Rescue: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why

Quite a few of us never said what time the collapse took place. Even more of us never said when the boy was pulled out of the tunnel, and at what time the boy died.

Time often matters as one of the five W's. But in this case, it's especially important to the telling of the story.

Time tells you how difficult it would have been for the boy to be okay after being buried for so long. Time tells you how difficult it was to dig out the boy, in that it took so long.

In this case, specific times are important bits of data that help show teh reader what happened, and not just leave them being told by you.

You say it was a difficult rescue. The times help readers see that.

In every story you write, try to determine which data sets help explain the story and show readers what they need to see in terms of evidence supporting your overall angle.

Robbery: WHO, What, When, Where, Why

A few of you never named the robber. Why in earth wouldn't you?

I mean, the name is central to the story: WHO robbed the store. WHO was shot dead. Right?

Don't forget to include all the five W's (who, what, when, where, why) and the one H that accompanies it (how).

Others failed to name the robber until very late in the story, after generically referring to a gunman repeatedly in the story. Ideally, you'd want to ID the robber no later than the nut graf -- since WHO did the robbing and WHO was killed was a very major W among the 5 W's -- and go from there.

Just like you didn't wait to identify Layoux by name, don't wait to ID people who are considered central to the story. A person killed whose actions triggered everything else that happened -- Layoux having to use his gun, Layoux losing his job as a result -- isn't a bit player whose name can wait until later, like the district attorney or a cop who showed up after everything was over.

Robbery: Who, What, When, WHERE, Why

Did you need to cite the store's specific 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?

The lede probably wasn't a good place for that -- a first attribution simply as a Haslett convenience store, or a local O-Mart store would have been fine -- but an address with a subsequent attribution would have been helpful.

I'm just sayin'.

JRN 200: The Body Of A News Story

The most basic story structures are very specific in style yet simple in design. So let's look an imaginary story done in a basic news style, starting with what you already know -- the lede:

School was canceled forever today after a 43-year-old college instructor won a multi-billion dollar lottery, quitting his job and sparking a walkout among his students.

The lede is usually followed by what is called the nut graf. The role of that paragraph is to elaborate and expand upon the details of the lede.

Consider the general identifiers posed in the lede: an unnamed instructor, an unnamed school, an unspecified big-money lottery ect. Try to follow up on those generalities with specifics in the nut graf, like this:

Omar Sofradzija, who teaches a journalism class at Michigan State University in East Lansing, won the $99 billion Amazeballs drawing Monday, after which he quit Tuesday, lottery officials said.

That was followed by a mass walkout by MSU students, and then cancelation of MSU classes the next day, university officials said.

In journalism, we try to keep paragraphs fairly short -- usually limited to one main point or idea per graf, and/or one or two sentences per graf. In this case, I thought the nut graf was running a bit long, so I split it into two grafs.

We try to keep paragraphs short and specific for two big reasons: one, to make it easy for the reader to identify key points and specific quotes and such; and two, to make it easy for editors to do the same so they can more quickly edit the story by easily finding what may be worth emphasis or cutting out.

The point after the nut graf is a great place to consider putting in a telling quote; something that goes to the heart of the story's theme or context or ultimate meaning. Something like this:

"If there's no Omar, there simply isn't any point in having school," MSU president Lou Anna K. Simon said.

At this point, the lede/nut graf/key quote package creates sort of a mini-story. In the same way the lede gives you the bare minimum of what you need to know about the story, this grouping of grafs gives readers the minimum amount of information AND supporting detail and evidence.

From this point on, you have a couple of options: you can add more supporting facts and quotes, in descending order of importance. This is called the inverted pyramid style of story organization. You start with the most important piece of background, then the next most important, and so on. Like with short paragraphs, it allows for faster reading and editing. Like this:

Sofradzija, who has been making just $2 an hour teaching an introduction-to-journalism class, said he plans to never teach again.

"Seriously, eff those little brats," he said.

But a number of students said that losing Sofradzija as an instructor has sapped their will to learn.

"If I can't learn from Omar, I can't learn. I'm that stupid," said Elvis Presley, a sophomore journalism major from Canada.

Sofradzija said he did not know what exactly he's spend his fortune on, but he promised it would be something stupid.

