Overall, nice work on the graded ledes exercise. No fatals that I caught. That's very good. Plus, for the first time you're getting very specific evaluations in numerical form. That's called a grade.
From the syllabus, here's a roundup of what the funny numbers atop your returned work means:
4.0: Story could be published virtually as is. It shows superior command of the facts, news judgment, story organization, reporting and writing.
3.5: Could be published with very minor revisions. Generally well-written, accurate copy containing all relevant material, but requires minor editing for maximum precision and clarity.
3.0: Better-than-average story. The story was handled well. Copy needs some rewriting and polishing before it could be published.
2.5: A little above average. The story might have a significant problem with reporting, organization, completeness, ect. Certainly needs rewriting.
2.0: Average job. Not a story most readers would read unless they really needed the information. The story may have reporting, organization or writing problems.
1.5: A weak story. The story may have a buried lede, problems in news interpretation, problems in story organization, omission of some important fact or source. The story needs substantial revision.
1.0: A non-story. The story lacks news judgment, displays major flaws in reporting and writing, omits important facts. The story needs substantial rethinking.
0.0: Story is late or failed to receive instructor's approval. Story is misleading or unethical. Organization of writing flaws make the story incoherent.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Graded Ledes: Peanut Barrel Rule, Part 2
When you think about the Peanut Barrel rule, a part of what you consider is what stands out most to a story, where it would be the first thing out of your mouth when talking about it to your friends.
Another aspect that often overlaps the first premise is that of end result and ultimate outcome: how did the story end? After all, the lede of a news story is usually the ending, wrapping up all the loose ends. That's a major way journalistic writing differs from other forms of writing.
This next lede meets the first aspect but not the second:
A trip to the gas station turned into every mother's worst nightmare when an armed robber stole a car with six-month-old Megan Perakiss in the backseat.
If this happened to be a delayed lede, where in the next paragraph you immediately get to end result, then you are fine. If not, then the lede can be improved upon.
This next lede was predicated on end result:
A terrifying ordeal ended well for a local family on Wednesday when a massive search located their six-month-old daughter safely inside a vehicle carjacked by an armed robber.
Of course, the downside of this approach is you lose a little bit of detail of what made the recovery dramatic: how the girl went missing in the first place. I though this next lede did a good job of reconciling all the competing factors:
An armed robbery of a local Quik Shoppe convenience store Wednesday afternoon quickly escalated to a carjacking and brief kidnapping of a six-month-old infant girl.
You hook the telling on the overall incident, and the use of "brief" to describe the kidnapping gives readers the indication they need of ultimate outcome.
Often, the Peanut Barrel rule is simple and to the point, like with this lede:
A group of Michigan State University scientists have joined fellow universities in coming with with a controversial idea to transplant African wildlife to the Great Plains of North America.
But it can also pre-emptively answer an obvious question created by your reporting, like, why the hell would they do that? This lede correctly anticipates such a question, and offers an answer:
In an effort to preserve species that are facing extinction, a group of more than 30 scientists want to relocate African wildlife to the Great Plains of North America.
Which of these do you think works best? Why or why not?
Another aspect that often overlaps the first premise is that of end result and ultimate outcome: how did the story end? After all, the lede of a news story is usually the ending, wrapping up all the loose ends. That's a major way journalistic writing differs from other forms of writing.
This next lede meets the first aspect but not the second:
A trip to the gas station turned into every mother's worst nightmare when an armed robber stole a car with six-month-old Megan Perakiss in the backseat.
If this happened to be a delayed lede, where in the next paragraph you immediately get to end result, then you are fine. If not, then the lede can be improved upon.
This next lede was predicated on end result:
A terrifying ordeal ended well for a local family on Wednesday when a massive search located their six-month-old daughter safely inside a vehicle carjacked by an armed robber.
Of course, the downside of this approach is you lose a little bit of detail of what made the recovery dramatic: how the girl went missing in the first place. I though this next lede did a good job of reconciling all the competing factors:
An armed robbery of a local Quik Shoppe convenience store Wednesday afternoon quickly escalated to a carjacking and brief kidnapping of a six-month-old infant girl.
You hook the telling on the overall incident, and the use of "brief" to describe the kidnapping gives readers the indication they need of ultimate outcome.
Often, the Peanut Barrel rule is simple and to the point, like with this lede:
A group of Michigan State University scientists have joined fellow universities in coming with with a controversial idea to transplant African wildlife to the Great Plains of North America.
But it can also pre-emptively answer an obvious question created by your reporting, like, why the hell would they do that? This lede correctly anticipates such a question, and offers an answer:
In an effort to preserve species that are facing extinction, a group of more than 30 scientists want to relocate African wildlife to the Great Plains of North America.
Which of these do you think works best? Why or why not?
Graded Ledes: How Specific Do You Get?
A few of you included the specific address of the robbed convenience store in your ledes. And some of you even had the exact description of the SUV; a 2006 Ford Explorer.
I don't think it was wrong to have such specifics in the lede, but at the same time I'm not sure they were necessary. Unless specifics add something contextual and meaningful to a lede, you may want to consider using a more generic identifier in the lede, and then offer the specific identifier on second reference.
In this case, whether it's a Ford Explorer or a Cadillac Escalade or a Hummer or whatever doesn't appreciably change a reader's understanding of the story. Now, if the vehicle and baby were still at large, then the specific info would be more newsworthy ... such as:
Police tonight were looking for a 2006 Ford Explorer carrying a six-month-old girl that was carjacked during a daylight robbery at at East Lansing Quik Shoppe Wednesday afternoon.
That's a lede I made up. Now, the specific is actionable information that's useful to an audience, and therefore clearly worthy of the lede.
I don't think it was wrong to have such specifics in the lede, but at the same time I'm not sure they were necessary. Unless specifics add something contextual and meaningful to a lede, you may want to consider using a more generic identifier in the lede, and then offer the specific identifier on second reference.
In this case, whether it's a Ford Explorer or a Cadillac Escalade or a Hummer or whatever doesn't appreciably change a reader's understanding of the story. Now, if the vehicle and baby were still at large, then the specific info would be more newsworthy ... such as:
Police tonight were looking for a 2006 Ford Explorer carrying a six-month-old girl that was carjacked during a daylight robbery at at East Lansing Quik Shoppe Wednesday afternoon.
