Alt Ledes: Ledes I Liked

... included ...

What was supposed to be the happiest day of 22-year-old Scott Forsythe's life turned into tragedy.

... and ... 

Trying his best to make it to his 9 a.m. wedding on time, Scott Forsythe's special day came to a fatal end.

... and ...


During a financial crisis, city officials decided it is time for the bad guys to start paying for their actions. Literally.

... and ...

Getting taken downtown by the police in East Lansing will now cost you more than just your time and dignity.

... and ...

America's grasslands could soon become America's pride lands if an idea crafted by lead scientists at Michigan State University and other collaborating institutions comes into fruition.

This next led stretched out over a couple of paragraphs, ahead of a presumed nut graf we don't see:

Most Americans go to the zoo if they ever want to see African wildlife, but what if African wildlife was brought to the Great Plains of North America?

If a group of biologists and ecologists from Michigan State University succeed with their relocation plan, that's exactly what will happen.

Now, which do you like? Why or why not?

Alt Ledes: Good Lede/Nut Graf Combos

In this exercise, you were asked to do just a lede, with no subsequent paragraph. But some of you did ledes that in essence acted as a combination alternate lede/subsequent nut graf, combined into a single graf.

What I did was split some of these ledes as follows, so you can see a concept we talked about earlier: that when you do a unique and contextual alternate lede, it is usually followed by a nut graf that sounds more like a traditional lede, fills in the specific blanks left by your general contextual lede, and offers a strong transition to the body of the story.

Let's look at a few examples:

Taxpayers in East Lansing will probably be happy to hear the term "cost of crime" is about to take on a new meaning.

East Lansing police chief Barry Kopperrud announced that the police department would begin charging arrestees a $25 fee for the process of taking their mug shots and fingerprints.

Now, the lede sets context, with the "cost of crime" meaning change. And the nut graf fills in the details of the lede, by detailing what the change is: that arrestees will be charged a $25 processing fee.

Same with this lede/nut graf combo: 

East Lansing needs money, and you can help. Want to know how? Get arrested.

The city is imposing a $25 fee, effective immediately, to every person who gets arrested and has his or her fingerprints and mug shot taken.

When we do alternate ledes, the nut graf will read very much like a basic lede.

Here's another decent one:

For Megan Perakiss, the 6-month-old daughter of Michael and Ethel Perakiss, Wednesday afternoon was a dangerous adventure.

She was in the back seat of a sport-utility vehicle which was carjacked by a man who had just robbed a nearby convenience store after 2 p.m. on Michigan Avenue. Fortunately, about 40 minutes after a search had begun, police found Megan Perakiss safe in the vehicle, which was abandoned in the parking lot of a Chinese restaurant.

And one more:

For 6-month-old Megan Perakiss, it was an ordeal she might never remember, but it's one her parents won't ever forget.

Police were "shocked but pleased" that n harm came to Perakiss after the car she was sitting in was stolen by an armed robber outside a local convenience store, although the robber is still on the loose.

Alt Ledes: Contextual, Or Too Casual?

With an alternate lede, we certainly want to set context, whether through an anecdote, an observation and/or word play. That's the purpose of an alternate lede; not just to say what happened, but how and why it matters and what greater meaning results from the action.

That means we have to make judgment calls on what is appropriate and what goes over the line in amplifying that context. Let's consider these ledes:

Cold feet is often a symptom of pre-ceremonial wedding jitters; however, the lead foot of 22-year-old Scott Forsythe resulted in tragedy this morning.

... and...

After the time and money spent to plan a wedding, the Howard and Forsythe families will need to plan for a funeral.

... and ...

Scott Forsythe was tragically in too much of a hurry to get married.

The 22-year-old was speeding over 100 mph to the church where he was to be married when he swerved off the road and was killed.

... and ...

"Until death do us part" is usually a phrase people say at the end of a weeding ceremony to seal the life-long commitment of marriage.

For 22-year-old Scott Forsythe, his death came 15 minutes before his chance to speak those words to his fiancee, Sara Howard.

... and ...

They say a man's life is over once they marry the woman they fell in love with.

For 22-year-old Scott Forsythe, his life ended 15 minutes before his wedding was set to take place.

Whaddya think? Fair or foul? I go back and forth on these two. Let's discuss.

Alt Ledes: Don't Assume!

Like in this lede:

There are many fears that go through a bride's mind before their wedding. For Sara Howard, she never thought to worry about her husband's drive to the church.

Now, it's structurally fine. But the question I have is, how do you know she never thought to worry about her husband's drive to the church?