Notice how pieces of telling information are paired up with quotes supporting, amplifying and humanizing that raw data. It's not necessary that every graf of info is followed by a related quote, but it does help in reinforcing the points that are made throughout a story.

Also, please note attribution is liberally used throughout the story, in every graf after the lede. That's for the benefit of readers, who get to see exactly where you get each bit of information that supports the original claim you make in your lede. Not only are you transparent, but you essentially rely on the expertise of your sources by citing them, building your credibility.

Another approach is to offer a chronological telling, looking at things from the start. It's important that you weigh the facts you have and the context of the story to decide if an inverted pyramid, chronology or some other method best tells the story. Like this:

Events quickly began to unfold around 8 p.m. Monday, when Sofradzija was named the Amazeballs winner. His resignation was submitted to MSU by 6 a.m. Tuesday, school officials said.

"Seriously, eff those little brats," Sofradzija said.

Word quickly swirled around campus of Sofradzija's departure, with students walking out of their classes em masse throughout the day Tuesday, school officials said.

"If I can't learn from Omar, I can't learn. I'm that stupid," said Elvis Presley, a sophomore journalism major from Canada.

University leaders met that night before making the cancellation of the semester official at 8 a.m. today, officials said.

And that's it. Notice how the story seems to end sort of abruptly. Looks weird, right? Well, in journalism that's okay is your story lacks what writers call a satisfying ending. Why is this okay? Because you already have an ending: your lede.

Now that we looked at these two structures in pieces, let's put it all together and look at the pieces as stories. First, the inverted pyramid:

School was canceled forever today after a 43-year-old college instructor won a multi-billion dollar lottery, quitting his job and sparking a walkout among his students.

Omar Sofradzija, who teaches a journalism class at Michigan State University in East Lansing, won the $99 billion Amazeballs drawing Monday, after which he quit Tuesday, lottery officials said.

That was followed by a mass walkout by MSU students, and then cancelation of MSU classes the next day, university officials said.

"If there's no Omar, there simply isn't any point in having school," MSU president Lou Anna K. Simon said.

Sofradzija, who has been making just $2 an hour teaching an introduction-to-journalism class, said he plans to never teach again.

"Seriously, eff those little brats," he said.

But a number of students said that losing Sofradzija as an instructor has sapped their will to learn.

"If I can't learn from Omar, I can't learn. I'm that stupid," said Elvis Presley, a sophomore journalism major from Canada.

Sofradzija said he did not know what exactly he's spend his fortune on, but he promised it would be something stupid.

*****

Now, the chronological style:

*****

School was canceled forever today after a 43-year-old college instructor won a multi-billion dollar lottery, quitting his job and sparking a walkout among his students.

Omar Sofradzija, who teaches a journalism class at Michigan State University in East Lansing, won the $99 billion Amazeballs drawing Monday, after which he quit Tuesday, lottery officials said.

That was followed by a mass walkout by MSU students, and then cancelation of MSU classes the next day, university officials said.

"If there's no Omar, there simply isn't any point in having school," MSU president Lou Anna K. Simon said.

Events quickly began to unfold around 8 p.m. Monday, when Sofradzija was named the Amazeballs winner. His resignation was submitted to MSU by 6 a.m. Tuesday, school officials said.

"Seriously, eff those little brats," Sofradzija said.

Word quickly swirled around campus of Sofradzija's departure, with students walking out of their classes em masse throughout the day Tuesday, school officials said.

"If I can't learn from Omar, I can't learn. I'm that stupid," said Elvis Presley, a sophomore journalism major from Canada.

University leaders met that night before making the cancellation of the semester official at 8 a.m. today, officials said.

Now, which is the best structure to use: inverted pyramid or chronology? Again, it depends on what best tells the story.

If you're writing about something complex where impact and meaning doesn't necessarily happen in sequence -- like a tuition increase or comparing on-campus and off-campus housing -- then structuring things based on an analyzed importance may be the way to go.

But of the story you're looking into naturally and dramatically unfolds in order -- like a bank robbery or 9/11 -- then a chronology probably works best.

A lot of it depends on what kind of facts you dig up while reporting. Note in each approach, some facts get greater or lesser emphasis, and some facts get entirely left out. You should think about which approach best uses the most important, relevant, interesting and useful facts. Whichever does is probably the highest and best approach to take.

