts and William Rehnquist.
"I would say this court is on the right track," she said.
The two candidates repeatedly talked over each other, with O'Donnell accusing Coons of caving at one point when he asked the moderator to move on to a new question after a lengthy argument.
"I guess he can't handle it," she said.
O'Donnell, a tea party favorite who stunned the state by winning the GOP primary last month in her third Senate bid in five years, called Coons a liberal "addicted to a culture of waste, fraud and abuse."
Coons, who has held a double-digit lead in recent polls, urged voters to support him as the candidate of substance, with a track record over six years as executive of the state's most populous county. He said O'Donnell's only experience is in "sharpening the partisan divide but not at bridging it."
Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Speech -- I Am An Idiot
I could tell you some B.S. like, "it happens to the best of us!" but this class is about accountability and I'll take full responsibility with no excuses:
I fataled. If you're wondering how, let me explain:
After uploading blog posts about the speech assignment, one of you took an early sneak-peek and noted that I fataled somebody for saying the speech took place two days before Halloween. I fataled it, noting that in the preface it simply said the event was a few days before Halloween.
What I missed -- and what you caught -- was that in the text, the surgeon general said this:
"In just two days many of our young people will be celebrating Halloween."
Yes, I completely missed it. Yes, in this instance I failed to do the due diligence that I implore each and every one of you to do each and every time. That is my fault. There is no excuse.
If any good comes out of this, I hope this highlights that it simply doesn't matter how experienced you are at being a journalist; you have to do the fundamentals each time and every time. You can't take short cuts because you're busy or in a hurry or tired or because you think you know what you're doing. There are things you can find ways to do faster in journalism, but you can never skip a step in the process. You have to do the little things every time out.
My thanks to the person who tipped me off to this and saved somebody else's grade. You did the right thing; you double-checked a fact and brought attention to a claim not supported by the facts. That's a good journalistic action. That's what we do, right?
If your mother says she loves you, check it out. And if the teacher says it's a fatal, check that out, too. The worst thing that happens is that you confirm I'm right, and the best thing that happens is that you find -- and, more importantly -- fix -- a mistake.
You may flog me now. And no, it doesn't mean I'll take it easy on finding and noting future fatals on your part.
I fataled. If you're wondering how, let me explain:
After uploading blog posts about the speech assignment, one of you took an early sneak-peek and noted that I fataled somebody for saying the speech took place two days before Halloween. I fataled it, noting that in the preface it simply said the event was a few days before Halloween.
What I missed -- and what you caught -- was that in the text, the surgeon general said this:
"In just two days many of our young people will be celebrating Halloween."
Yes, I completely missed it. Yes, in this instance I failed to do the due diligence that I implore each and every one of you to do each and every time. That is my fault. There is no excuse.
If any good comes out of this, I hope this highlights that it simply doesn't matter how experienced you are at being a journalist; you have to do the fundamentals each time and every time. You can't take short cuts because you're busy or in a hurry or tired or because you think you know what you're doing. There are things you can find ways to do faster in journalism, but you can never skip a step in the process. You have to do the little things every time out.
My thanks to the person who tipped me off to this and saved somebody else's grade. You did the right thing; you double-checked a fact and brought attention to a claim not supported by the facts. That's a good journalistic action. That's what we do, right?
If your mother says she loves you, check it out. And if the teacher says it's a fatal, check that out, too. The worst thing that happens is that you confirm I'm right, and the best thing that happens is that you find -- and, more importantly -- fix -- a mistake.
You may flog me now. And no, it doesn't mean I'll take it easy on finding and noting future fatals on your part.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Speech -- If This Were A Real Story . . .
. . . who, if anybody, would you contact for reaction/rebuttals/comment after the meeting?
Speech -- Lotsa Good News!
You guys were under the gun to identify what made this a story; what made it newsworthy. Not that some big-shot was speaking; rather, what was the big-shot saying that was relevant/interesting/useful?
You didn't have a lot of time to figure that out. You were on deadline.
Still, you did your job. Congrats! Let's look at some of the ledes. Tell me which ones you liked the best, and why:
In a speech delivered Sunday night at a Michigan PTA Convention in Detroit, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo addressed the issue of underage drinking as a problematic element of the Halloween season.
(Suggestion: first, why not get rid of the unwieldy "addressed the issue of" and replace it with a "called," like this:)
In a speech delivered Sunday night at a Michigan PTA Convention in Detroit, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo called underage drinking a problematic element of the Halloween season.
(I'd also consider flipping the lede to emphasize what was said over who said it, but I wouldn't say a flip was necessary, especially if you wanted to emphasize the speaker's status. Let's move on now and look at another lede.)
The surgeon general of the U.S. Public Health Service, Tom Izzo, addressed the issue of the alcohol industry targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit Sunday night.
(Again, I think this one is a bit heavy with unnecessary words. I'd flip the sequencing of Izzo's title and replace "addressed the issue of" with "alleged," as in Izzo was making an allegation, like this:)
U.S. Public Health Service Surgeon General Tom Izzo alleged the alcohol industry is targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit Sunday night.
(One other thing; watch your statement placement. Read it literally, it says "the alcohol industry targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit." That's not what you meant to say, is it? Perhaps the "where" (PTA convention in Detroit) should have been paired next to the who (Izzo) to avoid any potential confusion.
More ledes here:
Just days before Halloween, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo spoke in Detroit Sunday night about the harmful role the alcohol industry plays in the lives of America's youth.
This one brings some different context: it was just before the holiday, which makes the speech more relevant and useful than if it was the day before Easter, for example.
Next:
The alcohol industry is targeting Halloween, a traditional children's holiday, to market their products to a young audience, according to the nation's surgeon general who spoke at a convention in Detroit Sunday evening.
Again, we get context here with the "traditional children's holiday" mention. Next:
Surgeon General Tom Izzo took a stance against alcohol companies' efforts to target Halloween as their latest marketing opportunity.
Straight and to the point, right? Those are juts a few of some really good ones.
You didn't have a lot of time to figure that out. You were on deadline.
Still, you did your job. Congrats! Let's look at some of the ledes. Tell me which ones you liked the best, and why:
In a speech delivered Sunday night at a Michigan PTA Convention in Detroit, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo addressed the issue of underage drinking as a problematic element of the Halloween season.
(Suggestion: first, why not get rid of the unwieldy "addressed the issue of" and replace it with a "called," like this:)
In a speech delivered Sunday night at a Michigan PTA Convention in Detroit, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo called underage drinking a problematic element of the Halloween season.
(I'd also consider flipping the lede to emphasize what was said over who said it, but I wouldn't say a flip was necessary, especially if you wanted to emphasize the speaker's status. Let's move on now and look at another lede.)
The surgeon general of the U.S. Public Health Service, Tom Izzo, addressed the issue of the alcohol industry targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit Sunday night.
(Again, I think this one is a bit heavy with unnecessary words. I'd flip the sequencing of Izzo's title and replace "addressed the issue of" with "alleged," as in Izzo was making an allegation, like this:)
U.S. Public Health Service Surgeon General Tom Izzo alleged the alcohol industry is targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit Sunday night.
(One other thing; watch your statement placement. Read it literally, it says "the alcohol industry targeting Halloween as a marketing opportunity at a PTA convention in Detroit." That's not what you meant to say, is it? Perhaps the "where" (PTA convention in Detroit) should have been paired next to the who (Izzo) to avoid any potential confusion.
More ledes here:
Just days before Halloween, U.S. Surgeon General Tom Izzo spoke in Detroit Sunday night about the harmful role the alcohol industry plays in the lives of America's youth.
This one brings some different context: it was just before the holiday, which makes the speech more relevant and useful than if it was the day before Easter, for example.
Next:
The alcohol industry is targeting Halloween, a traditional children's holiday, to market their products to a young audience, according to the nation's surgeon general who spoke at a convention in Detroit Sunday evening.
Again, we get context here with the "traditional children's holiday" mention. Next:
Surgeon General Tom Izzo took a stance against alcohol companies' efforts to target Halloween as their latest marketing opportunity.
Straight and to the point, right? Those are juts a few of some really good ones.
Speech -- And Some Bad News
There were two fatals this time. Both fall under the "avoidable" category.
Two people had misspellings inside of a quote that changed the meaning of the quote. One said kids were "robed" when what was meant was that kids were "robbed." And the other said Halloween and "hobs" do not mix, when "hops" was meant.
BTW, I had no idea before now, but "hob" is an actual word. It's a noun, meaning several things:
1. A shelf or projection at the back or the inside off a fireplace, used for keeping things warm.
2. A tool used for cutting the teeth of machine parts, as of a gearwheel
3. A hobgoblin, sprite or elf
Seriously. Page 615 of The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition.
Every day is a learning experience, I guess.
Please learn to carefully double-check your work, folks.
Two people had misspellings inside of a quote that changed the meaning of the quote. One said kids were "robed" when what was meant was that kids were "robbed." And the other said Halloween and "hobs" do not mix, when "hops" was meant.
BTW, I had no idea before now, but "hob" is an actual word. It's a noun, meaning several things:
1. A shelf or projection at the back or the inside off a fireplace, used for keeping things warm.
2. A tool used for cutting the teeth of machine parts, as of a gearwheel
3. A hobgoblin, sprite or elf
Seriously. Page 615 of The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition.
Every day is a learning experience, I guess.
Please learn to carefully double-check your work, folks.
Speech -- Writing With (AP) Style
Is it Detroit, Michigan, or just Detroit?
It's the latter. Under "Detroit":
The city in Michigan stands alone in datelines.
And under "cities and towns":
See datelines for guidelines on when they should be followed by a state or country name.
There ya go.
BTW, how many of you are unclear on what is a dateline?
It's the latter. Under "Detroit":
The city in Michigan stands alone in datelines.
And under "cities and towns":
See datelines for guidelines on when they should be followed by a state or country name.
There ya go.
BTW, how many of you are unclear on what is a dateline?
Speech -- Better Word Order . . .
. . . equals shorter grafs! For instance, you can rearrange this . . .
In a speech made Sunday night made by the surgeon general, alcohol has been recognized as the nation's number one drug problem among youth, and the alcohol industry is taking advantage.
. . . to this . . .
In a speech Sunday night, the surgeon general recognized alcohol as the nation's number one drug problem among youth, and the alcohol industry is taking advantage.
In "made by the surgeon general, alcohol has been recognized," I dropped the empty "made" and then rearranged "surgeon general," "alcohol" and "recognized" while cutting the then-unnecessary "made by" and "has been."
See how this streamlines things?
Here's a simpler example:
. . . according to the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service, Tom Izzo.
Why not just reorder it to say:
. . . according to U.S. Public Health Service Surgeon General Tom Izzo.
. . . and drop the "of the"?
In a speech made Sunday night made by the surgeon general, alcohol has been recognized as the nation's number one drug problem among youth, and the alcohol industry is taking advantage.
. . . to this . . .
In a speech Sunday night, the surgeon general recognized alcohol as the nation's number one drug problem among youth, and the alcohol industry is taking advantage.
In "made by the surgeon general, alcohol has been recognized," I dropped the empty "made" and then rearranged "surgeon general," "alcohol" and "recognized" while cutting the then-unnecessary "made by" and "has been."
See how this streamlines things?
Here's a simpler example:
. . . according to the Surgeon General of the U.S. Public Health Service, Tom Izzo.
Why not just reorder it to say:
. . . according to U.S. Public Health Service Surgeon General Tom Izzo.
. . . and drop the "of the"?
Speech -- How Did You Know . . .
. . . this?
According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 4.6 million teenagers have a drinking problem.
This is kind of a trick question. You DON'T know this because the NIAAA told you, or because you read their report. You know it because Izzo cited the report, right?
So, correct attribution would be something like this:
Izzo said 4.6 million teenagers have a drinking problem, citing National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism figures.