In the information you were given, you have no indication whether she wasn't worried, or that her fiancee was a shitty driver who had her constantly terrified with his lead foot.

Here, we went beyond the information you had, and made an assumption. We were being creative based on our guessing, not the facts. And we can't do that.

Now, as a journalist you would have been correct to find out if she ever though she'd have to worry about her fiancee's driving. And if she answered yes, then this lede would be perfect.

But we need to confirm the facts first.

Alt Ledes: The Peanut Barrel Rule

There's nothing wrong with this lede. But it's still missing something. Here it is:

A 22-year-old man was killed in a car accident earlier this morning after veering to avoid a dog in the road, according to police.

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.

Let's look at this lede: does it meet the Peanut Barrel rule?

A Quik Shoppe robbery and carjacking took place just seconds apart. No one was killed, and the robber got away.

Now, you tell me what you think.

Alt Ledes: Say What You Mean!

What is wrong with this lede?

To save the life of a dog, 22-year-old Scott Forsythe lost his life in a car crash just 15 minutes before his wedding this morning.

If you read this lede literally, it's this: you're saying this man died 15 minutes before his wedding. You're suggesting his wedding took place (all "Weekend at Bernie's"-style, perhaps).

But that's not what you meant. What you meant was, he died 15 minutes before his wedding was to take place this morning.

If that's what you meant, then that's what you should have written.

Make sure you say what you mean, and mean what you say. Don't leave room for any misinterpretations. Be precise.

Alt 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.

Basic Ledes: Some Good Basic Ledes

In this exercise, we were looking to do basic ledes that simply sum up the bare minimum people need to know about a story's end result and ultimate outcome. And I'm happy to say many of you did at least pretty well in accomplishing that goal.

Like here:

Two children died in a house fire Saturday evening in East Lansing.

Is it very simple? Yes. Is it the gist of the story? Yes. It works. This one builds on it alittle bit, by adding a bit of critical extra detail:

Two children were killed in an East Lansing house fire Saturday evening after smoke detectors failed to sound due to dead batteries.


Here's another strong one:

Nearly one-third of women who attend graduate school after marriage end up divorcees, according to a recent study done at the University of Florida.

In that lede, a key detail is picked out and emphasized. Next is this:

A family of three was hospitalized with only minor injuries after a train struck their SUV at a Michigan Avenue crossing, police said.

You get end result and what happened in the first place. You know everything you absolutely need to know about this story; the rest is the details.

This next lede builds upon the last lede by adding an interesting additional detail:

No one was seriously injured when a train struck a car carrying a family of three, including a pregnant mother, on Michigan Avenue on Monday evening.

Which ones do you like the best? And why?

Basic Ledes: Fatals Are No Fun

In this assignment, the way I graded you was that for each completed lede-- no matter how strong or weak -- I gave you a grade equal to getting 10 out of 10 correct on a current events quiz, so doing this assignment should have given you the equivalent of three perfect quiz scores.

This is one of the very few times you'll get a grade just for effort, rather than performance. That's not how we'll grade such assignments going forward, but I wanted to make this first one a bit light in terms of your final grade.

The exception to the grade was if you had a fatal. A fatal is what we call a significant fact error, including incorrect premises, incorrectly spelled names, incorrect titles, misspellings that create a change in meaning, quotes with any inaccuracies contained within, incorrect statistics, incorrect telling facts like the day of the week, the time something occurred, wrong location, ect.

And the way we'll score fatals going forward is that it automatically makes your assignment grade to a 1.0. That's not to be an ass about it; it's because in journalism it's critical that we get our facts right.

In this assignment, I gave you a bit of a break. Instead of you biffing on the whole assignment, for each part of the assignment in which you fataled I gave you a quiz score equal to getting 3 out of 10 right.

Now, the way we learn to avoid getting fatals is to get fatals. Then, we learn why we fataled and what we could have done to avoid that fatal. Then, we apply those lessons going forward.

To that end, this semester we will review by blog every fatal done by the class, in hopes of not only keeping that person from making that mistake, but also to share those hard lessons so that others don't make such a mistake in the first place.

And now we start:

We had two fatals in this lede:

Two children, ages 5 and 3, burned to death after accidentally setting their Maldren Avenue house on fire Saturday evening, police said.

Structurally, this lede is fine. It was a no-brainer 10 or 10 if the facts all checked out.But there are two big fact errors.

First, the kids did not burn to death. According to the information you were give, they died from heat and smoke, not burning.