That's a lede I made up. Now, the specific is actionable information that's useful to an audience, and therefore clearly worthy of the lede.
Graded Ledes: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why, How?
Something is missing from this lede:
A family of three can breathe easy after their six-month-old daughter, who was in the backseat of their carjacked SUV, was found unharmed in the abandoned vehicle.
Okay, so we have WHO (the baby, the family) ...
... and we have WHAT (there was a carjacking of an SUV) ...
... and those are pretty important Ws to consider for the lede. So is WHEN. After all, when something happens makes it news, right? a Carjacking today is a hot story. One from last week is old news.
If the story was something other than a breaking news story, then the when may be unimportant. But for breaking news, the when is critical.
So, why wouldn't this lede have when in it? Missing the when took a good lede and made it inadequate.
A family of three can breathe easy after their six-month-old daughter, who was in the backseat of their carjacked SUV, was found unharmed in the abandoned vehicle.
Okay, so we have WHO (the baby, the family) ...
... and we have WHAT (there was a carjacking of an SUV) ...
... and those are pretty important Ws to consider for the lede. So is WHEN. After all, when something happens makes it news, right? a Carjacking today is a hot story. One from last week is old news.
If the story was something other than a breaking news story, then the when may be unimportant. But for breaking news, the when is critical.
So, why wouldn't this lede have when in it? Missing the when took a good lede and made it inadequate.
Graded Ledes: Who, WHAT, When, Where, Why, How
Something is missing from this lede:
Ethel Perakiss was reunited with her six-month-old daughter Megan after a carjacker took off with her daughter in the backseat during a robbery at a Quik Shoppe convenience store on Wednesday.
Took off in the backseat of what? An SUV, right? So, why not say that?
Don't overlook the obvious, folks. Check your 5 W's and how and make sure the critical ones are in there.
Ethel Perakiss was reunited with her six-month-old daughter Megan after a carjacker took off with her daughter in the backseat during a robbery at a Quik Shoppe convenience store on Wednesday.
Took off in the backseat of what? An SUV, right? So, why not say that?
Don't overlook the obvious, folks. Check your 5 W's and how and make sure the critical ones are in there.
Graded Ledes: Look For Inclusive Words!
Many of you in the animals lede referred to "ecologists and biologists." A couple of you simply referred to "scientists."
And why not? Ecologists and biologists are scientists. It's simpler and doesn't result in any lost meaning to your readers.
If you have the opportunity to group specifics under a single umbrella term, consider that course of action.
And why not? Ecologists and biologists are scientists. It's simpler and doesn't result in any lost meaning to your readers.
If you have the opportunity to group specifics under a single umbrella term, consider that course of action.
Graded Ledes: Avoid Redundant Words!
Like if you say, "a local East Lansing store." East Lansing is the locality, so you could just say, "East Lansing store" with no "local" and save a word.
Graded Ledes: Watch Wordiness!
Watch for opportunities to take many words and say the same thing with fewer words.
Like with, "preceded to carjack a vehicle." Why not just say "carjacked a vehicle" and save a couple of words?
Like with, "preceded to carjack a vehicle." Why not just say "carjacked a vehicle" and save a couple of words?
Graded Ledes: Watch Word Order!
Watch your word order for opportunities to shorten sentences.
For example, why say, "was the victim of a carjacking" when you could say, "was a carjacking victim" and save two words in the process?
For example, why say, "was the victim of a carjacking" when you could say, "was a carjacking victim" and save two words in the process?
Graded Ledes: A Versus The
So is it a six-month-old girl? Or the six-month-old girl?
In first reference, it's a six-month-old. After all, she's not the only six-month-old girl in the world, probably.
But after establishing her as a specific six-month-old girl, for second and subsequent references you could call her the girl.
In first reference, it's a six-month-old. After all, she's not the only six-month-old girl in the world, probably.
But after establishing her as a specific six-month-old girl, for second and subsequent references you could call her the girl.
Graded Ledes: Writing With (AP) Style
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 property. 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?
Also, was the address 2752 Michigan Ave or 2752 Michigan Ave. or 2752 Michigan Avenue?
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.
So in this case, it's 2752 Michigan Ave.
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 property. 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?
Also, was the address 2752 Michigan Ave or 2752 Michigan Ave. or 2752 Michigan Avenue?
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.
So in this case, it's 2752 Michigan Ave.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
More Ledes: Ledes I Liked
Again, nice work on the latest ledes exercise. You are all picking this up very well. A bunch of good ones, and here's a sampling of a few of 'em:
Fifteen minutes before he was supposed to walk down the aisle today, Scott Forsythe died in a car accident on Kirkmann Road, a half-mile from the church.
In that one,m you let the facts speak for themselves. In the next lede, you set context through the stark contrast between the joy of a wedding and the horror of a death:
Sara Howard though today would the the happiest of her life, when it turned into the worst when her fiance died in a car crash while swerving to avoid a dog.
This next one sets context through a quip and word play:
Being a suspect in a crime will cost you, literally. East Lansing city officials announced today that suspects will now pay a $25 fee for the process of being arrested.
This next lede doesn't just offer the what, but the why as well.
In an effort to trim expenses, East Lansing officials announced that mug shots and fingerprints now cost those being arrested a fee of $25.
On this next one, it's a straight-to-the-point summary:
A 16-year-old student who was previously arrested for robbing a woman at gunpoint is still allowed to play on his school's football team, even while on house arrest.
This next one uses writing style to create a mini-narrative, in the style of fiction-writing but entirely based on facts:
Several months ago, East Lansing police Detective Larry Chavez arrested a 16-year-old boy for armed robbery. Today, the same boy still plays for his high school football team.
This last one is a delayed lede that has fun with the contrast between a couple of typical -- but very different -- items that say a lot:
Football players usually wear wristbands as an accessory, but what about an electronic bracelet?
Of the last three, which one do you like best, and why?
Fifteen minutes before he was supposed to walk down the aisle today, Scott Forsythe died in a car accident on Kirkmann Road, a half-mile from the church.