According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, 4.6 million teenagers have a drinking problem.
This is kind of a trick question. You DON'T know this because the NIAAA told you, or because you read their report. You know it because Izzo cited the report, right?
So, correct attribution would be something like this:
Izzo said 4.6 million teenagers have a drinking problem, citing National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism figures.
Speech -- Good Quote!
This one was:
"Let us not make this year, the year they robbed the kids of Halloween," Izzo said. "For their sake and our own, let us keep Halloween sane, safe -- and sober."
Telling quote. It really got to the point of what many of you hooked your stories upon.
Then why did so many of you use it late in your stories?
The better a quote and the more it directly supports your central premise of key premises of your story, the more prominent and higher up that quote should be.
"Let us not make this year, the year they robbed the kids of Halloween," Izzo said. "For their sake and our own, let us keep Halloween sane, safe -- and sober."
Telling quote. It really got to the point of what many of you hooked your stories upon.
Then why did so many of you use it late in your stories?
The better a quote and the more it directly supports your central premise of key premises of your story, the more prominent and higher up that quote should be.
Speech -- Is This Fair?
This was one of your transitions:
Izzo's anger and frustrations with the alcohol industry was apparent throughout his speech.
It was closely followed with these quotes:
"The availability of alcohol and its acceptance, even glamorization, in our society are factors," he said. "Trick or treat. This year the alcohol industry has given new meaning to those innocent words of childhood."
"They (the alcohol industry) are serving up now treats -- and new tricks."
"The alcohol industry and its hired guns, the advertising agencies, know these facts," he said. (They have) chosen to be part of the problem, it is up to you to be part of the solution."
What do you think?
Izzo's anger and frustrations with the alcohol industry was apparent throughout his speech.
It was closely followed with these quotes:
"The availability of alcohol and its acceptance, even glamorization, in our society are factors," he said. "Trick or treat. This year the alcohol industry has given new meaning to those innocent words of childhood."
"They (the alcohol industry) are serving up now treats -- and new tricks."
"The alcohol industry and its hired guns, the advertising agencies, know these facts," he said. (They have) chosen to be part of the problem, it is up to you to be part of the solution."
What do you think?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Out Of Class Story #1 -- Bad Newz
Any fatals are too many fatals when it comes to out of class stories. Those assignments are just too big a part of your final grade for you to make a mistake.
I'm sorry to say TWO people fataled the first out of class story. One was a time fatal -- it was not turned in before or during the last class. And in the other, the person had two misspellings within a quote that changed the meaning of the words.
And yes, these were words that, when misspelled, created different but correctly-spelled words: sad became said, and lose became loose.
The only good news is that a fatal on this out of class story is salvageable. Fix the fatals -- in the case of the time fatal, that means simply turning in the work by the next due date; and in the case of the spelling fatals, that means simply correcting the spellings -- and the fatal will become only one-third of your assignment grade, with your rewrite grade being two-thirds.
Yes, getting a zero on one-third of your grade will mean you'll probably have a lower overall grade than you'd like, but a zero on one-third of your grade is still a helluva lot better than a zero on three-third of your grade.
Two more things to remember here: One, DO NOT INSERT A FATAL IN YOUR REWRITE THAT WAS NOT IN YOUR ORIGINAL STORY. For these two folks, that would be a killer. Make sure what you have is fact-checked!
Second, you will NOT have rewrite opportunities on the third and fourth out of class stories. Any fatal in those stories won't be fixable.
So let's be careful out there, okay?
I'm sorry to say TWO people fataled the first out of class story. One was a time fatal -- it was not turned in before or during the last class. And in the other, the person had two misspellings within a quote that changed the meaning of the words.
And yes, these were words that, when misspelled, created different but correctly-spelled words: sad became said, and lose became loose.
The only good news is that a fatal on this out of class story is salvageable. Fix the fatals -- in the case of the time fatal, that means simply turning in the work by the next due date; and in the case of the spelling fatals, that means simply correcting the spellings -- and the fatal will become only one-third of your assignment grade, with your rewrite grade being two-thirds.
Yes, getting a zero on one-third of your grade will mean you'll probably have a lower overall grade than you'd like, but a zero on one-third of your grade is still a helluva lot better than a zero on three-third of your grade.
Two more things to remember here: One, DO NOT INSERT A FATAL IN YOUR REWRITE THAT WAS NOT IN YOUR ORIGINAL STORY. For these two folks, that would be a killer. Make sure what you have is fact-checked!
Second, you will NOT have rewrite opportunities on the third and fourth out of class stories. Any fatal in those stories won't be fixable.
So let's be careful out there, okay?
Out Of Class Story #1 -- Neutral Experts
I won't get into the out of class stories too much, other than to say most of you did a decent job for the first time out and that I think you're well-positioned to use this as a springboard to do even better on your next out of class story.
One thing I will get into in a bit of detail is the concept of neutral experts.
Neutral experts are people who have a great deal of knowledge and/or expertise regarding the subject you're wring about, but importantly they don't have an interest in the outcome. It's someone who can offer analysis that helps readers decide which side of an issue is more credible. In a one-sided story, it helps readers evaluate whether the people you're writing about are on the up and up.
Think of it in terms of a game: you normally have one side and the other side, right? How you view the game depends on which side you're on. Unless you have a referee, that is. A neutral expert is sort of a referee, helping point on when one side is telling the truth and the other side is stretching it a bit -- or a lot.
Most news stories at least attempt to include at least one neutral expert. And almost all of your stories would have benefited from having a neutral expert included.
One person actually did find a neutral expert for their report. The story was about a Pennsylvania college which blocked students and faculty from using Facebook for a week, as part of a social science experiment.
The story cited officials from the school, of course. But the story also sought comment from an MSU prof who researches social media in general but who has nothing to do with the Pennsylvania project. That prof could expertly evaluate the experiment without any obvious bias like an official at the Pennsylvania school could be perceived as having (after all, that official wouldn't want his school to look bad, right?).
You can find a neutral expert about almost anything, no matter how obscure. Let's look at this example: during the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, a lot was made about how the Obamas would fist-bump each other. The New York Times Sunday Magazine even did a story about it.
Here's how the story started:
Is this the end of high-five?
On the night in June that Barack Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, he and his wife, Michelle, exchanged what was variously described as a “closed-fist high five,” a “fist pound,” a “knuckle buckle” and a “fist jab.” Jonathan Tilove in The New Orleans Times-Picayune called the gesture “the dap heard ’round the world,” which he felt encapsulated “the new cultural trajectory of American politics.”
Believe it or not, they found an expert on fist-bumping. And that expert is right here. Let's continue the story:
Prof. Geneva Smitherman, director of African-American language study at Michigan State University, says: “Pound is when knuckles touch in a horizontal position. That’s the gesture that Michelle and Barack used. Dap is when the knuckles touch in a vertical position. Both gestures can be used as a greeting, to signal respect, agreement, bonding.”
Like many other schools, MSU -- in hopes of getting free publicity -- even makes it easy to find experts. The MSU News Office's Web site has an experts list, which you can link to here: http://news.msu.edu/experts/Results/?
Just looking at the first page, these are just some of the topics for which MSU can find you a neutral expert: wind power, renewable energy, water preservation, breast cancer, breast cancer education, medical education, microfinance, filmmaking, documentary production, sensors and nano-bisensor devices for biodefense, health diagnostics and theraputics, child welfare, biblical references and history, Samartian population, meteorology and climatology, Isreali-Palestinian conflict, Israeli politics, society and culture, international relations, U.S. foreign policy, school funding, school choice, school district building projects, the effects of mass communications, health communications, communications campaigns, international relations, the Middle East, Muslim issues, the early formation of galaxies, tax and expenditure policies, state and local public finance, poverty and income distribution, campus sustainability, Internet governance, new wireless technologies, telecommunications regulation and policy, bone and tissue engineering, labor markets, chaos theory, alternative dispute resolution, primitive stars, galaxy formation, labor unions and collective bargaining, international and domestic labor policy, work and family policy, flexible scheduling policy, tropical diseases, malaria, AIDS/HIV . . .
. . . and those are just a FEW of the subject areas!
You can also search by typing in a topic here: http://news.msu.edu/experts/
I took some of your general topics and looked for experts. Like Google, sometimes you have to try the same general term in different ways (like if you're searching for an expert in campus safety, you try that term, then campus, then safety, then police, and so on).
Under "campus living" I found one expert. For "transportation" I found two. There were three each for "housing" and "discrimination" and "elections." I found four each for "police" and "campus" and "drug." For "safety" I found 14! And "health" produced 35!
And you can filter by these general topic areas: agruculture and environment; arts and humanities; athletics; board and administration; business, economy, law and communications; education; family and social issues; health, medicine and veterinary medicine; international; science and technology; staff and faculty; students and campus life; tuition, costs and enrollment.
Plus, there's always Google, right? And other schools as well. And think tanks. And private research institutions.
Wherever you find a good one, it's critical that you do. Journalism isn't about just getting both sides of the story. Getting one side and the other side and nothing else is just enabling a fight.
We're about trying to arrive at a verifiable version of the truth based on facts and checking out what people have to say, right? That's the role a neutral expert helps accomplish.
To paraphrase legendary baseball announcer and willful drunk Harry Caray -- and this might be the only smart thing he ever said in his life, God rest his soul -- there are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.
We need to get more than two out of three. We need all of 'em.
Go find some neutral experts!
One thing I will get into in a bit of detail is the concept of neutral experts.
Neutral experts are people who have a great deal of knowledge and/or expertise regarding the subject you're wring about, but importantly they don't have an interest in the outcome. It's someone who can offer analysis that helps readers decide which side of an issue is more credible. In a one-sided story, it helps readers evaluate whether the people you're writing about are on the up and up.
Think of it in terms of a game: you normally have one side and the other side, right? How you view the game depends on which side you're on. Unless you have a referee, that is. A neutral expert is sort of a referee, helping point on when one side is telling the truth and the other side is stretching it a bit -- or a lot.
Most news stories at least attempt to include at least one neutral expert. And almost all of your stories would have benefited from having a neutral expert included.
One person actually did find a neutral expert for their report. The story was about a Pennsylvania college which blocked students and faculty from using Facebook for a week, as part of a social science experiment.
The story cited officials from the school, of course. But the story also sought comment from an MSU prof who researches social media in general but who has nothing to do with the Pennsylvania project. That prof could expertly evaluate the experiment without any obvious bias like an official at the Pennsylvania school could be perceived as having (after all, that official wouldn't want his school to look bad, right?).
You can find a neutral expert about almost anything, no matter how obscure. Let's look at this example: during the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, a lot was made about how the Obamas would fist-bump each other. The New York Times Sunday Magazine even did a story about it.
Here's how the story started:
Is this the end of high-five?
On the night in June that Barack Obama clinched the Democratic nomination, he and his wife, Michelle, exchanged what was variously described as a “closed-fist high five,” a “fist pound,” a “knuckle buckle” and a “fist jab.” Jonathan Tilove in The New Orleans Times-Picayune called the gesture “the dap heard ’round the world,” which he felt encapsulated “the new cultural trajectory of American politics.”
Believe it or not, they found an expert on fist-bumping. And that expert is right here. Let's continue the story:
Prof. Geneva Smitherman, director of African-American language study at Michigan State University, says: “Pound is when knuckles touch in a horizontal position. That’s the gesture that Michelle and Barack used. Dap is when the knuckles touch in a vertical position. Both gestures can be used as a greeting, to signal respect, agreement, bonding.”
Dap started among black soldiers during the Vietnam War; to give “some dap” (not usually “a” dap) means “to offer kudos, congratulations”; Prof. James Peterson of Bucknell, a hip-hop historian, says he thinks it is rooted in dapper, “neat, fashionably smart.” Pound came out of hip-hop in the late 1980s. Fist bump came later: a 1996 note in the Sports Network wire service reported that Eddie Murray of the Baltimore Orioles was accepting congratulations from baseball teammates with “high-fives, handshakes or fist bumps.” Peterson says the new phrase robs the gesture of its cultural significance, which includes the Obamas’ “quiet but pronounced in-group affiliation with all of black America.”