Second, your sources were firefighters, not police. Police officers are not firefighters, and vice versa.

Two other ledes didn't fatal, but really missed a major premise of the story. Here's one of 'em:

East Lansing firefighters responded to a call at 9:15 p.m. last night when a local college student suffered second-degree burns while babysitting due to a faulty smoke detector.

First, the news isn't that firefighters responded to a call; it's what the call was: a house fire. We never say there was a house fire.

We need to be thinking end result. After all, we wouldn't write a sports story with a lede of, MSU played a football game against Ohio State, right? We'd write MSU beat Ohio State, 107-0. And in this case, we'd concentrate not that firefighters showed up, but what they showed up to: a house fire.

Second, we never got to the most significant end result; not that the babysitter was badly hurt, but that two children died. That's a huge miss! Death trumps injury, right?

Again, it's okay that we're making some mistakes in this class. That's how we learn. Let's just make sure we do really learn from these examples, okay?




 

Basic Ledes: Use Simple Language

Some of you wrote something like; martial disruption is greater among highly-educated women.

What is martial disruption, though? In going through the information you were given, it appears the metrics the study used were whether and when people got divorced or separated.

So, why not say just that: separation or divorce is greater among highly-educated women.

When you have a chance to simplify a term and be more precise, please do take that opportunity,

Basic Ledes: Details!

Make sure you're being precise in what you say. Like with this lede:

A family of three miraculously survived after being struck by a train while failing to stop at a gate to make sure no train was approaching.

So, the family was hit by the train? Were they walking across the tracks?

No. They were in a sport-utility vehicle that was struck by the train. Problem is, your lede at best is fuzzy on that critical detail and at worst misleading.

What you needed to say was, A family of three miraculously survived after their SUV was struck by a train while failing to stop at a gate to make sure no train was approaching.

Plus, there's an important element missing from this lede: when it happened. When is critical to news, right?

So, let's plug in the date, which in this case was Monday:  A family of three miraculously survived after their SUV was struck by a train Monday while failing to stop at a gate to make sure no train was approaching.

Okay, now you're done.

Basic Ledes: Don't Forget Your Articles!

I don't mean stories; I mean grammatical articles, like a, and, the.

This lede was missing its articles:

Three people taken to hospital after a train crashed into a sport-utility vehicle last night.

What you meant was this:

Three people were taken to a hospital after a train crashed into a sport-utility vehicle last night.

If you're wondering if you have proper articles in your lede, read it out loud. Does it sound like a complete sentence? Or does it sound like a robot talking?

If it's the latter, you're probably missing some articles.

This is a pretty common problem for newbie journos. I suspect it's because when we write story headlines, we do tend to leave out articles. But we don't do that in stories.

Basic Ledes: Flipping The Lede

With many ledes, we want to emphasize the news over the sourcing; that is, what happened gets priority over who it happened to or who said it.

Let's look at this lede, where the sourcing comes first:

A study led by sociologists at the University of Florida found highly educated women are more likely to end up in a failed marriage compared to women without degrees.

Now, that's a fine lede. Very solid. But I would argue that it can amplify the main point a bit more by what I call flipping the lede; that is, changing the sequence from source-finding to finding-source -- essentially, just moving the start of the lede to the back -- like this:

Highly educated women are more likely to end up in a failed marriage compared to women without degrees, a study led by sociologists at the University of Florida found.

Now, you start right out with the news, and then get to who discovered it. Notice I did not change, remove or add any words; it is exactly what you wrote. Just in a different sequence.

Was it necessary? No. But I think it does improve the lede just a bit more.

Are there times when you should have the sourcing first? Yes, when the source itself is newsworthy, like if President Obama announces something.

Basic Ledes: End Result

Ledes need to go to end result and ultimate outcome. So, is this lede sufficent?

A train struck a car carrying a family of three Monday morning. The accident occurred at 5:48 p.m. when Abraham Cohen failed to stop at a stop sign.

I would say not. What happened to the family? That goes to end result, right? This lede does that:

On Monday evening, a train struck a sport-utility vehicle carrying two adults and a child, resulting in extensive vehicle damage but no serious injuries.

Now, you know not only what happened, but how it ended up. And that's what a lede is supposed to do.

Likewise, the news isn't just that something happened, it's what happened. This lede gets the first part, but not the second:

A $1.5 million study by the University of Florida reveals how education effects the marital status of women.

Okay, so we know that there was a study. Problem is, from this lede we don't know what the study found, exactly!