In that one,m you let the facts speak for themselves. In the next lede, you set context through the stark contrast between the joy of a wedding and the horror of a death:
Sara Howard though today would the the happiest of her life, when it turned into the worst when her fiance died in a car crash while swerving to avoid a dog.
This next one sets context through a quip and word play:
Being a suspect in a crime will cost you, literally. East Lansing city officials announced today that suspects will now pay a $25 fee for the process of being arrested.
This next lede doesn't just offer the what, but the why as well.
In an effort to trim expenses, East Lansing officials announced that mug shots and fingerprints now cost those being arrested a fee of $25.
On this next one, it's a straight-to-the-point summary:
A 16-year-old student who was previously arrested for robbing a woman at gunpoint is still allowed to play on his school's football team, even while on house arrest.
This next one uses writing style to create a mini-narrative, in the style of fiction-writing but entirely based on facts:
Several months ago, East Lansing police Detective Larry Chavez arrested a 16-year-old boy for armed robbery. Today, the same boy still plays for his high school football team.
This last one is a delayed lede that has fun with the contrast between a couple of typical -- but very different -- items that say a lot:
Football players usually wear wristbands as an accessory, but what about an electronic bracelet?
Of the last three, which one do you like best, and why?
More Ledes: Fatals Suck
Sorry to say we had some fatals. Happy to say they didn't count again. This is the last exercise where fatals won't ruin your day -- again, you get a 10 out of 10 quiz grade in place of a 4.0 scale grade -- so let's please learn from these examples so we don't fatal when it counts.
Let's look at the first fatal lede:
Lansing city officials will now require all arrested citizens to pay a fee of $25 for their mug shots and fingerprints.
It's a nicely-structured lede, except for one thing: the city in question was East Lansing, not Lansing.
Can you find the fatal in the next lede?
Kennedy High School allows a student convicted of an armed robbery to play in football games and engage in other school activities.
The fatal could be that you labeled the student as convicted of armed robbery. We know he was arrested for armed robbery, but there was no information as to whether he was eventually convicted. When you are arrested and charged with something, you are accused of a crime. You aren't convicted until a judge or jury finds you guilty of a crime.
But that's not the fatal. The fatal is saying this is happening to a Kennedy High School kid. In fact, it's a Colonial High School kid.
The information you were given was that the East Lansing detective went to a Kennedy High football game to watch his son play for Kennedy. Kennedy was playing Colonial. And on Colonial's team the cop saw the criminal.
Yes, it's a little bit of a trick question. And that's on purpose. When I tell you guys that you have to understand what you're writing about, I'm not asking you if you know how to read or if you know English. I'm asking you if you understand the sequence of events and how things went down and what role each high school has in this instance.
That's what I mean by understanding what you write before you write it. And that's why before you start typing away, you need to go through your information and make sure you understand it.
Then again, it does also mean knowing the words you use. There's a fatal here:
Sara Howard thought today would be the happiest of her life when it turned into the worst, when her fiancee died in a car crash while swerving to avoid a dog.
This is the as-written version of one of the ledes I liked, which in that earlier version I corrected. Do you see the fatal?
It's with fiancee. A fiancee with two e's is defined as a woman awaiting marriage, while a man is known as a fiance, with just one e. You used two in referring to a guy. That's a fatal.
That's also an AP Style error. Please see AP Style under the heading of fiance, fiancee.
Let's look at the first fatal lede:
Lansing city officials will now require all arrested citizens to pay a fee of $25 for their mug shots and fingerprints.
It's a nicely-structured lede, except for one thing: the city in question was East Lansing, not Lansing.
Can you find the fatal in the next lede?
Kennedy High School allows a student convicted of an armed robbery to play in football games and engage in other school activities.
The fatal could be that you labeled the student as convicted of armed robbery. We know he was arrested for armed robbery, but there was no information as to whether he was eventually convicted. When you are arrested and charged with something, you are accused of a crime. You aren't convicted until a judge or jury finds you guilty of a crime.
But that's not the fatal. The fatal is saying this is happening to a Kennedy High School kid. In fact, it's a Colonial High School kid.
The information you were given was that the East Lansing detective went to a Kennedy High football game to watch his son play for Kennedy. Kennedy was playing Colonial. And on Colonial's team the cop saw the criminal.
Yes, it's a little bit of a trick question. And that's on purpose. When I tell you guys that you have to understand what you're writing about, I'm not asking you if you know how to read or if you know English. I'm asking you if you understand the sequence of events and how things went down and what role each high school has in this instance.
That's what I mean by understanding what you write before you write it. And that's why before you start typing away, you need to go through your information and make sure you understand it.
Then again, it does also mean knowing the words you use. There's a fatal here:
Sara Howard thought today would be the happiest of her life when it turned into the worst, when her fiancee died in a car crash while swerving to avoid a dog.
This is the as-written version of one of the ledes I liked, which in that earlier version I corrected. Do you see the fatal?
It's with fiancee. A fiancee with two e's is defined as a woman awaiting marriage, while a man is known as a fiance, with just one e. You used two in referring to a guy. That's a fatal.
That's also an AP Style error. Please see AP Style under the heading of fiance, fiancee.
More Ledes: Peanut Barrel Rule
There's nothing wrong with this lede. But it's still missing something. Here it is:
While a stray dog's life was spared, a 22-year-old was killed when he lost control of his car going 100 mph in order to avoid the dog.
Technically, it's correct. But let's think about the Peanut Barrel rule. If you wrote this story for The State News and then headed down to the Peanut Barrel to meet friends for a legal drink or two afterward, and then they asked you what you wrote about today, what would you say? More importantly, what would be first to come out of your mouth?
"Uh, well I wrote something abut a dude who got killed when he swerved his car to miss a doggie in the road."
I don't think so. What I think you'd say would be something like this:
"Dude, this was so effed up I don't believe it! Some guy was driving his car all crazy fast so he could make it to his wedding, but he CRASHED and DIED! On his WEDDING DAY! Soo effed up."
I really do think you'd certainly include the wedding angle. That's what made this crash unique and especially poignant and tragic.
If it's a fact or angle that would pass the Peanut Barrel test, then it's a good fact or angle for a lede. If your proposed lede doesn't pass Peanut Barrel muster, then try again until it does.