Let me be clear, though: these are NOT the only two story structure options you have. As you've read in the book and probably noticed in your newspaper readings, there are endless ways to write ledes and detail nut grafs and add quotes and cascade facts throughout a story.

You're first and foremost looking for the best way to tell a story, based on what makes meaning and context and accuracy clear and easy to follow.

These are just two basic ways to do that. Master this, and then start practicing other ways.

Rescue: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why

Quite a few of you never said what time the collapse took place. Even more of you never said when the boy was pulled out of the tunnel, and at what time the boy died.

Time often matters as one of the five W's. But in this case, it's especially important to the telling of the story.

Time tells you how difficult it would have been for the boy to be okay after being buried for so long. Time tells you how difficult it was to dig out the boy, in that it took so long.

In this case, specific times are important bits of data that help show teh reader what happened, and not just leave them being told by you.

You say it was a difficult rescue. The times help readers see that.

In every story you write, try to determine which data sets help explain the story and show readers what they need to see in terms of evidence supporting your overall angle.

Robbery: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why

One of you did a bang-up job on your story. Nice lede, good nut graf, good story flow.

One problem, though: nowhere in the story did you way WHEN anything happened. No dates, no times.

You could have an otherwise-great story, but if it entirely misses a key element -- like any of the five W's -- then it's not a great story, or even a good one.

Others had a day, but not time. Still others had a time, but no day.

Don't overlook the obvious, folks!

Robbery: Who, What, WHERE, When, Why

Did you need to cite the store's specific 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?

The lede probably won't have been a good place for that -- a first attribution simply as a Haslett convenience store, or a local O-Mart store would have been fine -- but an address with a subsequent attribution would have been helpful.

I'm just sayin'.

Robbery: WHO, What, When, Where, Why

A few of you never named the robber. Why in earth wouldn't you?

I mean, the name is central to the story: WHO robbed the store. WHO was shot dead. Right?

Don't forget to include all the five W's (who, what, when, where, why) and the one H that accompanies it (how).

Others failed to name the robber until very late in the story, after generically referring to a gunman repeatedly in the story. Ideally, you'd want to ID the robber no later than the nut graf -- since WHO did the robbing and WHO was killed was a very major W among the 5 W's -- and go from there.

Just like you didn't wait to identify Layoux by name, don't wait to ID people who are considered central to the story. A person killed whose actions triggered everything else that happened -- Layoux having to use his gun, Layoux losing his job as a result -- isn't a bit player whose name can wait until later, like the district attorney or a cop who showed up after everything was over.

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.

Robbery: The Mystery Of The Missing Nut Graf

Nut grafs are important. Nut grafs do two important things: they fill in some of the blanks and details from your lede, and they offer a smooth transition to the body of a story.

In this exercise, a few of you had inadequate nut grafs -- or none at all.

What many of you did was write a lede, and then directly go into the chronology of what happened, like here:

A robbery turned into a self-defense shooting late yesterday at O-Mart on 1284 East Forest Blvd. in Haslett.

When 22-year-old, Michael Layoux was working last night, a customer came in to purchase a pack of cigarettes just after 11 p.m.

Whoa, wait a minute. In the lede, you say there was a robbery that turned into self-defense. Who was robbed? Who defended himself? Who was the robber? The lede created those questins, and a nut graf could have answered 'em. Instead, you dive right into the play-by-play. Essentially, you're holding the reader hostage by not making it clear what conclusion they're reading toward. They need to read the entire story to find out what happened.

The body of a story offers details and evidence that supports your lede. Your nut graf offers just enough of the 5 w's -- who, what, when, where, why, plus how -- so that if a reader goes no further than the nut graf and never reads the chronology, they still know what happened and how it ended.

A nut graf would have been a perfect place to say something like this:

Using a contraband pistol, store clerk Michael Layoux shot and killed Robert Wiess as the latter man fled the store after robbing the register of an estimated $20 in cash around 11 p.m. Wiess' body was found nearby.

Here was a better use of a lede-nut graf sequence by one of youze:

A 22-year-old store clerk killed a man in self-defense after the man robbed his store at gunpoint late yesterday in Haslett.

Michael Layoux, a clerk at O-Mart on 1284 East Forest Blvd., shot Robert Wiess after he said he was threatened with a pistol, and Wiess demanded the money in the cash register.