Hand signals have a checkered history in politics, from Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s V-for-victory sign to the famed photo of Gov. Nelson Rockefeller “giving the finger” to hecklers to the clenched-fist salute of “black power” to Lyndon Johnson’s fondness for “pressing the flesh.”
When Michelle Obama visited Barbara Walters on “The View” on ABC, the candidate’s wife sought to soften her image with “I have to be greeted properly. Fist bump, please. It is now my signature bump. . . . I got it from the young staff. That’s the new high-five.”
Colleges are notorious for being loaded with neutral experts (think of all your profs doing research, and all the TA's working on their thesis papers!) So really, there's no excuse for you NOT to find a neutral expert, especially here or at other schools.Like many other schools, MSU -- in hopes of getting free publicity -- even makes it easy to find experts. The MSU News Office's Web site has an experts list, which you can link to here: http://news.msu.edu/experts/Results/?
Just looking at the first page, these are just some of the topics for which MSU can find you a neutral expert: wind power, renewable energy, water preservation, breast cancer, breast cancer education, medical education, microfinance, filmmaking, documentary production, sensors and nano-bisensor devices for biodefense, health diagnostics and theraputics, child welfare, biblical references and history, Samartian population, meteorology and climatology, Isreali-Palestinian conflict, Israeli politics, society and culture, international relations, U.S. foreign policy, school funding, school choice, school district building projects, the effects of mass communications, health communications, communications campaigns, international relations, the Middle East, Muslim issues, the early formation of galaxies, tax and expenditure policies, state and local public finance, poverty and income distribution, campus sustainability, Internet governance, new wireless technologies, telecommunications regulation and policy, bone and tissue engineering, labor markets, chaos theory, alternative dispute resolution, primitive stars, galaxy formation, labor unions and collective bargaining, international and domestic labor policy, work and family policy, flexible scheduling policy, tropical diseases, malaria, AIDS/HIV . . .
. . . and those are just a FEW of the subject areas!
You can also search by typing in a topic here: http://news.msu.edu/experts/
I took some of your general topics and looked for experts. Like Google, sometimes you have to try the same general term in different ways (like if you're searching for an expert in campus safety, you try that term, then campus, then safety, then police, and so on).
Under "campus living" I found one expert. For "transportation" I found two. There were three each for "housing" and "discrimination" and "elections." I found four each for "police" and "campus" and "drug." For "safety" I found 14! And "health" produced 35!
And you can filter by these general topic areas: agruculture and environment; arts and humanities; athletics; board and administration; business, economy, law and communications; education; family and social issues; health, medicine and veterinary medicine; international; science and technology; staff and faculty; students and campus life; tuition, costs and enrollment.
Plus, there's always Google, right? And other schools as well. And think tanks. And private research institutions.
Wherever you find a good one, it's critical that you do. Journalism isn't about just getting both sides of the story. Getting one side and the other side and nothing else is just enabling a fight.
We're about trying to arrive at a verifiable version of the truth based on facts and checking out what people have to say, right? That's the role a neutral expert helps accomplish.
To paraphrase legendary baseball announcer and willful drunk Harry Caray -- and this might be the only smart thing he ever said in his life, God rest his soul -- there are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.
We need to get more than two out of three. We need all of 'em.
Go find some neutral experts!
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Murder -- Too Many Fatals
Yes, we had some more. Four folks fataled this exercise. For the semester so far, seven of the 11 people in this class have fataled. I'm not happy about that for many reasons.
But my feelings don't matter here; learning from these mistakes is Let's go over what went wrong:
>>> You offered the wrong time element.
One story reported the robbery took place last night. Another reported it was this morning. In fact, it was yesterday morning.
>>> You misspelled the name of a central fact: the location.
You spelled North Pointe Inn, when in fact it was North Point Inn.
I've been giving some latitude to misspellings, as long as those misspelling do not involve changing a quote or one of the five W's in a story. This one regarded where, a central fact.
>>> You incorrectly quoted your sources.
One person quoted Cortez as saying "but I locked it." In fact, she said "but I'd locked it."
Another person quoted Cortez as saying Blohm has "another in his had," when in fact she said "another on one hand."
And Cortez was also quoted as saying she heard someone say, "Get the money out of here," when in fact the person said "Get that money out of here."
Additionally, some of you almost fataled by firmly asserting there WERE two suspects. You don't know that for sure; you have reason to believe there MAY have been a second suspect, but your witness could only absolutely confirm one.
We say NOT to assume, right? Well, don't. You can say there was at least one suspect or that there may have been a second suspect, but to go beyond that -- that is, what you know for sure -- is to assume.
Maybe if I were in a worse mood I would have put those down as fatals. Please, folks, don't have your grade rest on whether I'm feeling generous or not. Instead, guarantee an acceptable grade by committing to the fundamentals of vetting your work.
Check EVERY spelling, EVERY line, EVERY date, EVERY statistic, EVERY quote and EVERY fact for accuracy once you finish writing your story, and before you turn in your report.
Please, folks. You're better than this.
But my feelings don't matter here; learning from these mistakes is Let's go over what went wrong:
>>> You offered the wrong time element.
One story reported the robbery took place last night. Another reported it was this morning. In fact, it was yesterday morning.
>>> You misspelled the name of a central fact: the location.
You spelled North Pointe Inn, when in fact it was North Point Inn.
I've been giving some latitude to misspellings, as long as those misspelling do not involve changing a quote or one of the five W's in a story. This one regarded where, a central fact.
>>> You incorrectly quoted your sources.
One person quoted Cortez as saying "but I locked it." In fact, she said "but I'd locked it."
Another person quoted Cortez as saying Blohm has "another in his had," when in fact she said "another on one hand."
And Cortez was also quoted as saying she heard someone say, "Get the money out of here," when in fact the person said "Get that money out of here."
Additionally, some of you almost fataled by firmly asserting there WERE two suspects. You don't know that for sure; you have reason to believe there MAY have been a second suspect, but your witness could only absolutely confirm one.
We say NOT to assume, right? Well, don't. You can say there was at least one suspect or that there may have been a second suspect, but to go beyond that -- that is, what you know for sure -- is to assume.
Maybe if I were in a worse mood I would have put those down as fatals. Please, folks, don't have your grade rest on whether I'm feeling generous or not. Instead, guarantee an acceptable grade by committing to the fundamentals of vetting your work.
Check EVERY spelling, EVERY line, EVERY date, EVERY statistic, EVERY quote and EVERY fact for accuracy once you finish writing your story, and before you turn in your report.
Please, folks. You're better than this.
Murder -- Nuts!
Happy to see lots of good nut grafs in this exercise. You filled the hole between the lede summarizing the story, and the body of the story offering a chronological telling of how events unfolded.
What a nut graf offered in those situations is more detail to support your lede. And that in and of itself allowed for a less jarring transition from a brief and general lede to a timeline telling.
Here's a good sequence of lede-nut graf-chronology:
A robbery at the North Point Inn restaurant in Okemos yesterday resulted in the death of one employee while another employee managed to stay safe by locking herself in her office.
Cook Kevin Blohm was found dead with large knife wounds in his chest and hand after police came to the scene, according to bookkeeper Nina Cortez.
Cortez said the robbery too place shortly after 9 a.m., when she arrived at the restaurant to start counting revenue from the previous day.
Imagine if the nut graf was missing here. You start hearing Taylor's story before you have enough of a summation to know what she is going to detail.
Nut grafs allow you to offer that extra level of detail that essentially forms a mini-story atop the body of a story. In the same way a lede gives you the bare minimum you need to know about a story, the nut graf gives readers the bare minimum of background and details to make broader sense of the lede.
Again, you need to forget about classic English composition where the ending is at the end of the story. Here, the ending is at the start. Be sure to have a complete enough ending before people get into the meat of the story.
Here's another good lede-nut-chronology sequence:
A local restaurant cook was stabbed t death yesterday morning when an unidentified male and a possible accomplice robbed the North Point Inn in Okemos, according to the restaurant's bookkeeper.
Kevin Blohm, one of the cooks at the restaurant, was found dead on the floor in the reception area of the restaurant by the Okemos Police Department and and the restaurant's bookkeeper, Nina Cortez. Blohm had a large knife wound in his chest and another on his hand.
At approximately 9 a.m. Cortez was sitting in her office going through receipts and cash from the previous evening when a man walked around the corner holding a knife, she said.
What a nut graf offered in those situations is more detail to support your lede. And that in and of itself allowed for a less jarring transition from a brief and general lede to a timeline telling.
Here's a good sequence of lede-nut graf-chronology:
A robbery at the North Point Inn restaurant in Okemos yesterday resulted in the death of one employee while another employee managed to stay safe by locking herself in her office.
Cook Kevin Blohm was found dead with large knife wounds in his chest and hand after police came to the scene, according to bookkeeper Nina Cortez.
Cortez said the robbery too place shortly after 9 a.m., when she arrived at the restaurant to start counting revenue from the previous day.
Imagine if the nut graf was missing here. You start hearing Taylor's story before you have enough of a summation to know what she is going to detail.
Nut grafs allow you to offer that extra level of detail that essentially forms a mini-story atop the body of a story. In the same way a lede gives you the bare minimum you need to know about a story, the nut graf gives readers the bare minimum of background and details to make broader sense of the lede.
Again, you need to forget about classic English composition where the ending is at the end of the story. Here, the ending is at the start. Be sure to have a complete enough ending before people get into the meat of the story.
Here's another good lede-nut-chronology sequence:
A local restaurant cook was stabbed t death yesterday morning when an unidentified male and a possible accomplice robbed the North Point Inn in Okemos, according to the restaurant's bookkeeper.
Kevin Blohm, one of the cooks at the restaurant, was found dead on the floor in the reception area of the restaurant by the Okemos Police Department and and the restaurant's bookkeeper, Nina Cortez. Blohm had a large knife wound in his chest and another on his hand.
At approximately 9 a.m. Cortez was sitting in her office going through receipts and cash from the previous evening when a man walked around the corner holding a knife, she said.
Murder -- Say Something!
This was one of your transitions:
Cortez, a bookkeeper at the Okemos inn for seven years, recalls her last interaction with her victim, Kevin Blohm.
The graf tells me the key point here is that she spoke. But that's not the news; the news is what she said, right?
Think back to the football story situation we often talked about at the start of this semester. The news from a football game isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game; who won or lost, and why.
So instead of saying he recalled the last interaction, I'd write what she said that last interaction was; e.g., Cortez said she and Blohm talked about what happened at the restaurant the previous night before she asked him to make her some coffee.
See the difference? You tell your readers something now.
Cortez, a bookkeeper at the Okemos inn for seven years, recalls her last interaction with her victim, Kevin Blohm.
The graf tells me the key point here is that she spoke. But that's not the news; the news is what she said, right?
Think back to the football story situation we often talked about at the start of this semester. The news from a football game isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game; who won or lost, and why.
So instead of saying he recalled the last interaction, I'd write what she said that last interaction was; e.g., Cortez said she and Blohm talked about what happened at the restaurant the previous night before she asked him to make her some coffee.
See the difference? You tell your readers something now.
Murder -- Too Flippant . . .
. . . for a murder lede?
Forget million-dollar bank heists as seen in movies. One man was killed in Okemos yesterday by a robber who escaped with $130 from the North Point Inn.
What do you think?
Forget million-dollar bank heists as seen in movies. One man was killed in Okemos yesterday by a robber who escaped with $130 from the North Point Inn.
What do you think?