Again, I can't say your lede was incorrect. Clearly, it passes factual muster. But is it really complete? No. It misses context, like calling 9/11 just a plane crash.
While a stray dog's life was spared, a 22-year-old was killed when he lost control of his car going 100 mph in order to avoid the dog.
Technically, it's correct. But let's think about the Peanut Barrel rule. If you wrote this story for The State News and then headed down to the Peanut Barrel to meet friends for a legal drink or two afterward, and then they asked you what you wrote about today, what would you say? More importantly, what would be first to come out of your mouth?
"Uh, well I wrote something abut a dude who got killed when he swerved his car to miss a doggie in the road."
I don't think so. What I think you'd say would be something like this:
"Dude, this was so effed up I don't believe it! Some guy was driving his car all crazy fast so he could make it to his wedding, but he CRASHED and DIED! On his WEDDING DAY! Soo effed up."
I really do think you'd certainly include the wedding angle. That's what made this crash unique and especially poignant and tragic.
If it's a fact or angle that would pass the Peanut Barrel test, then it's a good fact or angle for a lede. If your proposed lede doesn't pass Peanut Barrel muster, then try again until it does.
Again, I can't say your lede was incorrect. Clearly, it passes factual muster. But is it really complete? No. It misses context, like calling 9/11 just a plane crash.
More Ledes: Say What You Mean, Mean What You Say
There's a problem with this lede:
Just moments before walking down the aisle, 22-year-old Scott Forsythe swerved his Ford Mustang to spare a dog's life, and lost his own.
Now, in many ways it's not a bad lede. It conveys the meaning fairly well. But what is incorrect -- a fatal, really -- is what it says: that Forsythe lost his life just moments before walking down the aisle.
Read that literally: it doesn't say moments before he was to walk down the aisle, it says a dead guy walked down the aisle, all "Weekend At Bernie's" style.
This lede go that point right:
An East Lansing man was killed in a car accident today at 8:45 a.m. while en route to the church where he was to be married 15 minutes later.
Make sure that you say what you mean, and that you mean what you say.
Just moments before walking down the aisle, 22-year-old Scott Forsythe swerved his Ford Mustang to spare a dog's life, and lost his own.
Now, in many ways it's not a bad lede. It conveys the meaning fairly well. But what is incorrect -- a fatal, really -- is what it says: that Forsythe lost his life just moments before walking down the aisle.
Read that literally: it doesn't say moments before he was to walk down the aisle, it says a dead guy walked down the aisle, all "Weekend At Bernie's" style.
This lede go that point right:
An East Lansing man was killed in a car accident today at 8:45 a.m. while en route to the church where he was to be married 15 minutes later.
Make sure that you say what you mean, and that you mean what you say.
More Ledes: What Crashed?
Ledes are hard in that you need to include all the info critical to understand the basic gist of the story, but at the same time you need to keep it brief and exclude any secondary details that may be helpful but not critical. That's a lot to take into consideration.
In that process, you may end up leaving out something so obvious, it's easy to forget it. Like in this lede:
Scott Forsythe died this morning 15 minutes before his wedding after he crashed into two trees and a fence going 100 mph to avoid hitting a dog.
Okay, so he hit that fence at 100 mph. He must be a fast runner.
I say that because you didn't say what he hit the fence while driving his car. All you say is that he hit the fence, nothing else included.
In another lede, you said a 22-year-old was killed. A 22-year-old what? Man? Car? Dog? Again, be precise.
Don't assume the reader knows a car was involved, and a man was killed. Don't make the reader guess that. Be clear AND concise. Not one or the other.
In that process, you may end up leaving out something so obvious, it's easy to forget it. Like in this lede:
Scott Forsythe died this morning 15 minutes before his wedding after he crashed into two trees and a fence going 100 mph to avoid hitting a dog.
Okay, so he hit that fence at 100 mph. He must be a fast runner.
I say that because you didn't say what he hit the fence while driving his car. All you say is that he hit the fence, nothing else included.
In another lede, you said a 22-year-old was killed. A 22-year-old what? Man? Car? Dog? Again, be precise.
Don't assume the reader knows a car was involved, and a man was killed. Don't make the reader guess that. Be clear AND concise. Not one or the other.
More Ledes: Clarity Via Word Order
Often, word order can help create clarity by putting information in a sequence that clearly spells out what happened. Conversely, poor word order can leave things a bit jumbled.
In that sense, this lede had a bit of room for improvement:
A 22-year-old died in a car accident this morning on the way to his wedding by veering off the road to avoid hitting a stray dog.
In this case, you could have arranged fact sequence to pair up commonalities, like this:
A 22-year-old on the way to his wedding died in a car accident this morning by veering off the road to avoid hitting a stray dog.
Before, the fact the man died and how and why he died was split in half by the wedding mention. In the reordering, the crash elements are placed together, and now the sentence flows a bit better.
In that sense, this lede had a bit of room for improvement:
A 22-year-old died in a car accident this morning on the way to his wedding by veering off the road to avoid hitting a stray dog.
In this case, you could have arranged fact sequence to pair up commonalities, like this:
A 22-year-old on the way to his wedding died in a car accident this morning by veering off the road to avoid hitting a stray dog.
Before, the fact the man died and how and why he died was split in half by the wedding mention. In the reordering, the crash elements are placed together, and now the sentence flows a bit better.
More Ledes: Flipping The Lede
Quite often, we want to emphasize not who is a source of a story, but what the story is; the actual action taking place. In this lede the action is the new charge:
Today East Lansing city officials announced that new arrestees will be charged $25 for mug shots and finger-printing services, in an attempt to trim expenses.
While the action is the new charge, you start the story with attribution; that is, from whom you're getting the information. By simply flipping the sequence of action and attribution you can emphasize the action, like this:
New arrestees will be charged $25 for mug shots and finger-printing services in an attempt to trim expenses, East Lansing city officials announced today.
Notice here I am using the exact same words you used in your lede. All I did was flip the attribution from the front of the lede to the back, and in doing so I moved the reference to today from the start of the attribution to the end.
The difference is that readers don't have to work through, "officials said blah blah" before getting to the gist of the story. Look at where you place attribution in a lede, and consider whether a flipped lede can help emphasize the main point.