The lede suggests a pair of whos (clerk, a man who was killed), a what (killed a man), a when (yesterday), a where (in Haslett) and a why (self-defense).

Then, the nut grafs details the whos (naming the clerk and gunman), the what (the killing was done by shooting), the where (at the O-Mart, address noted) and the why (threatened with a pistol, demanded cash).

Only then does the story continues with the chronology of how things unfolded, in time order. You get a bit more information in the nut graf to help establish the lede -- and to let people know how things ended up -- before getting a blow-by-blow of how things went down.

After placing that next to the lede, then you can dive into the chronology. Basically, your lede/nut graf combo should read like a mini-story. (And if you ever write for broadcast, that's what they typical 30-second TV news story is: a lede and a nut graf, and maybe one sentence of additional information.)

Robbery: Who, What, WHERE, When, 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?

The lede probably won't have been a good place for that -- a first attribution simply as a Haslett convenience store, or a local O-Mart store would have been fine -- but an address with a subsequent attribution would have been helpful.

I'm just sayin'.

Robbery: Who, What, WHEN, Where, Why ...

One of you did a bang-up job on your story. Nice lede, good nut graf, good story flow.

One problem, though: nowhere in the story did you way WHEN anything happened. No dates, no times.

You could have an otherwise-great story, but if it entirely misses a key element -- like any of the five W's -- then it's not a great story, or even a good one.

Don't overlook the obvious, folks!

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 everybody could 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:

Forty-three percent of American marriages break up within 15 years due to marrying young and being less religious, 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:

Women who are wealthy, religious, college-educated, and at least 20 years old when they marry are less likely to get divorced, according to the Centers for Disease Control.


Next is this:

Mayor Datolli will introduce a new panhandling ordinance next week that will provide one-way bus tickets out of town to vagrants.

It has who: the mayor who is acting, and homeless people being acted upon (though is it okay to call them vagrants, or is that a stereotypical slur that should have been replaced with the term "homeless people"?). It has what: the mayor wanting to boot the homeless out of here. It has when: as soon as next week. It has how: one-way bus tickets for the homeless. Four of six W's are covered here, and in only 22 words.

Next is this:

A local swimming pool is being sued for extensive injuries to a local resident who claims swimming officials failed to warn him of immediate lightning danger last summer.

Again, it sums everything you need to know in a simple, straightforward way. This next lede -- which was done by my fall 2011 class, and not this one -- 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, and it's fine that you did not. 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.


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.

Rescue: Five W's

Quite a few of you never said what time the collapse took place. Even more of you never said when the boy was pulled out of the tunnel, and at what time the boy died.

Time often matters as one of the five W's. But in this case, it's especially important to the telling of the story.

Time tells you how difficult it would have been for the boy to be okay after being buried for so long. Time tells you how difficult it was to dig out the boy, in that it took so long.

In this case, specific times are important bits of data that help show teh reader what happened, and not just leave them being told by you.

You say it was a difficult rescue. The times help readers see that.

In every story you write, try to determine which data sets help explain the story and show readers what they need to see in terms of evidence supporting your overall angle.

Police: Many Of You ...

. . . didn't list an exact address for Jiffy Foods.

You should have. It's news WHERE something happens, right?

Who, what, when, where, why, how.

Robbery: Who, What, WHERE, When, Why, How

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?

The lede probably won't have been a good place for that -- a first attribution simply as a Haslett convenience store, or a local O-Mart store would have been fine -- but an address with a subsequent attribution would have been helpful.

I'm just sayin'.

Robbery: WHO, What, When, Where, Why, How

A few of you never named the robber. Why in earth wouldn't you?

I mean, the name is central to the story: WHO robbed the store. WHO was shot dead. Right?

Don't forget to include all the five W's (who, what, when, where, why) and the one H that accompanies it (how).

Others failed to name the robber until very late in the story, after generically referring to a gunman repeatedly in the story. Ideally, you'd want to ID the robber no later than the nut graf -- since WHO did the robbing and WHO was killed was a very major W among the 5 W's -- and go from there.

Just like you didn't wait to identify Layoux by name, don't wait to ID people who are considered central to the story. A person killed whose actions triggered everything else that happened -- Layoux having to use his gun, Layoux losing his job as a result -- isn't a bit player whose name can wait until later, like the district attorney or a cop who showed up after everything was over.

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.

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.

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'.