Murder -- Sufficient Description
This was one of your descriptions of the suspect:
. . . "He was about 5 feet 10 inches, maybe 6 feet tall, in his early 20s, medium build."
Is that sufficient? No. It's too vague to be very useful to readers.
Think about it. How many people in the world fit that description? It's so many that you are not narrowing down suspect possibilities in the mind of the public; you actually are making a whole lot of innocent people look guilty!
It's best to use suspect descriptions when you are so specific that it can narrow down the suspect pool, like here:
The robber was between 5 foot 10 inches and 6 feet tall, in his early 20s, medium build, wearing a floral scarf over his face, blue jeans, a blue plaid button-up shirt and blue tennis shoes, and may have had an accomplice, according to Cortez.
This ID is far more useful. Besides telling readers the killer is color-blind, it's a distinctive description that -- combined with the time and place -- helps readers zero in on a single suspect, or a limited suspect pool.
. . . "He was about 5 feet 10 inches, maybe 6 feet tall, in his early 20s, medium build."
Is that sufficient? No. It's too vague to be very useful to readers.
Think about it. How many people in the world fit that description? It's so many that you are not narrowing down suspect possibilities in the mind of the public; you actually are making a whole lot of innocent people look guilty!
It's best to use suspect descriptions when you are so specific that it can narrow down the suspect pool, like here:
The robber was between 5 foot 10 inches and 6 feet tall, in his early 20s, medium build, wearing a floral scarf over his face, blue jeans, a blue plaid button-up shirt and blue tennis shoes, and may have had an accomplice, according to Cortez.
This ID is far more useful. Besides telling readers the killer is color-blind, it's a distinctive description that -- combined with the time and place -- helps readers zero in on a single suspect, or a limited suspect pool.
Murder -- Did You Need Quotes . . .
. . . here?
The man can be described as "5'10", maybe 6'0" tall, early 20s, medium build," according to Cortez.
There really isn't any difference between quoting this or paraphrasing this. As a quote, it really doesn't add a more human tone or voice than it would as a paraphrase.
If a quote is dull, technical or lacks a human-sounding voice, you're probably better off just paraphrasing the person.
The man can be described as "5'10", maybe 6'0" tall, early 20s, medium build," according to Cortez.
There really isn't any difference between quoting this or paraphrasing this. As a quote, it really doesn't add a more human tone or voice than it would as a paraphrase.
If a quote is dull, technical or lacks a human-sounding voice, you're probably better off just paraphrasing the person.
Murder -- Spell Check Didn't Help . . .
. . . when you wrote this (emphasis added) . . .
. . . or whether he just got in THERE way.
. . . or this . . .
. . . he had a scarf on the LOVER part, cowboy style.
(Uh, I'm pretty sure that gets an "R" movie rating right there)
Again, be sure you're actually reading your finished work, and not just taking spell check's word for it.
. . . or whether he just got in THERE way.
. . . or this . . .
. . . he had a scarf on the LOVER part, cowboy style.
(Uh, I'm pretty sure that gets an "R" movie rating right there)
Again, be sure you're actually reading your finished work, and not just taking spell check's word for it.
Murder -- Write With (AP) Style
Is it 5-feet-10-inch or 5'10 or five foot ten or 5 feet 10 inches?
It's the first on or the last one. AP Style, under "dimensions":
Use figures and spell out inches, feet, yards, ect, to indicate depth, height, length and width. Hyphenate adjectival forms before nouns.
EXAMPLES: He is 5 feet 6 inches tall, the 5-foot-6-inch man, the 5-foot man, the basketball team signed a 7-footer.
Use an apostrophe to indicate feet and quote marks to indicate inches (5'6") only in very technical contexts.
Moving on, in referring to the day of the week, should you have said yesterday or Tuesday (or Wednesday, depending on which day you filed your assignment)?
In general, it's the latter. Sayeth AP Style under "time element":
Use the days of the week, not today or tonight in print copy. Use the month and a figure where appropriate.
It's the first on or the last one. AP Style, under "dimensions":
Use figures and spell out inches, feet, yards, ect, to indicate depth, height, length and width. Hyphenate adjectival forms before nouns.
EXAMPLES: He is 5 feet 6 inches tall, the 5-foot-6-inch man, the 5-foot man, the basketball team signed a 7-footer.
Use an apostrophe to indicate feet and quote marks to indicate inches (5'6") only in very technical contexts.
Moving on, in referring to the day of the week, should you have said yesterday or Tuesday (or Wednesday, depending on which day you filed your assignment)?
In general, it's the latter. Sayeth AP Style under "time element":
Use the days of the week, not today or tonight in print copy. Use the month and a figure where appropriate.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Bicyclists -- Ledes
Every good story starts with a good lede.
A lede that passes the peanut Barrel test. A lede that makes things clear for readers and intrugues them, pulling them into the greater story. A lede that sums up what is the latest and most important. A lede that looks at ultimate outcome and context.
This lede accomplished many of those basic and important goals:
Holt resident Marsha Taylor was in the hospital for four months after a bicycling accident that could have paralyzed her. She was released two days ago.
Still, that lede leaves something to be desired. Yes, the accident was the most serious consequence here. But four months ago as a long time ago. That has to be very old news.
Given the disparity in time, I think it would have been wise to emphasize the timelier event, which of course was still directly connected to the accident since it was the reason she was in the hospital in the first place. This lede did that:
A local bicyclist was released from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after spending four months there while recovering from injuries after being hit by a car while biking in Holt.
That's a good lede. But I found a better lede, one that highlighted something that made this story a bit more interesting: the fact that wrecking her body hasn't scared her off from riding.
A bike-riding accident that would have kept most cyclists off their bikes for good is not stopping Holt resident Marsha Taylor from getting back on the horse.
I'm not sure I would have used a cliche like "on the horse," but it certainly hits a Peanut Barrel point. To-wit:
"Hey Omar, what story did you work on today?"
"I wrote about this woman who just got outta the hospital after getting all busted up riding her bike. And even though she got all messed up, she still wants to ride!"
That's one thing that makes this story a little bit different from any other accident story, right?
This lede disregarded the time element by putting the latest happening in a delayed lede role, and turned the accident into a mini-anecdote, like this:
Approximately two week after biking across the U.S. with no complications, 37-year-old Marsha Taylor arrived back in Holt only to become the victim of a severe biking accident.
She was released just two days ago after spending four months recovering in Mueller Memorial Hospital.
The opening of this lede obviously isn't pegged to the time element, like the first lede we looked at. It essentially turns the lede into a mini-anecdote that's a bit more personalized.
But it differs from the first lede in a very significant regard: it is trying to set context and tell a bigger story that goes straight to the Peanut Barrel rule: that somebody rode a bike across the country without a scratch, and then broke her body right by her home.
You know, it considers an angle that makes this story unique. It's ironic. It's contextual. It's a good lede, and great vision in terms of identifying what made a story truly different from the usual and expected.
A lede that passes the peanut Barrel test. A lede that makes things clear for readers and intrugues them, pulling them into the greater story. A lede that sums up what is the latest and most important. A lede that looks at ultimate outcome and context.
This lede accomplished many of those basic and important goals:
Holt resident Marsha Taylor was in the hospital for four months after a bicycling accident that could have paralyzed her. She was released two days ago.
Still, that lede leaves something to be desired. Yes, the accident was the most serious consequence here. But four months ago as a long time ago. That has to be very old news.
Given the disparity in time, I think it would have been wise to emphasize the timelier event, which of course was still directly connected to the accident since it was the reason she was in the hospital in the first place. This lede did that:
A local bicyclist was released from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after spending four months there while recovering from injuries after being hit by a car while biking in Holt.
That's a good lede. But I found a better lede, one that highlighted something that made this story a bit more interesting: the fact that wrecking her body hasn't scared her off from riding.
A bike-riding accident that would have kept most cyclists off their bikes for good is not stopping Holt resident Marsha Taylor from getting back on the horse.
I'm not sure I would have used a cliche like "on the horse," but it certainly hits a Peanut Barrel point. To-wit:
"Hey Omar, what story did you work on today?"
"I wrote about this woman who just got outta the hospital after getting all busted up riding her bike. And even though she got all messed up, she still wants to ride!"
That's one thing that makes this story a little bit different from any other accident story, right?
This lede disregarded the time element by putting the latest happening in a delayed lede role, and turned the accident into a mini-anecdote, like this:
Approximately two week after biking across the U.S. with no complications, 37-year-old Marsha Taylor arrived back in Holt only to become the victim of a severe biking accident.
She was released just two days ago after spending four months recovering in Mueller Memorial Hospital.
The opening of this lede obviously isn't pegged to the time element, like the first lede we looked at. It essentially turns the lede into a mini-anecdote that's a bit more personalized.
But it differs from the first lede in a very significant regard: it is trying to set context and tell a bigger story that goes straight to the Peanut Barrel rule: that somebody rode a bike across the country without a scratch, and then broke her body right by her home.
You know, it considers an angle that makes this story unique. It's ironic. It's contextual. It's a good lede, and great vision in terms of identifying what made a story truly different from the usual and expected.
Bicyclists -- Quotes
Quotes are a great way to highlight a point, illustrate a fact and personalize a calculated telling.
For those of you who hooked the story on the angle that Taylor can't wait to write again, you had a golden quote to use:
"I still want to ride. If I could, I'd be out there right now, but it's hard to ride a bike when you have to use crutches," Taylor said.
Great quote, right? Looking at the get-back-on-that-horse lede, it would be a perfect quote to support and confirm the lede for readers, right? Sums up your main point nicely, does it not?
Then why do I find it in the 13th graf of that story?
That's not the worst of it. Another one of you who had a similar lede saved that quote for the last graf of their story.
I think it would have been better positioned as the first quote you use in the story, ideally after the lede and nut graf and before you moved into the body of the story with a chronological telling.
It's not enough to find quotes that support central points of your story. It's not even enough to use quotes that support central points of your story. You should make sure the best quotes that best support your central points are ranked within your story in a spot that recognizes the prominence.
In the same way that it's not enough to have a story that's relevant, interesting and useful and that you need to have a lede where the relevance, interest and utility shine through; it's not enough to have a story with good quotes and you need to have a story where good quotes shine through.
For those of you who hooked the story on the angle that Taylor can't wait to write again, you had a golden quote to use:
"I still want to ride. If I could, I'd be out there right now, but it's hard to ride a bike when you have to use crutches," Taylor said.
Great quote, right? Looking at the get-back-on-that-horse lede, it would be a perfect quote to support and confirm the lede for readers, right? Sums up your main point nicely, does it not?
Then why do I find it in the 13th graf of that story?
That's not the worst of it. Another one of you who had a similar lede saved that quote for the last graf of their story.
I think it would have been better positioned as the first quote you use in the story, ideally after the lede and nut graf and before you moved into the body of the story with a chronological telling.
It's not enough to find quotes that support central points of your story. It's not even enough to use quotes that support central points of your story. You should make sure the best quotes that best support your central points are ranked within your story in a spot that recognizes the prominence.
In the same way that it's not enough to have a story that's relevant, interesting and useful and that you need to have a lede where the relevance, interest and utility shine through; it's not enough to have a story with good quotes and you need to have a story where good quotes shine through.
Bicyclists -- Nuts!
Up to now, you guys have been doing pretty well with nut grafs. Not so much on this exercise, though.
Many of you were missing nut grafs, leaving a hole between the lede summarizing the story, and the body of the story offering a chronological telling of how events unfolded.
What a nut graf would have offered in those situations is more detail to support your lede. And that in and of itself would have allowed for a less jarring transition from a brief and general lede to a timeline telling.
Here's a good sequence of lede-nut graf-chronology:
A local bicycist was released from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after spending four months there while recovering from injuries after being hit by a car while biking in Holt.
Marsha Taylor, a 37-year-old Harvard University graduate and McDonald's employee of 15 years, said the accident happened soon after she finished the U.S. tour. She had been back in Holt for about two weeks when the accident occurred.