Today East Lansing city officials announced that new arrestees will be charged $25 for mug shots and finger-printing services, in an attempt to trim expenses.
While the action is the new charge, you start the story with attribution; that is, from whom you're getting the information. By simply flipping the sequence of action and attribution you can emphasize the action, like this:
New arrestees will be charged $25 for mug shots and finger-printing services in an attempt to trim expenses, East Lansing city officials announced today.
Notice here I am using the exact same words you used in your lede. All I did was flip the attribution from the front of the lede to the back, and in doing so I moved the reference to today from the start of the attribution to the end.
The difference is that readers don't have to work through, "officials said blah blah" before getting to the gist of the story. Look at where you place attribution in a lede, and consider whether a flipped lede can help emphasize the main point.
More Ledes: Be Simple
Don't forget to translate and simplify technical terms, like in this lede:
From today forward, city officials announced that anyone who is arrested and incarcerated will be charged $25 by the jail, but will be refunded if later acquitted.
Instead of saying incarcerated, why not just say jailed? Same meaning, but a simpler and more commonly-used term.
From today forward, city officials announced that anyone who is arrested and incarcerated will be charged $25 by the jail, but will be refunded if later acquitted.
Instead of saying incarcerated, why not just say jailed? Same meaning, but a simpler and more commonly-used term.
More Ledes: Did You Need The Name?
In your ledes, some of you referred to the car accident victim specifically -- Scott Forsythe -- while others referred to him in the generic -- 22-year-old local man, or something to that effect.
While neither is wrong, I'd say the latter is the best approach. You have no reason to believe Forsythe is someone that would be known by name to your readers. In such cases, the generic identifier would suffice in a first reference, and you can offer the specific name as a secondary detail later in the story.
Now, if the victim was Oprah Winfrey, the name would be a good bet for the lede, precisely because she is someone many people would instantly recognize by name.
More Ledes: Write With (AP) Style
Is it 9:00 a.m. or 9 a.m. or 9 am or 9 o'clock?
It's 9 a.m., or maybe 9 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.
In the wake of this exercise, please be sure to review the AP Style listings for times.
Also, is it miles per hour or mph or m.p.h.?
It's mph or miles per hour. In AP Style, under, mph: Acceptable in all references for miles per hour or miles an hour.
Please note AP Style for mph.
It's 9 a.m., or maybe 9 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.
In the wake of this exercise, please be sure to review the AP Style listings for times.
Also, is it miles per hour or mph or m.p.h.?
It's mph or miles per hour. In AP Style, under, mph: Acceptable in all references for miles per hour or miles an hour.
Please note AP Style for mph.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Ledes: Ledes I Liked.
I'm happy to say that everybody did no worse than pretty good in this assignment, which in the past has been an ungraded piece of classwork. This year I'm going to give you some credit, though: you all get a boost to your overall quiz grade that's equivalent to 10 out of 10 on a single quiz. Which some of you could really use.
On this first assignment, it was far less important that I grade you and more critical that you get used to writing in a journalistic style and under a newsroom-type deadline before it starts counting for something.
Still, I think you're right where you need to be. Let's look at some of the ledes I thought worked well:
Couples who live together when they are younger are more likely to break up or divorce later in life, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
It identifies the most telling statistic, highlights it and provides a source for it. Nice work. This one collects a variety of factors:
Religion, age and wealth all factor in whether marriages last, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
Next is this:
Mayor Datolli plans to introduce a panhandling ordinance offering a one-way bus ticket out of town to homeless people at Tuesday's city council meeting.
It has who: the mayor who is acting, and homeless people being acted upon. It has what: the city council wanting to boot the homeless out of here. It has when: as soon as Tuesday's city council meeting. It has how: one-way bus tickets for the homeless. Four of six W's are covered here, and in only 25 words.
Next is this:
A victim of a lightning strike at a city swimming pool is suing the city for his injuries, citing neglect by the lifeguards to warn him of the storm.
Again, it sums everything you need to know in a simple, straightforward way. This next lede went a step further, and honed in on context:
Erik Barsh was going to be a senior tennis star until last summer when he was struck by lightning. Now he is in a legal volley with the city.
This is a more complex type of lede known by various terms, including a delayed lede (where the lede sets up a following nut graf that reads more like a basic lede) and an anecdotal lede (where in this case you are humanizing the subject a bit before plunging into the reason why this particular human is worthy of news coverage).
I didn't plan for you guys doing anything beyond a basic lede for this exercise, but it's fine that you did. We'll talk about alternate ledes and as the term goes on I'll encourage you to try more complex forms of story-telling. But if you want to fall back on the basic lee structure for now, that's perfectly fine. What I want to see you demonstrate for now is proper identification and fact selection. And a basic lede does that just fine.
Cynthia Lowe was arrested today for grand theft and defrauding an adoption agency after faking a pregnancy to receive money.
Very clear and concise. You know who did it, you know what they're charged with, and you know why they've been charged.
Another way to handle it would be to use a generic description of the woman instead of her full name in the lede, since she isn't anybody in particular that readers can expect to know by name, like Britney Spears or something. This lede took the generic approach:
A woman was arrested and charged with grand theft and fraud after faking a pregnancy to receive payments from an adoption agency.
Both these fraud ledes would have been further aided by the introduction of a telling fact that would take little space but say a lot: the exact dollar amount. Take out money and payments and instead put in $20,000. Doesn't that add so much more to the lede, in the same way saying whether a plane crash killed 2 people or 200 would say so much?
Look for those telling specifics that amplify the lede, and use them!
Now, there are some things missing from these and other ledes, like proper use of the word allegedly, and proper attribution use and style. But since we haven't learned those things yet, you weren't docked. And we'll get to learning those things very soon.
On this first assignment, it was far less important that I grade you and more critical that you get used to writing in a journalistic style and under a newsroom-type deadline before it starts counting for something.
Still, I think you're right where you need to be. Let's look at some of the ledes I thought worked well:
Couples who live together when they are younger are more likely to break up or divorce later in life, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
It identifies the most telling statistic, highlights it and provides a source for it. Nice work. This one collects a variety of factors:
Religion, age and wealth all factor in whether marriages last, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
Next is this:
Mayor Datolli plans to introduce a panhandling ordinance offering a one-way bus ticket out of town to homeless people at Tuesday's city council meeting.