And the news isn't that a study took place, in the same way the news isn't that a football game was played. It's who won or lost, right?

Again, we need end result. And the end result is that the study found more educated women are more likely to divorce. So, the best lede would have been something like this:

A $1.5 million study by the University of Florida reveals more education can negatively effect the marital status of women.

Now, we know ultimate outcome: what the study found.

Basic Ledes: Order Of Importance

In journalism, we shouldn't list things simply how they are listed; we should rank things based on importance.

Let's look at this lede:

A fire broke out at 9:15 p.m. Saturday on Maldren Avenue in East Lansing, resulting in $39,000 damage, the deaths of two children, and serious harm to their babysitter.

Now, let's look at the end results. How would you rank the imprtance of the following facts?

1. There was $39,000 in damage
2. Two children died
3. Their babysitter was badly hurt

I think most people would rank it 2, 3, then 1, right? So, do the same in your fact order, like this:

A fire broke out at 9:15 p.m. Saturday on Maldren Avenue in East Lansing, resulting in the deaths of two children, serious harm to their babysitter, and $39,000 in damage.

Just like a lede takes what is most important in a story and puts it out front, the elements of the lede must emphasize which facts are the most important among the most important.

Basic Ledes: Analysis Or Opinion?

It's a fine line between using descriptive words justified by the facts and being sensational with little justification. This lede straddled that line:

There was a miraculous escape as a train struck a family of three's SUV at an unsafe intersection on Michigan Avenue near Wayne Boulevard on Monday afternoon.

First, is it fair to say it was miraculous? It it was your conclusion, probably. But the information you were given included, police said it was amazing no one was killed. So it wasn't you simply making a subjective conclusion; you were citing presumed experts on car crashes (and hopefully in the body of the story you would include a quote from police explicitly supporting that claim in the lede).

Now, was it fair to call the intersection unsafe? This was a bit dicier. The information you were given said there were no warning lights or a crossing gate, but there were warning signs and a stop sign.

So, is that necessarily unsafe? If later in your story you cited some sort of expert or experts (like cops or safety engineers) or other people in the know (frequent users of the intersection), saying it's unsafe and offering a justification of why it's unsafe, then I'd say you're in the right.

But while this is clearly a less-protected crossing, I think it's a leap to say it's unsafe, in lieu of additional information. 

Basic Ledes: One Sentence Is Better Than Two

Most of the time, we'd like to keep ledes to one sentence. This one had two:

Three people were injured when a train struck a car Monday evening in East Lansing. Police say the driver of the car failed to stop at a stop sign.

I would say this lede could have been merged into one sentence by moving word order around so that the supporting fact (why the crash happened) fits into the main point (how it unfolded).

So I would take that second sentence and fold its main point into the narrative of the first sentence, like this:

Three people were injured when a train struck a car that failed to stop at a stop sign Monday evening in East Lansing.

Now, it's one fewer sentence, a few less words and you're still including the what and why in the lede.

Basic Ledes: Finding The Right Tense

In writing for print versus writing for broadcast, there's always been a difference in how we tense our words.

In broadcast, there's an emphasis on writing as if the audience is getting the news exactly when you're saying it, and in a short amount of time after it took place; for example, you'd write that a fire leaves a pair of children dead.

But in print, we write knowing that the reader will get the message long after we typed it up, and long after the event actually occurred: e.g. a fire left a pair of children dead.

For the purpose of this class, I'd prefer that you wrote in a print style. But be aware of the differences.

Basic 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 $25 with the dollar symbol ahead of the amount or 25 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.

Moving on, is it six-year-old girl with six spelled out, or is six in numeric form, like this: 6-year-old girl.

It's the latter. It's another exception to the general AP number rule. In AP Style under ages:

Always use figures.

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.

Also, is an 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.

And if you referred to the intersection of 29th Street and Melrose Avenue, that would be the correct reference, not just 29th and Melrose.

Basic Ledes: Don't Forget Important Details!

Like here:

Three were injured when a train struck a car Monday in East Lansing.

Um, three what? People? Puppies? Goldfish? What?

What we needed to do here was say, three people were injured when ...

Don't forget the obvious. And don't assume your audience can figure it out on their own. Be direct in your language and supporting facts.

Likewise, make sure you're saying what you mean to say, like here:

A train struck a family in a vehicle on Monday evening, but no one was seriously injured.

Now, did the train strike the family? No. The train struck a vehicle carrying the family. So say that:

A train struck a vehicle carrying a family on Monday evening, but no one was seriously injured.