"I was riding down 72nd Street almost to Southland Boulevard when a car hit me from behind and sent me flying off my bike," Taylor said.
Imagine if the nut graf was missing here. You start hearing Taylor's story before you have enough of a summation to know what she is going to detail.
Nut grafs allow you to offer that extra level of detail that essentially forms a mini-story atop the body of a story. In the same way a lede gives you the bare minimum you need to know about a story, the nut graf gives readers the bare minimum of background and details to make broader sense of the lede.
Again, you need to forget about classic English composition where the ending is at the end of the story. Here, the ending is at the start. Be sure to have a complete enough ending before people get into the meat of the story.
Many of you were missing nut grafs, leaving a hole between the lede summarizing the story, and the body of the story offering a chronological telling of how events unfolded.
What a nut graf would have offered in those situations is more detail to support your lede. And that in and of itself would have allowed for a less jarring transition from a brief and general lede to a timeline telling.
Here's a good sequence of lede-nut graf-chronology:
A local bicycist was released from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after spending four months there while recovering from injuries after being hit by a car while biking in Holt.
Marsha Taylor, a 37-year-old Harvard University graduate and McDonald's employee of 15 years, said the accident happened soon after she finished the U.S. tour. She had been back in Holt for about two weeks when the accident occurred.
"I was riding down 72nd Street almost to Southland Boulevard when a car hit me from behind and sent me flying off my bike," Taylor said.
Imagine if the nut graf was missing here. You start hearing Taylor's story before you have enough of a summation to know what she is going to detail.
Nut grafs allow you to offer that extra level of detail that essentially forms a mini-story atop the body of a story. In the same way a lede gives you the bare minimum you need to know about a story, the nut graf gives readers the bare minimum of background and details to make broader sense of the lede.
Again, you need to forget about classic English composition where the ending is at the end of the story. Here, the ending is at the start. Be sure to have a complete enough ending before people get into the meat of the story.
Bicyclist -- Did You . . .
. . . include that the bicyclist was a manager at McDonald's? Why or why not?
One person put her job status in their lede. Was that necessary?
One person put her job status in their lede. Was that necessary?
Bicyclist -- Punctuation Points
Reminders on some basic punctuation points:
Most of the time, an attributing "he said" or "she said" should end with a period. Like this:
"One doctor said I had what they called a hangman's facture," Taylor said. "She said it was a miracle that I wasn't paralyzed."
Also, punctuation marks should go INSIDE of quotes, like this:
. . . you have to use crutches," Taylor said.
And not OUTSIDE of quotes, like this:
. . . you have to use crutches", Taylor said.
Most of the time, an attributing "he said" or "she said" should end with a period. Like this:
"One doctor said I had what they called a hangman's facture," Taylor said. "She said it was a miracle that I wasn't paralyzed."
Also, punctuation marks should go INSIDE of quotes, like this:
. . . you have to use crutches," Taylor said.
And not OUTSIDE of quotes, like this:
. . . you have to use crutches", Taylor said.
Bicyclist -- Watch Your Wordiness
There are ways to be more efficient in your use of words. For example, watch redundancies and opportunities to combine thoughts.
Let's look at this lede:
A local bike enthusiast and McDonald's manager was released from the hospital two days ago from the hospital two days ago from Mueller Memorial after being hit by a car.
"The hospital" and "Mueller Memorial" are the same thing. So why not say this:
A local bike enthusiast and McDonald's manager was released from the hospital two days ago from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after being hit by a car.
A bit more clear, right?
Also, quite often "that" is an unnecessary word. Let's look at this passage (with all references to "that" in caps):
Taylor said THAT her condition actually got worse before getting better. She said THAT she developed complications after being moved to a rehab facility and then doctors discovered THAT she had some internal injuries.
Let's take out the "thats" and see what happens:
Taylor said her condition actually got worse before getting better. She said she developed complications after being moved to a rehab facility and then doctors discovered she had some internal injuries.
Does it change the meaning whatsoever?
Let's look at this lede:
A local bike enthusiast and McDonald's manager was released from the hospital two days ago from the hospital two days ago from Mueller Memorial after being hit by a car.
"The hospital" and "Mueller Memorial" are the same thing. So why not say this:
A local bike enthusiast and McDonald's manager was released from the hospital two days ago from Mueller Memorial Hospital two days ago after being hit by a car.
A bit more clear, right?
Also, quite often "that" is an unnecessary word. Let's look at this passage (with all references to "that" in caps):
Taylor said THAT her condition actually got worse before getting better. She said THAT she developed complications after being moved to a rehab facility and then doctors discovered THAT she had some internal injuries.
Let's take out the "thats" and see what happens:
Taylor said her condition actually got worse before getting better. She said she developed complications after being moved to a rehab facility and then doctors discovered she had some internal injuries.
Does it change the meaning whatsoever?
Bicyclist -- Writing With (AP) Style
Is it 72nd St. and Southland Blvd.? Or 72nd Street and Southland Boulevard? Or Seventy-Second Street?
In this case, it was 72nd Street and Southland Boulevard. From AP Style, under "addresses":
Use the abbreviations Ave., Blvd. and St. only with a numbered address: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Spell them out and capitalize when part of a formal street name without a number: Pennsylvania Avenue. Lowercase and spell out when used alone or with more than one street name: Massachusetts and Pennsylvania avenues.
Spell out and capitalize First through Ninth when used as street names; use figures with two letters for 10th and above: 7 Fifth Ave., 100 21st St.
In this case, it was 72nd Street and Southland Boulevard. From AP Style, under "addresses":
Use the abbreviations Ave., Blvd. and St. only with a numbered address: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Spell them out and capitalize when part of a formal street name without a number: Pennsylvania Avenue. Lowercase and spell out when used alone or with more than one street name: Massachusetts and Pennsylvania avenues.
Spell out and capitalize First through Ninth when used as street names; use figures with two letters for 10th and above: 7 Fifth Ave., 100 21st St.
Bicyclist -- What is the news . . .
. . . in this lede?
Long-time bicyclist Marsha Taylor spoke this morning following her release from a four-month-long hospital stay after a bicycling accident nearly left her paralyzed.
The lede tells me that the news is that she spoke. But that's not the news; the news is what she said, right?
Think back to the football story situation we often talked about at the start of this semester. The news from a football game isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game; who won or lost, and why.
Borrowing from some of the other ledes, I'd say the news was that she said was anxious to start riding again. So a better version of this lede could be something like this:
Long-time bicyclist Marsha Taylor said she is anxious to ride again following her release from a four-month-long hospital stay after a bicycling accident nearly left her paralyzed.
Long-time bicyclist Marsha Taylor spoke this morning following her release from a four-month-long hospital stay after a bicycling accident nearly left her paralyzed.
The lede tells me that the news is that she spoke. But that's not the news; the news is what she said, right?
Think back to the football story situation we often talked about at the start of this semester. The news from a football game isn't that a game was played; it's what happened at the game; who won or lost, and why.
Borrowing from some of the other ledes, I'd say the news was that she said was anxious to start riding again. So a better version of this lede could be something like this:
Long-time bicyclist Marsha Taylor said she is anxious to ride again following her release from a four-month-long hospital stay after a bicycling accident nearly left her paralyzed.
Bicyclist -- Attribution
Most people are getting the hang of attribution; some of you are not.
It's important to attribute where you got your information throughout your story, and repeatedly if necessary.
How did you know Taylor was riding her bike down 72nd Street? You weren't there, were you? Of course not. She told you she was.
So a paragraph with that bit of info needs a "she said" somewhere.
How do you know she partook in bike tours? Again, it's because she told you. The graf containing that statement needs a "she said."
I'm going to reemphasize a pretty good rule of thumb: pretty much every paragraph should cite a source. Pretty much every fact should have a source citation nearby.
If in any single graf you are using just a single source, a single attribution somewhere in the graf is sufficient.
I know when it's a story where you interviewed just one person, it might seem weird having graf after graf all end in "she said."
But your readers don't know you spoke with just one source. And they do want to know how you know what you know.
So be transparent with your readers about how you got your information, and attribute.
It's important to attribute where you got your information throughout your story, and repeatedly if necessary.
How did you know Taylor was riding her bike down 72nd Street? You weren't there, were you? Of course not. She told you she was.
So a paragraph with that bit of info needs a "she said" somewhere.
How do you know she partook in bike tours? Again, it's because she told you. The graf containing that statement needs a "she said."
I'm going to reemphasize a pretty good rule of thumb: pretty much every paragraph should cite a source. Pretty much every fact should have a source citation nearby.
If in any single graf you are using just a single source, a single attribution somewhere in the graf is sufficient.
I know when it's a story where you interviewed just one person, it might seem weird having graf after graf all end in "she said."
But your readers don't know you spoke with just one source. And they do want to know how you know what you know.
So be transparent with your readers about how you got your information, and attribute.
Bicyclist -- More Spell Check Non-Catches
The spell check was cool with you referring to a gull bladder.
I'm pretty sure you meant gall bladder, and not the bladder of a sea-faring bird.
Spell check is an aid to - but not a substitute for -- rigorously reviewing your copy. Line by line, word by word, fact by fact.
I'm pretty sure you meant gall bladder, and not the bladder of a sea-faring bird.
Spell check is an aid to - but not a substitute for -- rigorously reviewing your copy. Line by line, word by word, fact by fact.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Out of Class Story #1 -- Tell me . . .
. . . how was it?
What surprised you?
What stumped you?
What did you discover?
What did you like about the assignment? What did you like not so much?
What will you do different next time? What will you do again?
Let's try to share good ideas and warn others about pitfalls.
What surprised you?
What stumped you?
What did you discover?
What did you like about the assignment? What did you like not so much?
What will you do different next time? What will you do again?
Let's try to share good ideas and warn others about pitfalls.
Drowning -- Red Marks
At this point in the term, you may be getting many of your papers back with lots and lots of red ink all over your work. Red pen marks where I point out things that didn't work so well and offer ideas on what you could have done better.
And that's a good thing! Red ink is good!
Seriously, I'm not trying to give you a BS pep talk. Red ink really IS good.
In journalism, we learn by doing, then reviewing, and then applying any and all lessons learned going forward. Red ink helps you do that by pointing out the good and the could-be-better. Red ink helps you identify where you need to keep working and improving. Red ink gives you feedback that is critical at this point to your development as a journalist.
So don't freak out. Red ink is good. Just make sure you are carefully reading and evaluating my critiques; learning whatever lessons you can; and applying what you learn the next time out.
And that's a good thing! Red ink is good!
Seriously, I'm not trying to give you a BS pep talk. Red ink really IS good.
In journalism, we learn by doing, then reviewing, and then applying any and all lessons learned going forward. Red ink helps you do that by pointing out the good and the could-be-better. Red ink helps you identify where you need to keep working and improving. Red ink gives you feedback that is critical at this point to your development as a journalist.
So don't freak out. Red ink is good. Just make sure you are carefully reading and evaluating my critiques; learning whatever lessons you can; and applying what you learn the next time out.
Drowning -- Peanut Barrel Rule
On Monday, I told you that this was an exercise that's usually tripped up previous 200 classes.
And this one did the same here, but not in the way I expected.
In the past, people had trouble with the concept of ledeing with the latest news and properly backgrounding the story so that readers had sufficient background info, which is defined as this: enough information with which to make sense of the latest news.
You aced that. But where many of you went off the rails was in identifying what was the latest AND biggest news. I didn't expect that.
Many of your ledes were like this one:
East Lansing police this morning released the name of the man who drowned yesterday in Nichols Lake in Lakeside Park.
. . . or like this one . . .
The name of the unidentified man who lost his life attempting to rescue a young boy from Nichols Lake Sunday has been released today by the East Lansing Police Department.