It has who: the mayor who is acting, and homeless people being acted upon. It has what: the city council wanting to boot the homeless out of here. It has when: as soon as Tuesday's city council meeting. It has how: one-way bus tickets for the homeless. Four of six W's are covered here, and in only 25 words.
Next is this:
A victim of a lightning strike at a city swimming pool is suing the city for his injuries, citing neglect by the lifeguards to warn him of the storm.
Again, it sums everything you need to know in a simple, straightforward way. This next lede went a step further, and honed in on context:
Erik Barsh was going to be a senior tennis star until last summer when he was struck by lightning. Now he is in a legal volley with the city.
This is a more complex type of lede known by various terms, including a delayed lede (where the lede sets up a following nut graf that reads more like a basic lede) and an anecdotal lede (where in this case you are humanizing the subject a bit before plunging into the reason why this particular human is worthy of news coverage).
I didn't plan for you guys doing anything beyond a basic lede for this exercise, but it's fine that you did. We'll talk about alternate ledes and as the term goes on I'll encourage you to try more complex forms of story-telling. But if you want to fall back on the basic lee structure for now, that's perfectly fine. What I want to see you demonstrate for now is proper identification and fact selection. And a basic lede does that just fine.
Cynthia Lowe was arrested today for grand theft and defrauding an adoption agency after faking a pregnancy to receive money.
Very clear and concise. You know who did it, you know what they're charged with, and you know why they've been charged.
Another way to handle it would be to use a generic description of the woman instead of her full name in the lede, since she isn't anybody in particular that readers can expect to know by name, like Britney Spears or something. This lede took the generic approach:
A woman was arrested and charged with grand theft and fraud after faking a pregnancy to receive payments from an adoption agency.
Both these fraud ledes would have been further aided by the introduction of a telling fact that would take little space but say a lot: the exact dollar amount. Take out money and payments and instead put in $20,000. Doesn't that add so much more to the lede, in the same way saying whether a plane crash killed 2 people or 200 would say so much?
Look for those telling specifics that amplify the lede, and use them!
Now, there are some things missing from these and other ledes, like proper use of the word allegedly, and proper attribution use and style. But since we haven't learned those things yet, you weren't docked. And we'll get to learning those things very soon.
Ledes: Don't Forget Your Articles!
I don't mean stories. A mean a grammatical article, like a, an, the.
Like here: Woman arrested today for defrauding adoption agency.
It should be, A woman was arrested today for defrauding an adoption agency.
When it comes to writing for news, what messes us up regarding articles are newspaper headlines, which usually drop articles in favor of brevity. While that is true of headlines, that is not true of the actual stories under the headlines. Articles need articles.
If you're not sure if you have articles, read your story out loud and ask yourself if it sounds like you've formed complete sentences. If not, it's usually because you're missing an article.
Like here: Woman arrested today for defrauding adoption agency.
It should be, A woman was arrested today for defrauding an adoption agency.
When it comes to writing for news, what messes us up regarding articles are newspaper headlines, which usually drop articles in favor of brevity. While that is true of headlines, that is not true of the actual stories under the headlines. Articles need articles.
If you're not sure if you have articles, read your story out loud and ask yourself if it sounds like you've formed complete sentences. If not, it's usually because you're missing an article.
Ledes: Seek Missing Information!
There was a sort of trick question in this exercise, and that would be on the one citing Mayor Datolli.
In journalism, we fully identify people in first referring to them in a story. So in a first reference, it's Omar Sofradzija, with both the first and last name.
In subsequent references, however, you just use the last name: just Sofradzija said, for example.
In this case, though, you weren't given a first name for Datolli. What to do?
As journalists, our job isn't to simply write what is put before us. It's also to seek answers to holes in the information we have.
The correct response would have been to ask me for the mayor's first name. In a real world setting, it would be to find out what the mayor's first name was by making phone calls or checking records or just asking the mayor what the hell her first name was.
Be curious. Don't settle for what you have if what you have leaves unanswered questions.
In journalism, we fully identify people in first referring to them in a story. So in a first reference, it's Omar Sofradzija, with both the first and last name.
In subsequent references, however, you just use the last name: just Sofradzija said, for example.
In this case, though, you weren't given a first name for Datolli. What to do?
As journalists, our job isn't to simply write what is put before us. It's also to seek answers to holes in the information we have.
The correct response would have been to ask me for the mayor's first name. In a real world setting, it would be to find out what the mayor's first name was by making phone calls or checking records or just asking the mayor what the hell her first name was.
Be curious. Don't settle for what you have if what you have leaves unanswered questions.
Ledes: Be Economical With Words
Look for places where you use a bunch of words when fewer words would suffice. And use direct language. Like here:
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident that happened at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Let's take out "that happened." What's left is this:
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Does the reader lose anything other than two words? I'd say no. So, if the words don't add anything to the lede, why add the words?
Also, in journalism we try to use direct language. So, instead of saying the accident left his friend deceased, why not just say it left his friend dead?
This next lede had several problems regarding bets word use:
Mayor Datolli proposes a controversial busing systems plan to assist vagrants to move on and out of the city.
First, did you need to say controversial busing systems plan? I would think controversial bus plan would suffice.
Second, how about move on and out? Couldn't you just say move out and not lose any conveyance of meaning?
Third, is it offense to refer to homeless people as vagrants? Let's try to avoid terms that can legitimately be seen as offensive.
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident that happened at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Let's take out "that happened." What's left is this:
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Does the reader lose anything other than two words? I'd say no. So, if the words don't add anything to the lede, why add the words?
Also, in journalism we try to use direct language. So, instead of saying the accident left his friend deceased, why not just say it left his friend dead?
This next lede had several problems regarding bets word use:
Mayor Datolli proposes a controversial busing systems plan to assist vagrants to move on and out of the city.
First, did you need to say controversial busing systems plan? I would think controversial bus plan would suffice.
Second, how about move on and out? Couldn't you just say move out and not lose any conveyance of meaning?
Third, is it offense to refer to homeless people as vagrants? Let's try to avoid terms that can legitimately be seen as offensive.
Ledes: Understand What You Are Writing!
This lede surprised the heck out of me:
A senior citizen was arrested and charged with grand theft and adoption fraud after faking a pregnancy for the purpose of receiving benefits from the Hope Agency.
Uh, where did you get that the person was a senior citizen? I don't see that in the information you were provided. Additionally, if you did think that, wouldn't you question it because senior citizens can't get pregnant?
I suspect you may have mistaken the woman's apartment number -- 74 -- with her age. Make sure you understand what you are writing before you start writing.
I can't decide if that should get the award for the biggest goof of the day. This next lede is certainly a contender:
A woman was arrested today for grand theft and defrauding an abortion agency by faking her pregnancy.
Oy, vey. I know you meant adoption. But that's not what you wrote. Please, proof-read your work because spell check won't catch you using the wrong word, as long as the wrong word is spelled correctly.
There were two such cases of that. In another instance, someone wrote "lighting" when they meant to write "lightning." Again, spell check is a supplement to but not a substitute for reviewing the story yourself, line by line.
If this happened to be a normally-graded exercise, all three of these examples would have qualified as fatals and an automatic grade of 1.0 out of 4.0. So let's be careful out there.
In the same vein, make sure what you write can be understood clearly by others. This one leaves a bit of room for interpretation:
After receiving $12,000 to pay for medical expenses and signing adoption papers for a made-up pregnancy, police arrested Cynthia Lowrie for grand theft and defrauding of the agency.
Readers can probably figure this out on their own, but let's look at what you wrote in a literal way: did Cythnia do all that before she was arrested? Or did the police do all that before arresting Cynthia? You would have been better off to eliminate any chance of misunderstanding like this:
After Cynthia Lowrie received $12,000 to pay for medical expenses and signed adoption papers for a made-up pregnancy, police arrested her for grand theft and defrauding of the agency.
(There's something else to consider here: in your lede, you shifted between tenses. At one point you were going with -ing, and at another you shifted to -ed. Try to maintain the same tense throughout.)
This next lede also leaves some room for confusion:
Mayor Datolli announced today that she will introduce a new ordinance to the city council to decrease the amount of panhandling at their annual Tuesday meeting.
Again, let's read this literally. You are saying that they are trying to decrease the panhandling that happens at their meetings. Obviously not what you meant to say. Better word order would have helped make that point clear, like this:
Mayor Datolli announced today that she will introduce a new ordinance to the city council at their annual Tuesday meeting to decrease the amount of panhandling.
Neither lede is the most confusing lede ever. Not even close. Still, our job as journalists is to be precise. Leave no room for mistaken interpretation.
FYI, technically there's a fatal there, too: you had no information that meetings were annual, which by definition means once a year. Again, be careful with word use.
Finally, make sure you identify the latest highlight and outcome in your lede. This one did not do that:
Erik Barsh suffered brain and nerve injuries and the loss of a friend after they were hit by lightning at a swimming pool when lifeguards failed to evaluate swimmers.
The latest event wasn't that they were hit by lightning. That happened a year ago. The reason it's news now is because Barsh is now suing. This lede may have worked if it was a delayed lede, followed by this:
Now, Barsh wants the city to pay for that.
Or something like that. Either way, just be sure that what you're pegging your story on is what makes it news. And what usually makes it news is whatever is new.
A senior citizen was arrested and charged with grand theft and adoption fraud after faking a pregnancy for the purpose of receiving benefits from the Hope Agency.
Uh, where did you get that the person was a senior citizen? I don't see that in the information you were provided. Additionally, if you did think that, wouldn't you question it because senior citizens can't get pregnant?
I suspect you may have mistaken the woman's apartment number -- 74 -- with her age. Make sure you understand what you are writing before you start writing.
I can't decide if that should get the award for the biggest goof of the day. This next lede is certainly a contender:
A woman was arrested today for grand theft and defrauding an abortion agency by faking her pregnancy.
Oy, vey. I know you meant adoption. But that's not what you wrote. Please, proof-read your work because spell check won't catch you using the wrong word, as long as the wrong word is spelled correctly.
There were two such cases of that. In another instance, someone wrote "lighting" when they meant to write "lightning." Again, spell check is a supplement to but not a substitute for reviewing the story yourself, line by line.
If this happened to be a normally-graded exercise, all three of these examples would have qualified as fatals and an automatic grade of 1.0 out of 4.0. So let's be careful out there.
In the same vein, make sure what you write can be understood clearly by others. This one leaves a bit of room for interpretation:
After receiving $12,000 to pay for medical expenses and signing adoption papers for a made-up pregnancy, police arrested Cynthia Lowrie for grand theft and defrauding of the agency.
Readers can probably figure this out on their own, but let's look at what you wrote in a literal way: did Cythnia do all that before she was arrested? Or did the police do all that before arresting Cynthia? You would have been better off to eliminate any chance of misunderstanding like this:
After Cynthia Lowrie received $12,000 to pay for medical expenses and signed adoption papers for a made-up pregnancy, police arrested her for grand theft and defrauding of the agency.
(There's something else to consider here: in your lede, you shifted between tenses. At one point you were going with -ing, and at another you shifted to -ed. Try to maintain the same tense throughout.)
This next lede also leaves some room for confusion:
Mayor Datolli announced today that she will introduce a new ordinance to the city council to decrease the amount of panhandling at their annual Tuesday meeting.
Again, let's read this literally. You are saying that they are trying to decrease the panhandling that happens at their meetings. Obviously not what you meant to say. Better word order would have helped make that point clear, like this:
Mayor Datolli announced today that she will introduce a new ordinance to the city council at their annual Tuesday meeting to decrease the amount of panhandling.
Neither lede is the most confusing lede ever. Not even close. Still, our job as journalists is to be precise. Leave no room for mistaken interpretation.
FYI, technically there's a fatal there, too: you had no information that meetings were annual, which by definition means once a year. Again, be careful with word use.
Finally, make sure you identify the latest highlight and outcome in your lede. This one did not do that:
Erik Barsh suffered brain and nerve injuries and the loss of a friend after they were hit by lightning at a swimming pool when lifeguards failed to evaluate swimmers.