Let's lean on the Peanut Barrel rule: what are you most likely to say first? That the name of the dead rescuer was released? Or that the boy he was trying to save died today? What do you think?
I'd say the latter is clearly more impactful and newsworthy than the release of a name. The latter (a death) is clearly a more momentous happening than the former (the release of a name of someone we already know is dead and isn't a particularly well-known public figure of any sort).
So I liked this lede much better:
Edward McGorwan, a boy who was in critical condition overnight related to a drowning accident, has died this morning, according to Dr. Catrina Lowrie, a physician at the Regional Medical Center.
Of course, the best lede would try to incorporate BOTH latest happenings, while giving preference to the death over the naming. That's what this lede did:
A local boy was pronounced dead today after he was pulled out of Nichols Lake unconscious yesterday, and police released the victim's name who drowned while trying to save him.
. . . and so did this one . . .
A doctor announced this morning that Edward McGorwan, the boy rescued from Nichols Lake yesterday, is now dead. His attempted rescuer has also been identified.
One thing about that last lede: I think it would have been better if you had flipped the lede to put the new up front and the attribution second, like this:
Edward McGorwan, the boy rescued from Nichols Lake yesterday, is now dead, a doctor announced this morning. His attempted rescuer has also been identified.
See how that cuts to the chase better?
And this one did the same here, but not in the way I expected.
In the past, people had trouble with the concept of ledeing with the latest news and properly backgrounding the story so that readers had sufficient background info, which is defined as this: enough information with which to make sense of the latest news.
You aced that. But where many of you went off the rails was in identifying what was the latest AND biggest news. I didn't expect that.
Many of your ledes were like this one:
East Lansing police this morning released the name of the man who drowned yesterday in Nichols Lake in Lakeside Park.
. . . or like this one . . .
The name of the unidentified man who lost his life attempting to rescue a young boy from Nichols Lake Sunday has been released today by the East Lansing Police Department.
Let's lean on the Peanut Barrel rule: what are you most likely to say first? That the name of the dead rescuer was released? Or that the boy he was trying to save died today? What do you think?
I'd say the latter is clearly more impactful and newsworthy than the release of a name. The latter (a death) is clearly a more momentous happening than the former (the release of a name of someone we already know is dead and isn't a particularly well-known public figure of any sort).
So I liked this lede much better:
Edward McGorwan, a boy who was in critical condition overnight related to a drowning accident, has died this morning, according to Dr. Catrina Lowrie, a physician at the Regional Medical Center.
Of course, the best lede would try to incorporate BOTH latest happenings, while giving preference to the death over the naming. That's what this lede did:
A local boy was pronounced dead today after he was pulled out of Nichols Lake unconscious yesterday, and police released the victim's name who drowned while trying to save him.
. . . and so did this one . . .
A doctor announced this morning that Edward McGorwan, the boy rescued from Nichols Lake yesterday, is now dead. His attempted rescuer has also been identified.
One thing about that last lede: I think it would have been better if you had flipped the lede to put the new up front and the attribution second, like this:
Edward McGorwan, the boy rescued from Nichols Lake yesterday, is now dead, a doctor announced this morning. His attempted rescuer has also been identified.
See how that cuts to the chase better?
Drowning -- A Reminder
Some of you weren't here Monday, so you may or may not have seen this item in the blog. It's important that you read this and know this if you want to avoid fataling the rest of teh way out. Here we go:
Some of you are still penning ledes that are way too long. Ledes that are mushed together with nut grafs. Ledes that are waaaaay over the 32 words or so we're trying to maintain for now.
So, here's a new rule. It's in caps and bold-faced so it's unmistakable:
ALL LEDES FOR PRACTICE STORY AND TEST STORY EXERCISES MUST BE NO MORE THAN 32 WORDS UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!!!
ANY LEDES IN A PRACTICE STORY OR A TEST STORY THAT EXCEEDS THAT LIMIT WILL BE CONSIDERED A FATAL, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A ZERO ON THAT EXERCISE.
I'M NOT KIDDING, FOLKS!!!
I'm not doing this to be an ass. But ledes are supposed to be brief and to the point. A lede that's 40 or 50 words is neither brief nor to the point.
And a big part of journalism is decision-making; that is, sorting through endless information and prioritizing and summarizing for the reader what is most important. If I allow you to do runaway ledes, you won't develop good decision-making habits. And that will catch up with you at some point; maybe not in this class, and probably at a time when the stakes for you will be much higher.
So we're not going to let that happen. We're going to work out your bad habits and instill some good habits. And that's gonna start with a 32-word cap on ledes.
(For some of you, it's not even a question of needing to develop a lede; you already have a good lede, but it's mushed together with the nut graf and a supporting graf. We just need to make sure you know where to find the "return" key on your keyboard. Here's a good rule of thumb: if you have a lede -- or any paragraph, for that matter -- that's more than one sentence, take a look and see if it's one unit of thought or one piece of information supporting that unit of thought. If it's more than one unit of any of the above, then split it up into separate grafs.)
If anyone needs ANY help in developing ledes, let's schedule some office hours to work on it. I don't expect you to figure this out on your own, but I do expect you to identify what you're having problems with and seek the appropriate remedial help.
Some of you are still penning ledes that are way too long. Ledes that are mushed together with nut grafs. Ledes that are waaaaay over the 32 words or so we're trying to maintain for now.
So, here's a new rule. It's in caps and bold-faced so it's unmistakable:
ALL LEDES FOR PRACTICE STORY AND TEST STORY EXERCISES MUST BE NO MORE THAN 32 WORDS UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!!!
ANY LEDES IN A PRACTICE STORY OR A TEST STORY THAT EXCEEDS THAT LIMIT WILL BE CONSIDERED A FATAL, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A ZERO ON THAT EXERCISE.
I'M NOT KIDDING, FOLKS!!!
I'm not doing this to be an ass. But ledes are supposed to be brief and to the point. A lede that's 40 or 50 words is neither brief nor to the point.
And a big part of journalism is decision-making; that is, sorting through endless information and prioritizing and summarizing for the reader what is most important. If I allow you to do runaway ledes, you won't develop good decision-making habits. And that will catch up with you at some point; maybe not in this class, and probably at a time when the stakes for you will be much higher.
So we're not going to let that happen. We're going to work out your bad habits and instill some good habits. And that's gonna start with a 32-word cap on ledes.
(For some of you, it's not even a question of needing to develop a lede; you already have a good lede, but it's mushed together with the nut graf and a supporting graf. We just need to make sure you know where to find the "return" key on your keyboard. Here's a good rule of thumb: if you have a lede -- or any paragraph, for that matter -- that's more than one sentence, take a look and see if it's one unit of thought or one piece of information supporting that unit of thought. If it's more than one unit of any of the above, then split it up into separate grafs.)
If anyone needs ANY help in developing ledes, let's schedule some office hours to work on it. I don't expect you to figure this out on your own, but I do expect you to identify what you're having problems with and seek the appropriate remedial help.
Drowning -- Don't Use Euphemisms
Like here:
It was also announced that McGorwan had passed this morning, according to . . .
Use language that is clear and to the point.
The person died. Just say they died.
It was also announced that McGorwan had passed this morning, according to . . .
Use language that is clear and to the point.
The person died. Just say they died.
Drowing -- Write With (AP) Style
On second reference, is it Dr. Lowrie and Officer Linn? Or Lowrie and Linn?
AP Style, under "doctors":
Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title . . . do not continue to use of Dr. in subsequent references.
AP Style, under "military titles":
On first reference, use the appropriate title before the full name . . . in subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
On second reference of young Edward McGorwan, is it McGorwan or Edward or Edward McGorwan? Here's AP Style, under "names":
In general, use last names only on second reference.
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
In stories involving youngsters, generally refer to them by first name on second reference if they are 15 or younger and by their surname at 18 and older.
However, use news judgment and refer to children under 15 by their last name if the story is a serious one involving, for example, a major crime. With the 16- or 17-year-olds, use the surname unless it's a light-hearted story.
So, given the circumstances in this case, what is the way to go?
And is it navy, or Navy?
Look it up and tell me.
AP Style, under "doctors":
Use Dr. in first reference as a formal title . . . do not continue to use of Dr. in subsequent references.
AP Style, under "military titles":
On first reference, use the appropriate title before the full name . . . in subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
On second reference of young Edward McGorwan, is it McGorwan or Edward or Edward McGorwan? Here's AP Style, under "names":
In general, use last names only on second reference.
When it is necessary to distinguish between two people who use the same last name, as in married couples or brothers and sisters, use the first and last name.
In stories involving youngsters, generally refer to them by first name on second reference if they are 15 or younger and by their surname at 18 and older.
However, use news judgment and refer to children under 15 by their last name if the story is a serious one involving, for example, a major crime. With the 16- or 17-year-olds, use the surname unless it's a light-hearted story.
So, given the circumstances in this case, what is the way to go?
And is it navy, or Navy?
Look it up and tell me.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Robbery -- Peanut Barrel Rule
There were plenty of good ledes in the exercise you did Monday. People adhered to the 32-word lede limit we have in place right now, and you made some good decisions on how to best use the space you were alloted in creating the highest and best ledes possible.
But some were better than others. Here was an acceptable lede:
Michael Layoux shot and killed the man who had just robbed the convenience store he worked at late last night.
It gets the basics of the story correct. It's not wrong by any means. But it's missing context.
Think about the Peanut Barrel rule: would you first tell friends that someone working at a store shot someone robbing the store, and leave it at that?
No, I think you'd throw in what made this story unique and different from other robbery stories. You tried that with these two ledes here:
Michael Layoux, a clerk at the O-Mart convenience store in Haslett, made a decision against company policy. That decision may have saved his life.
. . . and . . .
During his shift late yesterday, an employee of the O-Mart convenience store in Haslett shot and killed a man attempting to rob the store, but will not be charged for his death.
These are good ledes. Really good ledes. Concise, contextual, the whole shebang. But let's put it up against the Peanut Barrel rule again: is whatever really, really made this story stand out in these ledes? Are these the best ledes you can come up with?
I think you can take it a step better. My gut tells me that what really made this story the most unique is that the clerk legally defended himself -- and lost his job for saving his own life!
This lede hit that sweet spot:
A student at Lansing Community College was fired from a convenience store in Haslett after shooting a man who was in the process of robbing the store.
Very good. But the ledes I thought were best captured ALL the dynamic elements in clear, clean language:
An attempted theft was foiled late yesterday at a Haslett convenience store when the clerk on duty shot and killed the robber in self-defense, resulting in the loss of his job.
. . . and . . .
After shooting and killing a man in self-defense, a Lansing Community College student was fired from his job after the Haslett convenience store he worked at was robbed late yesterday.
Still, I think I could top those ledes. The one point missing was the connection between saving his life and losing his job. If I decided to go straight with little color, I'd do this:
A Haslett convenience store clerk won't face charges for shooting and killing a would-be robber, but he lost his job for violating company rules of possessing handguns on the job. (And it's only 31 words!)
Or if I wanted to get a bit colorful:
The same actions that allowed Michael Layoux to save his own life also cost him his job.
. . . or . . .
Michael Layoux didn't break the law when he shot and killed a robber last night. But he did break a company rule, and that will cost him his job.
How do my ledes adhere to the Peanut Barrel rule? Which works best, and why? Your turn to critique me.
But some were better than others. Here was an acceptable lede:
Michael Layoux shot and killed the man who had just robbed the convenience store he worked at late last night.
It gets the basics of the story correct. It's not wrong by any means. But it's missing context.
Think about the Peanut Barrel rule: would you first tell friends that someone working at a store shot someone robbing the store, and leave it at that?
No, I think you'd throw in what made this story unique and different from other robbery stories. You tried that with these two ledes here:
Michael Layoux, a clerk at the O-Mart convenience store in Haslett, made a decision against company policy. That decision may have saved his life.
. . . and . . .
During his shift late yesterday, an employee of the O-Mart convenience store in Haslett shot and killed a man attempting to rob the store, but will not be charged for his death.
These are good ledes. Really good ledes. Concise, contextual, the whole shebang. But let's put it up against the Peanut Barrel rule again: is whatever really, really made this story stand out in these ledes? Are these the best ledes you can come up with?
I think you can take it a step better. My gut tells me that what really made this story the most unique is that the clerk legally defended himself -- and lost his job for saving his own life!
This lede hit that sweet spot:
A student at Lansing Community College was fired from a convenience store in Haslett after shooting a man who was in the process of robbing the store.
Very good. But the ledes I thought were best captured ALL the dynamic elements in clear, clean language:
An attempted theft was foiled late yesterday at a Haslett convenience store when the clerk on duty shot and killed the robber in self-defense, resulting in the loss of his job.
. . . and . . .
After shooting and killing a man in self-defense, a Lansing Community College student was fired from his job after the Haslett convenience store he worked at was robbed late yesterday.
Still, I think I could top those ledes. The one point missing was the connection between saving his life and losing his job. If I decided to go straight with little color, I'd do this:
A Haslett convenience store clerk won't face charges for shooting and killing a would-be robber, but he lost his job for violating company rules of possessing handguns on the job. (And it's only 31 words!)
Or if I wanted to get a bit colorful:
The same actions that allowed Michael Layoux to save his own life also cost him his job.
. . . or . . .
Michael Layoux didn't break the law when he shot and killed a robber last night. But he did break a company rule, and that will cost him his job.
How do my ledes adhere to the Peanut Barrel rule? Which works best, and why? Your turn to critique me.
Robbery -- Write With (AP) Style, Part 1
In writing about this robbery, one of you referred to the robber as a thief. Are those terms interchangeable? No. How do I know that? AP Style.
This is what it says under "burglary, larceny, robbery, theft":
Legal definitions of burglary vary, but in general a burglary involves entering a building (not necessarily by breaking in) and remaining unlawfully with the intention of committing a crime.
Larceny is the legal term for the wrongful taking of proerty. Its nonlegal equivalents are stealing or theft.
Robbery in the legal sense involves the use of violence or threat in committing larceny. In a wider sense it means to plunder or rifle, and may thus be used even if a person was not present: His house was robbed while he was away.
Theft describes a larceny that did not involve threat, violence or plundering.
So, based on that information, was he a robber or a thief? Why or why not?
This is what it says under "burglary, larceny, robbery, theft":
Legal definitions of burglary vary, but in general a burglary involves entering a building (not necessarily by breaking in) and remaining unlawfully with the intention of committing a crime.
Larceny is the legal term for the wrongful taking of proerty. Its nonlegal equivalents are stealing or theft.
Robbery in the legal sense involves the use of violence or threat in committing larceny. In a wider sense it means to plunder or rifle, and may thus be used even if a person was not present: His house was robbed while he was away.
Theft describes a larceny that did not involve threat, violence or plundering.
So, based on that information, was he a robber or a thief? Why or why not?
Robbery -- Write With (AP) Style, Part 2
Is it 11:00 p.m. or 11 p.m. or 11 pm or 11 o'clock?
It's 11 p.m., or maybe 11 o'clock. Under "times":
Use figures except for noon and midnight. Use a colon to separate hours from minutes: 11 a.m., 1 p.m., 3:30 p.m. . . . The construction 4 o'clock is acceptable, but time listings with a.m. or p.m. are preferred.
Is it 24 hours or 24 hrs? Under "time sequences" (right after the listing for "time"!):
Spell out: 50 hours, 23 minutes, 14 seconds.
In general, do you spell out the number three, or use the digit 3? What about two and 2? Eleven and 11?
We've already gone over these, folks. You tell me.
It's 11 p.m., or maybe 11 o'clock. Under "times":
Use figures except for noon and midnight. Use a colon to separate hours from minutes: 11 a.m., 1 p.m., 3:30 p.m. . . . The construction 4 o'clock is acceptable, but time listings with a.m. or p.m. are preferred.
Is it 24 hours or 24 hrs? Under "time sequences" (right after the listing for "time"!):
Spell out: 50 hours, 23 minutes, 14 seconds.
In general, do you spell out the number three, or use the digit 3? What about two and 2? Eleven and 11?
We've already gone over these, folks. You tell me.
Robbery -- Four Fatals? Frustrating.
I'm sorry to say we set a new fatal standard for the semester so far: four people fataled this exercise.
Why? Attention to detail, that's why.
One of you cited Ingham County police. The information given to you indicated it was Meridian Township police and Ingham County prosecutors.
Another one of you named the robbery victim as Michael Ernest. His name was actually Michael Ernest Layoux.
And two of you spelled the last name of the robber as Weiss. The information given to you indicated it was Wiess.
Each of these fatals was avoidable. You need to MAKE SURE you are double-checking EVERYTHING you have written against he facts that you have been given. You need to MAKE SURE you are checking ALL information given to you for inconsistencies.
Every time. All the time.
Let's not have another fatal day like Monday, okay?
Why? Attention to detail, that's why.
One of you cited Ingham County police. The information given to you indicated it was Meridian Township police and Ingham County prosecutors.
Another one of you named the robbery victim as Michael Ernest. His name was actually Michael Ernest Layoux.
And two of you spelled the last name of the robber as Weiss. The information given to you indicated it was Wiess.
Each of these fatals was avoidable. You need to MAKE SURE you are double-checking EVERYTHING you have written against he facts that you have been given. You need to MAKE SURE you are checking ALL information given to you for inconsistencies.
Every time. All the time.
Let's not have another fatal day like Monday, okay?
Robbery -- "The" vs. "A"
Was it THE Haslett convenience store? Or A Haslett convenience store?
I'd say the latter. It probably isn't the only store in town, right?
Is it THE robber, or A robber, in first reference?
Same thing. The robber probably isn't the only one to ever rob anything.
I'd say the latter. It probably isn't the only store in town, right?
Is it THE robber, or A robber, in first reference?
Same thing. The robber probably isn't the only one to ever rob anything.
Robbery -- Spell Check Hates You!
Not completely. But I need to remind you, spell check will not catch words that you accidentally use that are spelled correctly.
Like when you said the robber ran through the class. I assume you meant glass.
Or when you said police said is was okay. I assume you want it was okay.
Yes, you should use spell check. But that's not a substitute for reading your copy word-for-word.
Like when you said the robber ran through the class. I assume you meant glass.
Or when you said police said is was okay. I assume you want it was okay.
Yes, you should use spell check. But that's not a substitute for reading your copy word-for-word.
Robbbery -- Did you need . . .
. . . to use the clerk's full name of Michael Ernest Layoux?
It's not wrong to use middle names or middle initials, but here's a good rule of thumb: if you feel the name is so common where a middle name is needed to distinguish a person from others with a similar name, then you may want to use a middle name or initial. Like with former MSU football coach John L. Smith.
But if you feel the name is fairly unique, it's less necessary. Like with Omar Sofradzija.
BTW, you may have noticed serial killers or mass murderers or criminals of the highest profile are often referred to with a middle name included (like John Wayne Gacy, Lee Harvey Oswald, ect.). That's because with a crime so heinous, you want to go the extra mile to make sure you're identifying the right guy.
It's not wrong to use middle names or middle initials, but here's a good rule of thumb: if you feel the name is so common where a middle name is needed to distinguish a person from others with a similar name, then you may want to use a middle name or initial. Like with former MSU football coach John L. Smith.
But if you feel the name is fairly unique, it's less necessary. Like with Omar Sofradzija.
BTW, you may have noticed serial killers or mass murderers or criminals of the highest profile are often referred to with a middle name included (like John Wayne Gacy, Lee Harvey Oswald, ect.). That's because with a crime so heinous, you want to go the extra mile to make sure you're identifying the right guy.
Robbery -- Did you say . . .
. . . it was a brand of Winston cigarettes? Or just cigarettes?
Was the particular brand necesary to the story? Or was it unimportant, other than to give the company a free ad?
Specific brands should be cited if important to the story; like if a Ford Focus crashed into a Hummer. Knowing a teeny-car brand hit a monster-tank brand makes a story more understandable, right?
But in this case, the robber could have asked for Winstons or Camels or whatever. It really wouldn't have made any difference.
It's one thing if you were writing some sort of detailed narrative, where small observations mater in setting mood and color. This wasn't one of those cases. You were just writing a plain ol' daily news story.
I would have left out the brand name.
Was the particular brand necesary to the story? Or was it unimportant, other than to give the company a free ad?
Specific brands should be cited if important to the story; like if a Ford Focus crashed into a Hummer. Knowing a teeny-car brand hit a monster-tank brand makes a story more understandable, right?
But in this case, the robber could have asked for Winstons or Camels or whatever. It really wouldn't have made any difference.
It's one thing if you were writing some sort of detailed narrative, where small observations mater in setting mood and color. This wasn't one of those cases. You were just writing a plain ol' daily news story.
I would have left out the brand name.
Robbery -- Who, What, When, WHERE, Why . . .
Did you need to cite the store's street address? Isn't that a basic and helpful identifier of WHERE this happened?
Wouldn't people wonder WHERE? Whether this was near their home? Or was the store they go to?
I'm just sayin'.
Wouldn't people wonder WHERE? Whether this was near their home? Or was the store they go to?
I'm just sayin'.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Out Of Class #1 -- Almost Due!
You should be finishing up work on your first out of class story assignment, due Wednesday. Make sure you meet the minimum requirements as noted in the syllabus in terms of length and sourcing.
Also, use the lessons you've learned in class and mentioned in this blog -- including today's blog posts about source attribution, which we will talk about here in a bit.
The deadline is BY the start of class Wednesday, so it has to be to me by 9:10 a.m. that day. You may turn in your story in paper form or electronically in a Word document via email to omars@msu.edu.
Whether you turn in your story by hand or email, be sure to turn in to me your tip sheet by the deadline.
Do the best you can on this assignment. It's just the first big step in your journalistic evolution, so don't sweat it too much. You'll only get better as the class goes along. Keep in mind you will have an opportunity to rewrite the story and improve your assignment grade.
And of course, don't forget: NO FATALS. Double-check everything and assume nothing.
Good luck, everybody.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Missing: A Roundup
Decent job overall on the take-home assignment. There are some problems to work out that we'll discuss here, but it's nothing that's unusual for a novice journalist.
There was one situation that came up: someone filed their story late. In this case, the person was specifically waiting for responses to questions they emailed me.
Since I never gave explicit instructions on what to do in such instances, I won't fatal this person this time.
Note I said "this time."
In the future, if you have story questions and I do not respond in a manner that is timely to you, finish the story the best you can and put in writing after the story what your question was, and what you had to do in writing your story to work your way around the unanswered question.
If I decide your question was something that a novice journalist couldn't reasonably figure out on their own (such as choosing between two inconsistent spellings of the same name), then you will not be penalized for the omission. If the omission is something I think you should have been able to figure out on your own (such as an attribution matter, where the attribution is included but perhaps you zipped past it by reading your sourcing too quickly), then you will be docked.
Either way, I expect your assignments to be turned in on deadline. No more exceptions from here on out, unless it's a truly bizarre situation.
P.S., another one of you cut it waaaaay too close in turning in the assignment. This person came within 58 seconds of a time fatal.
Please, don't wait until the last minute to send your story. Your comupter can freeze up. Or your Internet connection can go slow. Or other problems might arise. Just like such problems do in professional newsrooms (where, if you hit such problems and miss a deadline, you can face an editor who will yell at you, "Why did you wait until the last f@#%ing minute to file your story, anyway?" Always give yourselves a time cushion of at least a few minutes so you can overcome any unanticipated last-second problems.)