The latest event wasn't that they were hit by lightning. That happened a year ago. The reason it's news now is because Barsh is now suing. This lede may have worked if it was a delayed lede, followed by this:
Now, Barsh wants the city to pay for that.
Or something like that. Either way, just be sure that what you're pegging your story on is what makes it news. And what usually makes it news is whatever is new.
Ledes: Writing With (AP) Style
In this assignment you weren't asked to write conforming to AP style. And on this one I won't grade you on that basis. Still, we're going to use this opportunity to start picking up some of the more common AP style points.
Like with how to refer to money. Is it $12,000 with the dollar symbol ahead of the amount or 12,000 dollars, with dollars spelled out?
It's the former This is what I pulled from the AP Stylebook, under dollars: "Use figures and the $ sign in all except casual references or amounts without a figure."
Number usage has its own specific style under AP rules. Here's the most basic AP guideline, in your style book under numerals: In general "Spell out whole numbers below 10, use figures for 10 and above."
So two should be two, not 2. And 10 should be 10, not ten.
So then, is this correct to start a sentence, under AP Style rules, by spelling out a number like this?
Twenty-two . . .
Actually, that IS correct number use. This is under the numerals heading:
Spell out a numeral at the beginning of a sentence.
Also, Is it 17 year-old with a hyphen between year and old or 17-year-old with hyphens between everything or 17 year old with no hyphens at all? AP Style under "ages": Use hyphens for ages expressed as adjectives before a noun or as substitutes for a noun.
So it's 17-year-old, with hyphens between the 17 and year, and between the year and old.
Another AP no-no is using the percentage symbol of % instead of spelling out the word percent. The correct use is to spell out the symbol, like this: 35 percent. Please review the AP listing under percent.
Moving on, many of you referred to the Centers for Disease Control as just that in your lede. A few of you called used its acronym of CDC in a first reference. An acronym is a word formed from the first letter or letters of a series of words, such as MSU (which is the acronym for Michigan State University).
And using an acronym on first reference is probably a no-no.
In most first cases, it's best to spell out the full title of an entity. If an acronym is especially well-known -- like NASA or FBI or USA -- then generally it is acceptable in a first reference. I'm not sure CDC makes that cut, FYI.
Now, in subsequent references you have a few options. One is to refer to the center in the generic, like I just did: as the center, lower-cased. A second option would be to consider using the acronym, after establishing what the acronym is in the first reference.
This is where I'm going to refer you back to AP Style. Please carefully read and review the listing for abbreviations and acronyms.
Speaking of the CDC, was it Center for Disease Control or Centers for Disease Control? Did anybody check AP style under Centers for Disease Control? What does it say?
The idea behind AP style is not simply to drive you crazy; it's also to create a consistent way of referring to terms and phrases and stats and such throughout not just a story, but throughout all stories offered by a single media organization. Consistency is the key point I'd like you to learn here, and we'll use AP style as the baseline.
I know the AP Stylebook is a lot to digest. But as this class goes on, I expect that you improve by checking your word use against the AP Stylebook, and by remembering AP Style rules as we go along.
What I'm saying is, I don't expect you to make the same mistake twice. I expect you to learn from your mistakes and apply the lessons going forward.
When it comes to types of language you're likely to frequently -- like numbers and money references -- you may want to make a cheat sheet that you can quickly refer to. Just an idea, folks.
Like with how to refer to money. Is it $12,000 with the dollar symbol ahead of the amount or 12,000 dollars, with dollars spelled out?
It's the former This is what I pulled from the AP Stylebook, under dollars: "Use figures and the $ sign in all except casual references or amounts without a figure."
Number usage has its own specific style under AP rules. Here's the most basic AP guideline, in your style book under numerals: In general "Spell out whole numbers below 10, use figures for 10 and above."
So two should be two, not 2. And 10 should be 10, not ten.
So then, is this correct to start a sentence, under AP Style rules, by spelling out a number like this?
Twenty-two . . .
Actually, that IS correct number use. This is under the numerals heading:
Spell out a numeral at the beginning of a sentence.
Also, Is it 17 year-old with a hyphen between year and old or 17-year-old with hyphens between everything or 17 year old with no hyphens at all? AP Style under "ages": Use hyphens for ages expressed as adjectives before a noun or as substitutes for a noun.
So it's 17-year-old, with hyphens between the 17 and year, and between the year and old.
Another AP no-no is using the percentage symbol of % instead of spelling out the word percent. The correct use is to spell out the symbol, like this: 35 percent. Please review the AP listing under percent.
Moving on, many of you referred to the Centers for Disease Control as just that in your lede. A few of you called used its acronym of CDC in a first reference. An acronym is a word formed from the first letter or letters of a series of words, such as MSU (which is the acronym for Michigan State University).
And using an acronym on first reference is probably a no-no.
In most first cases, it's best to spell out the full title of an entity. If an acronym is especially well-known -- like NASA or FBI or USA -- then generally it is acceptable in a first reference. I'm not sure CDC makes that cut, FYI.
Now, in subsequent references you have a few options. One is to refer to the center in the generic, like I just did: as the center, lower-cased. A second option would be to consider using the acronym, after establishing what the acronym is in the first reference.
This is where I'm going to refer you back to AP Style. Please carefully read and review the listing for abbreviations and acronyms.
Speaking of the CDC, was it Center for Disease Control or Centers for Disease Control? Did anybody check AP style under Centers for Disease Control? What does it say?
The idea behind AP style is not simply to drive you crazy; it's also to create a consistent way of referring to terms and phrases and stats and such throughout not just a story, but throughout all stories offered by a single media organization. Consistency is the key point I'd like you to learn here, and we'll use AP style as the baseline.
I know the AP Stylebook is a lot to digest. But as this class goes on, I expect that you improve by checking your word use against the AP Stylebook, and by remembering AP Style rules as we go along.
What I'm saying is, I don't expect you to make the same mistake twice. I expect you to learn from your mistakes and apply the lessons going forward.
When it comes to types of language you're likely to frequently -- like numbers and money references -- you may want to make a cheat sheet that you can quickly refer to. Just an idea, folks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)