There was one situation that came up: someone filed their story late. In this case, the person was specifically waiting for responses to questions they emailed me.
Since I never gave explicit instructions on what to do in such instances, I won't fatal this person this time.
Note I said "this time."
In the future, if you have story questions and I do not respond in a manner that is timely to you, finish the story the best you can and put in writing after the story what your question was, and what you had to do in writing your story to work your way around the unanswered question.
If I decide your question was something that a novice journalist couldn't reasonably figure out on their own (such as choosing between two inconsistent spellings of the same name), then you will not be penalized for the omission. If the omission is something I think you should have been able to figure out on your own (such as an attribution matter, where the attribution is included but perhaps you zipped past it by reading your sourcing too quickly), then you will be docked.
Either way, I expect your assignments to be turned in on deadline. No more exceptions from here on out, unless it's a truly bizarre situation.
P.S., another one of you cut it waaaaay too close in turning in the assignment. This person came within 58 seconds of a time fatal.
Please, don't wait until the last minute to send your story. Your comupter can freeze up. Or your Internet connection can go slow. Or other problems might arise. Just like such problems do in professional newsrooms (where, if you hit such problems and miss a deadline, you can face an editor who will yell at you, "Why did you wait until the last f@#%ing minute to file your story, anyway?" Always give yourselves a time cushion of at least a few minutes so you can overcome any unanticipated last-second problems.)
Missing: Ledes Are Waaaaay Too Looooong
Some of you are still penning ledes that are way too long. Ledes that are mushed together with nut grafs. Ledes that are waaaaay over the 32 words or so we're trying to maintain for now.
So, here's a new rule. It's in caps and bold-faced so it's unmistakable:
ALL LEDES FOR PRACTICE STORY AND TEST STORY EXERCISES MUST BE NO MORE THAN 32 WORDS UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!!!
ANY LEDES IN A PRACTICE STORY OR A TEST STORY THAT EXCEEDS THAT LIMIT WILL BE CONSIDERED A FATAL, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A ZERO ON THAT EXERCISE.
I'M NOT KIDDING, FOLKS!!!
I'm not doing this to be an ass. But ledes are supposed to be brief and to the point. A lede that's 40 or 50 words is neither brief nor to the point.
And a big part of journalism is decision-making; that is, sorting through endless information and prioritizing and summarizing for the reader what is most important. If I allow you to do runaway ledes, you won't develop good decision-making habits. And that will catch up with you at some point; maybe not in this class, and probably at a time when the stakes for you will be much higher.
So we're not going to let that happen. We're going to work out your bad habits and instill some good habits. And that's gonna start with a 32-word cap on ledes.
(For some of you, it's not even a question of needing to develop a lede; you already have a good lede, but it's mushed together with the nut graf and a supporting graf. We just need to make sure you know where to find the "return" key on your keyboard. Here's a good rule of thumb: if you have a lede -- or any paragraph, for that matter -- that's more than one sentence, take a look and see if it's one unit of thought or one piece of information supporting that unit of thought. If it's more than one unit of any of the above, then split it up into separate grafs.)
If anyone needs ANY help in developing ledes, let's schedule some office hours to work on it. I don't expect you to figure this out on your own, but I do expect you to identify what you're having problems with and seek the appropriate remedial help.
So, here's a new rule. It's in caps and bold-faced so it's unmistakable:
ALL LEDES FOR PRACTICE STORY AND TEST STORY EXERCISES MUST BE NO MORE THAN 32 WORDS UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE!!!
ANY LEDES IN A PRACTICE STORY OR A TEST STORY THAT EXCEEDS THAT LIMIT WILL BE CONSIDERED A FATAL, AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A ZERO ON THAT EXERCISE.
I'M NOT KIDDING, FOLKS!!!
I'm not doing this to be an ass. But ledes are supposed to be brief and to the point. A lede that's 40 or 50 words is neither brief nor to the point.
And a big part of journalism is decision-making; that is, sorting through endless information and prioritizing and summarizing for the reader what is most important. If I allow you to do runaway ledes, you won't develop good decision-making habits. And that will catch up with you at some point; maybe not in this class, and probably at a time when the stakes for you will be much higher.
So we're not going to let that happen. We're going to work out your bad habits and instill some good habits. And that's gonna start with a 32-word cap on ledes.
(For some of you, it's not even a question of needing to develop a lede; you already have a good lede, but it's mushed together with the nut graf and a supporting graf. We just need to make sure you know where to find the "return" key on your keyboard. Here's a good rule of thumb: if you have a lede -- or any paragraph, for that matter -- that's more than one sentence, take a look and see if it's one unit of thought or one piece of information supporting that unit of thought. If it's more than one unit of any of the above, then split it up into separate grafs.)
If anyone needs ANY help in developing ledes, let's schedule some office hours to work on it. I don't expect you to figure this out on your own, but I do expect you to identify what you're having problems with and seek the appropriate remedial help.
Missing: How Do You Know? (Part 1)
How did you know no more than 100 missing people are victims of foul play? It it because you spoke to each and every missing person?
No. It's because police told you. So you need to attribute that number to something like, police said.
How do you know Sabrina the teen-age run-away ended up in New York, where she prostituted herself? Were you hanging out with her there?
No. You know because she told you. So you needed to attribute that to something like, she said.
How do you know Jason Abare was arrested last month. Were you there when he got busted?
No. You know because he told you. By now, you know what you needed to do.
Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
No. It's because police told you. So you need to attribute that number to something like, police said.
How do you know Sabrina the teen-age run-away ended up in New York, where she prostituted herself? Were you hanging out with her there?
No. You know because she told you. So you needed to attribute that to something like, she said.
How do you know Jason Abare was arrested last month. Were you there when he got busted?
No. You know because he told you. By now, you know what you needed to do.
Pretty much everything not witnessed by you should have some sort of attribution. He said; she said; according to records; whatever.
Make sure you have properly attributed everything in your story. Basically, every paragraph after the lede and nut graf should have some sort of attribution affixed to it.
Missing: Did You . . .
. . . use Sabrina Diaz's last name?
Why? Didn't you promise her that you would not?
If you didn't use her last name, did you tell readers WHY you weren't?
In "Elements of Journalism," we talked about being transparent with readers. Part of that transparency includes telling readers why we aren't fully identifying somebody.
You really needed a disclaimer like . . .
. . . said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition that her last name not be used.
Why? Didn't you promise her that you would not?
If you didn't use her last name, did you tell readers WHY you weren't?
In "Elements of Journalism," we talked about being transparent with readers. Part of that transparency includes telling readers why we aren't fully identifying somebody.
You really needed a disclaimer like . . .
. . . said Sabrina, who spoke on the condition that her last name not be used.
Missing: Did You Notice . . .
. . . the first name of Jason Abare's wife was spelled TWO different ways (Anne/Ann)?
If you did notice, what did you do, and/or what should you have done?
If you did notice, what did you do, and/or what should you have done?
Missing: Write With (AP) Style
On first reference, is it Sergeant Manuel Cortez, or Sgt. Manuel Cortez?
It's Sgt. I know, because I looked in AP Style, under "military titles."
On second reference, is it Sgt. Cortez, or just Cortez?
It's the latter. Under the same:
In subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
Do you start a sentence with a number expressed in digits? No. Do you spell out "percent" instead of using the symbol? Yes. We went over those AP Style points ALREADY. These repeat mistakes should NOT be cropping back up!
It's Sgt. I know, because I looked in AP Style, under "military titles."
On second reference, is it Sgt. Cortez, or just Cortez?
It's the latter. Under the same:
In subsequent references, do not continue using the title before a name. Use only the last name.
Do you start a sentence with a number expressed in digits? No. Do you spell out "percent" instead of using the symbol? Yes. We went over those AP Style points ALREADY. These repeat mistakes should NOT be cropping back up!
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Squirrels: Ya Did Good
I saw lots of good stuff in the squirrels exercise. Good structure, nice writing, yadda yadda yay.
No fatals, and everybody scored in the 3-point range. Everybody identified the inconsistency in their source notes -- the double-spelling of a last name, the correct of which was Brookes -- and everybody seemed to understand what they were writing.
Good assignment, folks!
No fatals, and everybody scored in the 3-point range. Everybody identified the inconsistency in their source notes -- the double-spelling of a last name, the correct of which was Brookes -- and everybody seemed to understand what they were writing.
Good assignment, folks!
Squirrels: Write Tight
Why say "An Associate English Professor at LCC, Oliver Brookes . . . "
. . . when you could say . . .
"LCC Associate English Professor Oliver Brookes . . . "
Watch your word order and look for efficiencies. Quite often "an" or "at" or such words are unnecessary.
Save a couple of words; save a tree; save the world.
. . . when you could say . . .
"LCC Associate English Professor Oliver Brookes . . . "
Watch your word order and look for efficiencies. Quite often "an" or "at" or such words are unnecessary.
Save a couple of words; save a tree; save the world.
Squirrels: No First Person!
This was one of your grafs:
But why are the squirrels attacking our cars?
That's a no-no. Avoid first-person construction; as journalists, we are not part of the stories we write. So there is no "our" or "us" or "I" (unless, of course, a first person account is precisely the specialized type of story you're working on. Which you won't be in this class).
So what to do? Consider your story subjects. It's LCC, right?
So, why not say, But why are squirrels attacking cars at LCC?
But why are the squirrels attacking our cars?
That's a no-no. Avoid first-person construction; as journalists, we are not part of the stories we write. So there is no "our" or "us" or "I" (unless, of course, a first person account is precisely the specialized type of story you're working on. Which you won't be in this class).
So what to do? Consider your story subjects. It's LCC, right?
So, why not say, But why are squirrels attacking cars at LCC?
Squirrels: Write With (AP) Style
Is it Lansing Community College, or LCC?
Let's look at AP Style, first under "abbreivations and acronyms." I admit, it's confusing gobbledygook here. But this is the general rule of thumb: spell out on first reference, use the acronym or another generic abbreviations (such as "the college") in subsequent references.
Regarding the latter, check "second references" in AP Style.
Let's look at AP Style, first under "abbreivations and acronyms." I admit, it's confusing gobbledygook here. But this is the general rule of thumb: spell out on first reference, use the acronym or another generic abbreviations (such as "the college") in subsequent references.
Regarding the latter, check "second references" in AP Style.
Squirrels: Nut Grafs Are Driving You Nuts
Some of you are having problems with the concept of a nut graf. A nut graf is generally a paragraph that flows the lede and builds upon it, allowing for a seamless transition into te body of the story.
The sequence is like this:
The lede hits the most basic and essential elements of the story.
The nut graf expands and elaborates upon the lede.
Then you start with details supporting the lede.
Here's a good lede/nut graf/body sequence from one of youze:
A recent rash of car problems at Lansing Community College is being blamed on one particular group of culprits: squirrels.
In recent weeks, college officials have received several complaints from staff members regarding damage to their cars that, in some cases, have resulted in several hundred dollars worth of repairs.
Associate professor of English Oliver Brookes said he made an unpleasant discovery while trying to determine the cause of a faulty headlight when he opened the hood of his van.
"There was a big squirrels' nest in the corner where the light wires were," Brookes said.
See the flow here?
The sequence is like this:
The lede hits the most basic and essential elements of the story.
The nut graf expands and elaborates upon the lede.
Then you start with details supporting the lede.
Here's a good lede/nut graf/body sequence from one of youze:
A recent rash of car problems at Lansing Community College is being blamed on one particular group of culprits: squirrels.
In recent weeks, college officials have received several complaints from staff members regarding damage to their cars that, in some cases, have resulted in several hundred dollars worth of repairs.
Associate professor of English Oliver Brookes said he made an unpleasant discovery while trying to determine the cause of a faulty headlight when he opened the hood of his van.
"There was a big squirrels' nest in the corner where the light wires were," Brookes said.
See the flow here?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)